• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.53 no.3
• /
• pp.42-61
• /
• 2020

Even though research on heritage interpretation has been conducted steadily since the mid-20th century, the actual concept of such interpretation has not been clear. In The ICOMOS Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites, which is a leading international standard of heritage management, the definition of heritage interpretation is still vague. Also, defining its concept is tricky because it is based on the 'situation,' which could change at any moment. Therefore it seems that previous research has focused only on the social function of heritage interpretation. Since socio-philosophy research has become increasingly crucial in heritage studies, the concept of heritage interpretation needs to be precise. Therefore, this paper looks at research history chronologically, divides its social role into two different branches, and finally reifies the definition of the concept. Two social values of heritage interpretation can be distinguished as 'modern heritage interpretation,' and 'inclusive interpretation.' Modern heritage interpretation directs studies into conveying heritage's value to the public as measured by a few experts. It is an educational and communicative role. Inclusive heritage interpretation focuses on seeking comprehensive recognition of diverse values and finds ways to promote reconciliation among multiple stakeholders of heritage. Even though these two functions have developed in different social backgrounds, it is apparent that both have been generated in an unclear, overlapping, and complicated context. The concept of heritage interpretation is too complex to simplify as 'interpretation' itself. This paper defines such interpretation as 'all activities involved in the process of value creation of heritage.' Two social values relate to the concept of 'interpretation': they all have a common recognition of fundamental characteristics of heritage. This is used to establish a collective identity in society. However, it is more appropriate to conceptualize inclusive heritage interpretation as 're-interpretation' because it denies modern heritage interpretation and identifies new negotiated value.