Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

Memory-making in tourism: a call for a more differentiated discussion

Alena Pfoser and Sabine Stach analyse the production and circulation of memories in the arena of tourism.

Tourism is an important arena for the production and circulation of memories in today’s societies. In their recent article in the journal Memory Studies, Alena Pfoser and Sabine Stach argue for a more systematic investigation of this tourism-memory nexus.

In unserer heutigen Gesellschaft stellt der Tourismus einen zentralen Ort der Produktion und Zirkulation von Erinnerungen dar. In ihrem kürzlich erschienenen Artikel in der Zeitschrift Memory Studies plädieren Alena Pfoser und Sabine Stach für eine systematischere Untersuchung dieses Zusammenhangs zwischen Tourismus und Erinnerung.


Tourist destinations often invite us to travel back in time, to experience a time stood still or turned back. Iconic heritage sites and museums are major tourist attractions, visited by millions of tourists each year. Alongside well-preserved old towns, iconic architecture, or ancient cultural sites, more recent and obscure pasts – such as memories of communism, recent revolutions and industrial heritage – have been incorporated into the tourism industry. Tourism is also driven by individual memories of past visits, personal and family ties that can stimulate a desire to (re)visit them. Moreover, tourism also creates new memories in the form of stories, photographs and souvenirs that are taken back home and shared with others.

Holiday mementos for sale (Source: Sunguk Kim, Unsplash, Creative Commons).

Despite the obvious (yet complex) connections between tourism and memory-making, tourism remains surprisingly underexamined in memory studies research. When we, two researchers working on guided city tours in different contexts in Eastern Europe, met for the first time in May 2019, it was quickly apparent that we had a similar view of the limitations of existing research. Tourist sites appear to be primarily the subject of heritage studies, which have long been critically concerned with questions of the construction and management of cultural heritage. Moreover, the topic of tourism has also increasingly become the focus of academic debates in history, history education and, above all, public history. Often, the term “history tourism” (in German “Geschichtstourismus”) is used to analyse the integration of memorial sites and “authentic places” into tourism industry offers. However, while these fields of study have some overlapping concerns, we thought that bringing tourism into conversation with work in memory studies offered both more focused and nuanced perspective on memory and the remembering process in tourism. Our following exchange resulted in an article that was recently published in Memory Studies. There, we not only sought to provide a critical reflection on these limitations but also put forward a vision of how an expanded examination of the “tourism-memory nexus” could look like.

A bibliometric analysis of tourism in memory research

To go beyond our own impressions of the literature, we first conducted bibliometric research of the most significant peer-reviewed journals in memory studies: Memory Studies (2008-), History & Memory (1998-), Memory, Mind and Media (2022-). We identified a total of 134 articles, out of which 19 mentioned “tourism” either in their title, keywords, or abstract. Most of the remaining 115 articles did not have tourism as their focus, but examined for example the creation of heritage sites or city branding processes and dedicated a smaller part of their analysis to tourism planning or promotion. Other articles focused on museums and memorials and discussed visitor practices and/or the reception of sites as part of the analysis but did not address questions of touristification nor explored tourists’ meaning-making in detail. Apart from confirming our impression of the limited preoccupation with tourism in memory research, the analysis also showed a narrow thematic focus on sites associated with violence and trauma. Over two thirds of articles discussed “difficult pasts / dark tourism” such as studies on battlefield tourism, concentration camps, prisons, and war memorials. The number of articles focusing on other themes were particularly small when considering only those publications that had tourism as their primary focus, with only seven articles discussing subjects beyond difficult pasts.

Themes of tourism-related articles in memory studies journals (Source: Pfoser & Stach, 2024, own calculations).

Castles, neighbourhoods and museum shops as sites of remembering

Moving beyond this narrow focus, we firstly propose to expand the range of sites examined in the literature to include those with a high tourist appeal such as ancient, medieval or early modern heritage. Despite their popularity with families, such sites are usually only discussed in terms of monument preservation and heritage management. Castles, city fortifications, rulers’ residences or townhouses seem to belong to an unproblematic, picturesque “distant past” that can be touristified in whatever way one likes (Groebner, 2013: 412–414). Alongside an examination of these sites, we should also reflect upon the “tourist component” of sites already in focus, considering them as destinations anchored in the international tourism industry. This involves an analysis of consumer infrastructures such as museum shops and of the planning and designing of sites for tourists. Finally, a broader understanding of toured sites should encompass memory processes that refer to multiple sites including the analysis of itineraries and the work of tour guides who put sites in an order and make them part of an overarching narrative, thereby producing new meanings.

Memories of joy and entertainment

Alongside the expansion of sites, we also need to expand the analysis of the variety of modes of remembering. As understandable as the focus on difficult heritage is, it is equally important to question the seemingly natural link between memory research and trauma. Scholars such as Ann Rigney (2018: 370) have argued for a “positive turn” in memory studies scholarship, which can also be built on work on memory-making in tourism. This is particularly important as tourism is closely associated with fun, relaxation and entertainment. Criticism of tourism has also underlined the notion of tourism as a hedonic, light, joyful, and somewhat superficial experience. It is reasonable to ask whether this discredits tourism as an object of research, or whether entertainment and fun should instead be brought into its focus. This includes individual, joyful, and playful but also voyeuristic, escapist, and entertainment-centred modes of remembering. We argue that tourism offers a unique opportunity to engage more fully with these modes and their interconnections with others, allowing us to move beyond a normative approach that implies a division between legitimate, i.e. empathic and reflective, and less legitimate, i.e. self-centered and hedonic, modes of remembering.

Museum shops: an understudied site of memory-making (Source: Erikk Pung, Unsplash, Creative Commons).

Multiscalar tourism memories

Finally, research on memory-making can also build on discussions of scales in memory studies research. We argue that more attention needs to go into the scale of personal and autobiographical remembering. As Sabine Marschall (2012: 2217) wrote, memory-making in tourism “does not necessarily require the presence of monuments and precious cultural objects, but relies on embodied memories that evoke emotions”. Memories are actively used by tourists to construct images of self and other. Prior to their trip, when making decisions of where to travel, and during and after their trips, tourists draw on their own past experiences as well as socially and culturally transmitted understandings of the past.

Moreover, as tourism routinely involves border crossing, tourism lends itself well to analysis of transnational remembering, allowing us to analyse both the deterritorialisation and transnationalisation of memory in tourism institutions and practices and its reterritorialisation in particular places. As our work on tour guiding shows, international tourism enables a transnational negotiation of memory that results not necessarily in the creation of cosmopolitan frameworks that replace the national ones but can also lead to pragmatic interpretative adjustments and selective silences as a response to mnemonic difference, pointing to the translations and frictions of transnational memory work.

For a more nuanced discussion of tourism memories

Tourism continues to be conceived implicitly or explicitly as diminishing memory, detaching it from the past and rendering it inauthentic and trivial. Our hope is that by expanding the study of memory-making in tourism to cover a range of sites, modes and scales we can contribute to a destigmatisation of tourism as a research subject and reach a richer and more differentiated understanding of the tourism-memory nexus. In fact, modes of remembering in tourism often are politically more ambiguous and can stand in contrast with the memories of hope that have been at the centre of a ‘positive turn’ in memory studies. Yet, memories based on direct tourist encounters can also challenge hostile conceptions of the other, and the idleness that tourism at least partly enables can act as counterweight in a world driven by the demands of speed. Instead of being dismissed, memory-making in tourism deserves a more nuanced discussion.


Bibliography

Groebner V (2013) Touristischer Geschichtsgebrauch. Über einige Merkmale neuer Vergangenheiten im 20. und 21. Jahrhundert. Historische Zeitschrift 296: 408–428

Marschall S (2012) Tourism and memory. Annals of Tourism Research 39(4): 2216–2219.

Pfoser A & Stach S (2024) Beyond difficult pasts: Towards a fuller understanding of memory-making in tourism. Memory Studies.

Rigney A (2018) Remembering hope: transnational activism beyond the traumatic. Memory Studies 11(3): 368–380.


Sabine Stach is a researcher at GWZO Leipzig in the department “Culture and Imagination“.

Alena Pfoser is a senior lecturer in Communication and Media Studies at Loughborough University, UK.


Title picture: Playing with heritage (Source: Jakob Owens, Unsplash, Creative Commons).


OpenEdition schlägt Ihnen vor, diesen Beitrag wie folgt zu zitieren:
Lab 3.3 Inwertsetzung und Kommodifizierung (3. Juni 2025). Memory-making in tourism: a call for a more differentiated discussion. Value of the Past. Abgerufen am 10. November 2025 von https://doi.org/10.58079/141ut


Autor: Lab 3.3 Inwertsetzung und Kommodifizierung

Das Lab 3.3 beschäftigt sich mit der Inwertsetzung und Kommerzialisierung von Vergangenheit, so beispielsweise mit De-Industrialisierungsprozessen, Gentrifizierung ehemaliger Arbeiterviertel, Musealisierung historischer Hinterlassenschaften oder Geschichtsmarketing und -tourismus.

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.