In April, we held the final event of our Unlocking Landscapes Network. Funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council from 2020-2023, the network has been bringing people together to reflect on how arts and humanities research can develop valuable insights for landscape policy and practice.
During the event, we shared reflections from across the network and from our ReStorying Landscapes for Social Inclusion project, as well as launching a new report, ‘Unlocking Landscapes: The inclusive role of sensory histories of people and place’.
The report foregrounds the potential for sensory history scholarship to disrupt and expand the types of stories shared about landscape; moving beyond dominant forms of landscape encounter and enabling a greater diversity of people to ‘be’ and belong in historic landscapes. It is intended for anyone involved in the management and interpretation of such landscapes.
Due to the remit of the network, the report primarily focuses on historic landscapes that have a designed element and that have a contemporary leisure use: from country estate gardens, through to public parks and arboretums, places of industrial heritage and national trails. However, there are many other places that have historical and cultural meanings for which the insights shared could still be considered.
You can download the report in varied formats, with links included below:
In the report, we reflect on how the interpretation of historic landscapes could be expanded by drawing on multisensory place stories; considering how and why the sounds, scents, textures and broader sensations of embodying the landscape may have changed through history, and how these experiences may have varied amongst different types of inhabitants (human or otherwise). The focus on ‘stories’ rather than ‘story’ is key as there are many, often overlapping narratives, which can speak to similarly diverse landscape visitors, makers and shapers.
We suggest value in broadening the range of narratives shared about past landscapes and landscape experiences, for example by including accounts from often overlooked groups such as foresters, labourers, and gardeners – those materially tasked with shaping the land. Although this can be challenging with the limited nature of primary source material, even limited snapshots that acknowledge hidden or unnoticed labour in the making, remaking and maintenance of landscapes would help raise awareness of the significance of such roles within landscape history.
The temporalities of the stories told about landscape are also important. Climate change is impacting – and will continue to impact – on landscapes with both personal and cultural value. Can we look to landscape histories to emphasise the dynamic qualities of landscape through the stories told, finding ways to continue to care for and nurture such landscapes as they evolve in the face of change?
Although the report calls for more attention to a range of landscape histories, we do not suggest the answer lies solely in more written text and interpretation boards. Over-reliance on the written word can reinforce privileged experiences and ways of perceiving places, and limit experiential and embodied ways of sensing, knowing, imagining and understanding landscape that are just as important. Rather, we encourage the use of new innovative and artistic approaches that complement yet move beyond the written word.
If you have any questions about or would like to feedback on the content, do get in touch with the network lead, Clare Hickman (at clare.hickman@ncl.ac.uk) or the co-lead, Sarah Bell (at Sarah.Bell@exeter.ac.uk) – we’d love to hear from you!
