遗产理论重新建构的实践：博物馆由圣殿走向世俗

Western theories on cultural herit-age have been developing continuously in ceaseless debates, and these theories have experienced dif-ferent stages of emerging, evolution and decon-struction. At the same time, a reconstruction of‘cultural heritage theories ’ is now being imple-mented and even has gained a certain achieve-ment. Indeed, at present ‘museums ’ have be-come the playgrounds for the reconstruction of new theories: museums are being transformed from a‘palatial ’ heritage protection institutes into ‘an-thropocentric’ cultural service institutes by means of ‘audience engagement’ . Museums increasingly implement the reconstruction of cultural heritage theories. From the 8 th to the 12 th of August 2016 a training project on ‘audience engagement ’ -hos-ted both by the British Council and the Chinese Museums Association-took place in the ‘National Museums Liverpool’ group. Due to its preeminent geological position, professional teams of special-ists, and audience-oriented working mechanisms, the National Museums Liverpool has become a new paradigm for the world of museums. However, be-hind these visible developments, a process of cul-tural heritage studies has been providing a strong support and guidance. Going back to European ideology from the late 18thto 19th century, the ‘past’ was seen as an ob-ject to be studied, pursued, protected, or even re-built ( designing past landscapes, old buildings, and memorials) . This ideology became the starting point of ‘Eurocentric heritage studies ’ . Due to this background, initial heritage studies have been branded with phrases as‘Eurocentrism’ ,‘author-itativeness’ , and ‘sanctification ’; this view has affected a large number of museums in the world. However, heritage studies have been adjusting and evolving. Post-modern heritage theories questioned issues like ‘centralization ’ and ‘authoritative-ness’ , and instead refocused on concepts like‘people’ , ‘democracy ’ , and ‘pluralistic socie-ty’ . The advocacy of‘cultural diversity’ and sup-port of expressions of‘intangible cultural heritage’ are practical applications of this new development in heritage theories. Taking the National Museums Liverpool as a case, the first characteristic of this museums group is the easy accessibility of the location of the muse-ums:several museums are situated just besides the sea as well as close to the city shopping center. Still, other museums are located on the opposite side of this area, yet it is only a 20-minutes walk between the two sides. A second characteristic is a special ‘managerial/administrative mechanism ’ that allows all museums to be run in a certain way;at the same time curators remain at the core of the teams that conduct the projects in the museums. A third trait is that the museum audience remains the main focus of all operations in the‘National Muse-ums Liverpool ’ . The case of National Museums Liverpool shows that ‘museums ’ have become an important place for reconstructing ‘cultural herit-age theories’. By means of ‘free admission’ and ‘audience engagement ’ , the museums’ function has changed from a ‘sacred place for collecting, researching and rescuing the past’ to an anthropo-centric service institute: museums have shifted from an organization of ‘sanctification ’ to one of‘secularization’ . With this development of cultural heritage the-ories, the traditional model of the museums has been reconstructed and renovated:it seems to have restored the voice of the general public and of cer-tain non-powerful groups to preeminence. In addi-tion, the bowuguan tiaoli ( Museum Regulations) issued by the State Council of China in 2015 says that‘education’ is the primary function of a muse-um. This redefinition of what a museum is sup-posed to be, actually reflects a guiding ideology of changing the museum’s traditional status and iden-tity. It also emphasizes the museum’s need for au-dience engagement. All of this challenges the museum’s traditional function of ‘collecting, pre-serving, researching, and displaying’ . New social functions, such as‘public education’ and‘public cultural service’ , are thus constantly emerging into a museum. Although different names have been given to these new functions, ‘audience engage-ment’ is at the core of them. Generally speaking, as international museums are slowly transforming - guided by cultural heritage theories-domestic museums will also gradually change their predomi-nant ‘sacred position ’ and shift into museums of‘decentralization’ . Anthropocentrism and‘service to the people’ will increasingly be the new identity of present-day museums.