Rome, Florence and Venice: Post-Modernization, Heritage and Tourism in Italy

ABSTRACT Tourism has always played an important role in Italy and, since the Grand Tour time, it has shaped its image. Yet the processes of post-modernization have deeply affected both tourism and the Italian main tourist destinations. Theming and culturalization of consumption (Melotti, 2016), urban beautification processes and “new tourisms” (Marra & Ruspini, 2010, 2011), as well as a new approach to authenticity, related both to a post-modern tourist gaze and to new international tourism, are transforming Italian towns, their urban and tourist policies and their image. There emerge new interesting hybrid narratives mixing culture and consumption, history and leisure, tourism and urban processes. Rome, which has the largest archaeological area in Europe and one of the largest in the world, under the effects of post-modernization and new international tourism has witnessed the transformation of its main archaeological area (including the Colosseum and the ancient Forums) into a sort of huge theme park, with multimedia shows and special events. The loss of historical consciousness, the development of new concepts of authenticity (Lukas, 2007; Gilmore & Pine, 2007; Melotti, 2011), the increasing importance of sensorial and experiential forms of tourism have played an important role in this change, which has also favoured the spreading of living history and historical reenactment. This process has led to a sort of “late” Disneyization of the archaeological site, according to models originally emerged in countries without such a rich historical heritage. Florence, a city with an extraordinary ancient centre dating back to the Middle Ages, has witnessed the transformation of this area into a sort of great open-air mall under the pressures of consumerism and international tourism. It is interesting to remark that, while in China various “Florence Villages” have been recently created for commercial and tourist purposes, even near Florence a similar themed outlet was opened, which presents itself as a new tourist destination, deserving “tourist gaze” (Urry & Larsen, 2011). Venice is experiencing a similar destiny. While in the United States (Las Vegas and elsewhere) and in China some fake Venices were constructed for commercial, residential and tourist purposes, the real Venice is becoming a city largely based on tourist activities, which affect its image. Yet, surprisingly, despite this deep cultural change, Italian towns seem to be resilient to the effects of globalization and to maintain their “identity”. Actually, tourists and local communities contribute to create a new lively transnational urban culture. These cases are really ”good to think” the complex and dynamics relationships between tourism and heritage as well as between tourism and urban policies. The paper entails an interdisciplinary approach taking into account sociology and anthropology of tourism, urban sociology, cultural and heritage studies. REFERENCES Gilmore, J.H., & Pine, B. J.II (2007). Authenticity. What consumers really want. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Lukas, S.A. (Ed.) (2007). The themed space. Locating culture, nation and self. Plymouth: Lexington Books. Marra ,E., & Ruspini, E. (Eds.) (2010). Altri turismi. Viaggi, esperienze, emozioni. Milano: Franco Angeli. Marra ,E., & Ruspini, E. (Eds.) (2011). Altri turismo crescono. Turismi outdoor e turismi urbani. Milano: Franco Angeli. Melotti, M. (2016). Beyond Venice. Heritage, tourism and mobilities. In M. Melotti (Ed.) Mobilities and hospitable city. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing (in press). Melotti, M. (2016). Gladiator for a day. Tourism, archaeology and theme parks in Rome. In F. Carlà, F. Freitag, S. Mittermeier & A. Schwarz (Eds.). Time and Temporality in Theme Parks, Hannover: Wehrhahn (in press). Melotti, M. (2011). The plastic venuses. Archaeological tourism in post-modern society. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars. Urry, J., & Larse, J. (2011). The tourist gaze 3.0. London: Sage.