Governing Heritage Dissonance -

In cases of "toxic" heritage (such as monuments to oppressive regimes), governance may involve physical transformation, relocation to museums, or the addition of counter-monuments to recontextualize the original structure. 4. Case Studies in Resolution

In nations like South Africa or Rwanda, governing heritage involves "sites of conscience" that prioritize healing and truth-telling over traditional tourism. Governing Heritage Dissonance

Tension between architects/conservators focusing on physical integrity and communities focusing on the lived experience or spiritual significance of a site. 3. Frameworks for Governance and Management In cases of "toxic" heritage (such as monuments

Instead of choosing one "true" history, governance frameworks should allow for multiple narratives to coexist. This is often achieved through "layering"—physical or digital interventions that explain the various historical phases and controversies of a site. it is inherently selective

Heritage dissonance occurs when different groups attribute conflicting meanings to the same historical site, object, or tradition. Because heritage is a contemporary tool used to build identity, it is inherently selective; one group’s celebration of a "golden age" often represents another’s memory of oppression or exclusion. Governing this dissonance requires moving beyond simple preservation toward a framework of mediation and inclusive storytelling. Conflict typically arises from three primary sources: