3 ms·

This is awesome. A great way to bring attention to and protect humanity's cultural heritage - especially in these times of self isolation. I thought this list

by anonu 7y ago

This is awesome. A great way to bring attention to and protect humanity's cultural heritage - especially in these times of self isolation. I thought this list of other Living Heritage items - referenced in one of the article links [1] - was pretty cool: Playing and building the kantele Playing and building the jouhikantele (bowed lyre) Playing the musical saw National Culture Days of the Deaf Ryijy tradition Making of Tommi knives Puppetry Bedtime story tradition Demoscene Living Christmas Calendar of Käpylä Horsemanship of the Roma Kalevala bone setting [1] https://www.museovirasto.fi/en/articles/demoskene-sahansoitto-ja-romanien-hevostaidot-elavan-perinnon-kansalliseen-luetteloon-12-uutta-kohdetta https://www.museovirasto.fi/en/articles/demoskene-sahansoitt...

new2628 7y ago
While all those in the list are great, the list itself is a worthy match for Borges' Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge in which animals are divided into: those that belong to the Emperor, embalmed ones, those that are trained, suckling pigs, mermaids, fabulous ones, stray dogs, those included in the present classification, those that tremble as if they were mad, innumerable ones, those drawn with a very fine camelhair brush, others, those that have just broken a flower vase, those that from a long way off look like flies.
- notkaiho 7y ago
  I hadn't seen this since high school. Thank you for reminding me. :)
Fnoord 7y ago
Impressive list. Isn't it up to future civilizations which parts of our culture become heritage? What is the benefit of defining it as such? Protecting the culture? At what cost? I don't mean to downplay the importance, I'm just wondering if it is up to us, and if it is worth it. Heck, can we even reasonably decide if such is worth it? Does it matter? I don't know.
- rob74 7y ago
  Well, all the items in the list are already "heritage" (you can include the demoscene too, which at >20 years old can also be considered "heritage" in our fast-moving field). Generally things which get on these UNESCO lists are those which a country considers to be particularly important/unique/characteristic of the country, and the benefit is attracting attention to them and thus contributing to their continued existence/protection. One random example: there are lots of Roman ruins, but if the 4th-century palace of a Roman emperor is almost continually inhabited and turned into a medieval city, that's pretty unique and worthy of the UNESCO list (https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/97/ https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/97/).
  - toyg 7y ago
    > 20? More like > 30... For comparison, it’s as “heritage” now as WWII-related items were in 1980 - i.e. quite a bit for sure.
- Mediterraneo10 7y ago
  The UNESCO World Heritage site system drew international attention to historical sites that otherwise would have remained unknown. The intangible culture list does the same for the arts and other traditions. It isn't meant to say "You must like and perpetuate it" as much as "Look, this people has something cool which you might want to check out."

by anonu 7y ago

new2628 7y ago

While all those in the list are great, the list itself is a worthy match for Borges' Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge in which animals are divided into: those that belong to the Emperor, embalmed ones, those that are trained, suckling pigs, mermaids, fabulous ones, stray dogs, those included in the present classification, those that tremble as if they were mad, innumerable ones, those drawn with a very fine camelhair brush, others, those that have just broken a flower vase, those that from a long way off look like flies.

notkaiho 7y ago
I hadn't seen this since high school. Thank you for reminding me. :)

Fnoord 7y ago

Impressive list. Isn't it up to future civilizations which parts of our culture become heritage? What is the benefit of defining it as such? Protecting the culture? At what cost? I don't mean to downplay the importance, I'm just wondering if it is up to us, and if it is worth it. Heck, can we even reasonably decide if such is worth it? Does it matter? I don't know.

rob74 7y ago
Well, all the items in the list are already "heritage" (you can include the demoscene too, which at >20 years old can also be considered "heritage" in our fast-moving field). Generally things which get on these UNESCO lists are those which a country considers to be particularly important/unique/characteristic of the country, and the benefit is attracting attention to them and thus contributing to their continued existence/protection. One random example: there are lots of Roman ruins, but if the 4th-century palace of a Roman emperor is almost continually inhabited and turned into a medieval city, that's pretty unique and worthy of the UNESCO list (https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/97/ https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/97/).
- toyg 7y ago
  > 20? More like > 30... For comparison, it’s as “heritage” now as WWII-related items were in 1980 - i.e. quite a bit for sure.
Mediterraneo10 7y ago
The UNESCO World Heritage site system drew international attention to historical sites that otherwise would have remained unknown. The intangible culture list does the same for the arts and other traditions. It isn't meant to say "You must like and perpetuate it" as much as "Look, this people has something cool which you might want to check out."