Dark Tourism and World Heritage Sites: The Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome) and Auschwitz Birkenau: German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940–1945)
There are moments in time when mankind does something so monumental that it impacts the entire world, for better or for worse. In those types of situations, time and time again we have seen monuments and memorials created and erected to commemorate the significance of those events and, through this recognition, that moment becomes part of the human race’s history, culture, and at times identity. However, for events where dark, evil, and sad happenings occurred, how do we commemorate these types of events? In situations like this, it is almost imperative to allocate those sites where those events occurred and designate them onto a specific category. Due to the universal value of these types of sites, they may be inscribed under UNESCO’s World Heritage Site List because of their significance and, if they meet one of the criteria established by this organization. For two sites this appeared to be the case and were inscribed within the World Heritage Site List. These two sites, the Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome) and Auschwitz Birkenau: German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940–1945), met certain criteria thus resulting in their inscription. Due to their inscription, tourism became inevitable, however, for sites so closely associated with death and destruction, what type of tourism is generated by these World Heritage Sites? One answer is dark tourism.
The purpose of this blog post is to discuss this controversial classification of tourism and how it is a direct reflection of what these sites represent and how they were created. Through this post, dark tourism will be defined and explained, controversies addressed, tourism in numbers and exposure addressed, and how both the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Auschwitz Birkenau are dealing with the residual effects of dark tourism through education, interpretation, and technology.
Thoughts on Dark Tourism: defining the term, establishing reasons, and confronting the controversies
To better understand the concept of dark tourism it is important to comprehend exactly what it means. This type of tourism, which originated in the late 20th century (Light 2017:277), has been described as one where people visit certain locations that are associated with and can be identify with suffering and death. It is important to note that dark tourism may also be referred to as black spots tourism, thanatourism, and morbid tourism (Biran et al. 2012). These locations vary from battlefield sites, locations where crimes against humanity and genocide occurred (Auschwitz Birkenau), sites associated with man-made (Hiroshima Peace Memorial) and natural disasters, terrorist attacks, and prisons (The Guardian). When researching this subject, searches generated over 3.5 million hits on Google indicating that there is a curiosity and the desire to learn more about this controversial type of tourism. A secondary aspect in understanding dark tourism is identifying why tourists are visiting these sites in the millions each year.
Through studies, researchers were able to establish 4 key themes associated with dark tourism. These themes, which include: (1) the motivations to visit places of suffering, (2) the experiences of visitors generated from these sites, (3) what type of relationship visitors have and their sense of identity, and (4) what new approaches are being used when theorizing the consumption of dark tourism, helped create the reasons why people visit sites associated with death and destruction (Light 2017: 285). From those themes, there where 18 reasons as to why these sites are visited annually by tourists. The top five reasons include: (1) the opportunity to learn and gain a better understanding of what occurred there and why, (2) out of sheer curiosity, (3) having a personal connection to that site that is closely associated with family, (4) the “see it to believe it” mindset, and (5) out of simple leisure motives. Other reasons, outside the top five included, visiting a site that is considered a “must see”/bucket list destination, to pay respect to those who perished in the site, and a general interest in death/morbid curiosity (Light 2017: 286). Surprisingly, general interest in death/morbid curiosity was ranked 10th.
Regardless of the reason(s) as to why people visit these locations, specifically these two World Heritage Sites, the effect is overwhelming. With a total of nearly 4 million people, tourist visited both World Heritage Sites in 2017. Considering the number of visitors that were drawn to both locations last year, it is important to discuss the controversies that surround dark tourism.
One of the misconceptions that is associated with this type of tourism is that people are solely visiting these locations due to their fascination with the macabre aspect. As previously mentioned, that reason was not ranked in the top 5 of why people visit these locations, rather it barely made it to the top 10. Although that reason may not be ranked high in why people visit these sites overall, that does not deter from it being a key reason why people visit sites associated with tragic events. In the case of Auschwitz Birkenau there are 4 main reasons that have been identified as to why people visit the site. They include: (1) “see it to believe it”, being able to visit the site to absorb the understanding that something bad occurred there, (2) “learning and understanding”, comprehending why this occurred and to gain a better educated understanding, (3) “famous death tourist attractions”, being able to say that you as a visitor went to this site that is famous for its relation to death and tragedy and, (4) “emotional heritage”, visitors being able to connect to their heritage by having an emotional experience (Biran et al. 2012). Although the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Auschwitz Birkenau where ‘created’ after mass death and destruction occurred, there are other reasons why these sites are overwhelmed with visitors yearly that were not mentioned.
A secondary aspect of the controversy that surrounds dark tourism is the name itself. World Heritage Sites are closely associated with tourism and when the word dark is inserted before it, that creates a stigma within sites that are associated with this phenomenon. UNESCO clearly explains that the mission of countries who are home to World Heritage Sites need to ensure the safety and protection of their natural and cultural heritage associated within these places (Jimura 2015:82). Additionally, when sites are closely associated with death it becomes a marketing aspect for companies that cater to a specific visitor; those who specifically want to visit these types of sites. In that manner, it becomes the brand of that location. The death and tragedy associated with these sites become a selling point the emphasize how dark these sites are (Yoshida et al. 2016). Because the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Auschwitz Birkenau have a direct relation to death and mass destruction, those aspect must be protected regardless of the circumstances and controversies that surround them. It is the responsibility of the Japanese and Polish government and the site managers of both sites, to ensure that the aspects associated with the ‘dark’ part of these sites are correctly interpreted and explained through various mediums. In doing so, there is a lesser chance of these two sites being wrongfully depicted and extorted through misconceptions.
Thoughts on the Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome)
After the United States dropped the first atomic bomb over Hiroshima on August of 1945, the devastation that occurred was felt immediately and sent shock waves around the world. With a death toll of over 100,000 people and the destruction of nearly everything within a one-mile radius of the impact zone, the catastrophic event left a dark mark in history (The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki). The Genbaku Dome, the skeleton of a structure that was the only building that remained standing after the bombing, became synonymous with the tragic event. Located in Hiroshima, Japan, this site was inscribed in the World Heritage Site List in 1996 under the (vi) criteria (Hiroshima Peace Memorial Genbaku Dome). To preserve the integrity of this location the structure has been preserved as a ruin, so visitors and locals alike can see the actual effects of the destruction the bomb created. As a result, the dome became a symbol that acknowledged a time of peace after one of humans deadliest creations was detonated rather than emphasizing the destruction the bomb created (Hiroshima Peace Memorial Genbaku Dome). Although the focus leans more towards post bombing and the peace that resulted from this rather than the devastation of this event, it does not mean that the death associated through this is not forgotten, but rather it is interpreted and explained in a different manner (Wu et al. 2013).
Thoughts on Auschwitz Birkenau: German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940–1945)
Referred to as the epitome of dark tourism, the German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp of Auschwitz Birkenau marks one of humankinds darkest moments in history. Between 1942 and 1945, Auschwitz Birkenau was the site where people suffered at the hands of the Nazis and were subjected to torture, forced labor, and starvation. Additionally, Auschwitz Birkenau was the site of mass exterminations where Jewish people and other groups of individuals who did not meet the Nazi ideal, where murdered, most notoriously in gas chambers with the poison Zyklon B. In Auschwitz Birkenau alone, approximately 1.5 million people were murdered with roughly 90% of them being Jewish (Biran et al. 2012). As a result, this site has become a symbol the reflects human kinds worst doings. Like the Hiroshima Peace Memorial, this site falls under the umbrella of dark tourism because of its association with death and suffering (Light 2017:277).
Located in southern Poland in Oświęcim County, Auschwitz Birkenau was inscribed to the World Heritage Site List under the (vi) criteria in 1979 (Auschwitz Birkenau). To regain its integrity and authenticity most of the buildings remain untouched, unless for preservation purposes (Auschwitz Birkenau). Rather than demolishing the buildings, particularly the barracks and gas chambers, they have become the physical symbol of what Auschwitz Birkenau was and what they represented during that time. Because the significance of Auschwitz Birkenau will vary to people of different ethnicity and religious beliefs, leaving the site as is emphasizes that, rather than capitalizing and focusing on one aspect of the entire site (Biran et al. 2012). However, establishing that identity is not enough to deter the dark tourism label of the site; it is up to the interpretation and education provided at the site that better explain the cultural aspect of it.
Thoughts on numbers and exposure
Over the years the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Auschwitz Birkenau have become locations where people do actively seek to visit. 1.7 million people visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and over 2 million people visited Auschwitz Birkenau in 2017. For both sites, an increase in visitors resulted after significant events occurred. The Hiroshima Peace Memorial saw a spike in visitation after President Barack Obama visited the site in 2016. Similarly, 2015 marked the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz Birkenau, resulting in a 40% increase in visitors (The Daily Mail). As a result, the site has been referred to as the new tourist hot spot in a Daily Mail Article. The popularity of this site is significant enough that in a list compiled by travel site TripAdvisor, it was ranked as the 7th most visited World Heritage Site in the world in 2017 (TripAdvisor list).
Documenting the experience of the visit has also proven to be a steady trend with visitors that has resulted in exposing the site from the visitor prospective. A search through Instagram, a social media site , produced over 8,000 public posts that were uploaded to the site with the tag #hiroshimapeacememorial (Instagram Tag Search). Similar tags utilized for this site include: #hiroshimapeacememorialpark with over 7,000 public posts, #atomicbombdome with over 16,000 public posts, and #hiroshimapeacememorialmuseum with over 1,00 public posts. Auschwitz Birkenau currently has over 290,000 public posts with the tag #auschwitz (Instagram Tag Search). #auschwitzbirkenau has over 45,000 public posts, and over 7,500 public posts with the tag #auschwitzmemorial. Additionally, Auschwitz Birkenau has an official Instagram page, Auschwitz Memorial and Museum, with over 37,000 followers and over 900 posts (Auschwitz Birkenau Instagram Page). Although both sites produce impressive numbers on Instagram, the content that is posted is different. The tags associated with Auschwitz Birkenau have images that are mostly uploaded in black and white, people looking somber, and captions detailing the tragedies that occurred there. In contrast, the images that were uploaded with the associated tags of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial most were colorful with people smiling. The captions on these images included references to peace, war, and a reminder of the bombs consequence. Although the captions and photo content that are uploaded by visitors are different there is still a correlation of people visiting these sites and publicizing it, regardless of their ties to dark tourism.
Thoughts on Education and Interpretation on sites associated with Dark Tourism: The Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Auschwitz Birkenau
There is no denying that both the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Auschwitz Birkenau will always have an association to its dark past however, that does not mean that the education and interpretation based off both sites must solely represent the reasons why they are linked to dark tourism. Erasing the history and significance of these two sites is not the intended purpose, but when the interpretation is done correctly, then can those who visit these sites fully comprehend the significance of these cultural sites from all angles. Utilizing exhibits, educational material, and technology, aid in the interpretation of both the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Auschwitz Birkenau.
In the case of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial, the Japanese government has focused more on the post effects of Hiroshima rather than focusing solely on the actual event through the creation of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. The museum offers educational material and exhibits that convey the events before the bombing, the day of the bombing, and the effects post bombing. Making it their mission to spread the message known as “No More Hiroshima’s”, the museum uses materials related to that day, such as the accounts of A-bomb (atomic bomb) survivors, belongings left by the victims, and artifacts related to the A-bomb to spread its message (Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum). The exhibits on display at the museum introduce the site, explain what the dangers of nuclear weapons are, and give the history of Hiroshima. Additionally, there are video testimonies as well as special exhibits that are available for visitor use (Hiroshima Peace Memorial). The video testimonies that are used by the museum are part of an interpretation system known as kataribe (storyteller). This type of interpretation involves the testimony of the hibakusha (surviving victims) where these survivors explain the first-hand accounts of that day (Wu et al. 2013).
Along with the first-hand accounts and exhibits, a secondary method in which education and interpretation are presented involve the use of technology. Targeting school groups who visit the museum, museum officials have encouraged the use of smart phones and tablets to revamp the educational approach of the site to a younger demographic (Yoshida et al. 2016). Although the content will be the same as the one available through the text panels, the inclusion of these devises targets the newer generation who may not have an immediate connection to the site. The use of tablets and smart phones represent the direction in which interpretation and education are heading towards and how sites adapt.
In conjunction to the museum, the local Hiroshima government has also focused its attention to identifying stakeholders who are impacted by the memorial. Once it has been established who the stakeholders are, in this case stakeholders being defined as local citizens, students, investors and tourists, then can a new branding project be initiated (Wu et al. 2013). This new branding project moves the site forward rather than allowing it to remain static in its meaning. The effect of this branding has allowed the Hiroshima Peace Memorial to not just be considered the subject of dark tourism because of its association with a tragic event, but rather be considered a monument that remembers the victims and symbolizes hope and peace as well as conveying the message of eliminating the need of all nuclear weapons Wu et al. 2013).
In 2005 the International Center for Education about Auschwitz and the Holocaust (ICEAH) was established under the Auschwitz Birkenau Memorial and Museum. The ICEAH fulfills the mission of the site through interpretation and education. Dedicated to preserve the authenticity of the site through the preservation of the buildings and the memory of both victims and survivors, it serves as the purpose of the ICEAH. Additionally, the mission calls for an understanding regarding the origins of intolerance, anti-Semitism, and racism (Auschwitz Birkenau Memorial and Museum). The second part of the mission is pertinent to this site as it includes other factors related to the site where education and interpretation play a vital role. Rather than the sole focus of the site being related to death, the mission establishes other aspects that in turn targets a broader type of visitor, rather than a visitor whose sole purpose is to partake in dark tourism.
The use of exhibits, text panels, and the buildings themselves play a vital role in the education and interpretation aspect of the site. The education role established by the Memorial and Museum provides the necessary information of what occurred in the concentration camp during World War II. The educational material is divided in three sections where each section corresponds with a specific group. These groups, pupils and students, teachers and educators, and other groups, have specific programs and materials available for use that covers the history of Auschwitz Birkenau and why this tragedy occurred (Auschwitz Birkenau Education). The material utilized by the pupils and students group is further divided between Middle, Upper-Secondary, and University levels where age appropriate material is presented. For all groups the educational material consists of workshops, multimedia, presentations, educational activities, and video lectures, mostly created by the ICEAH. By utilizing these educational materials, the interpretation aspect then comes forth to explain why Auschwitz Birkenau is culturally important.
Interpreting the second part of the mission statement through the educational materials helps direct attention to the other concepts and not focus entirely on the history of mass death. Although the objects that are on exhibit, such as the personal belongs of the prisoners, are a link to the death that occurred there, the understanding that this occurred because of racism, anti-Semitism, and intolerance is explained through the interpretation. Additionally, since a diverse group of people were forced into Auschwitz Birkenau the significance of the place will vary. With the interpretation and the education provided by the ICEAH then can the reasoning's of why people visit Auschwitz Birkenau be truly reflected. As previously mentioned, the number two reason why people visit this site is based off wanting to gain a better understanding of the event through education. Although the educational content is going to based off the tragic events that occurred at Auschwitz Birkenau, the education and interpretation visitors interact with will be able to convey a message of what Auschwitz Birkenau represents rather than just a site associated with death.
Conclusion
Dark tourism, and its associations with locations based off death and tragedy, is a controversial subject, particularly when the locations being visited by people fascinated with this type of tourism are visiting World Heritage Sites. The events that are associated with the Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome) and Auschwitz Birkenau: German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940–1945) are the type of events that are directly related to dark tourism. However, this is not to cast a shadow on the locations solely based the tragic events that occurred. Through the work of governments and site managers, education and interpretation can offer a different point of view for visitors who are visiting these sites. Rather than just focusing on the negative aspects that occurred there, through interpretation and education can visitors learn more about the sites and gain a better understanding of what these sites represent. Dark tourism itself may never fade away as millions of people search for information on this type of tourism, but the effects of dark tourism should not be the sole identity of both the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Auschwitz Birkenau.
Resources
“#auschwitz • Instagram Photos and Videos.” Instagram. Accessed April 30, 2018. https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/auschwitz/.
“#hiroshimapeacememorial • Instagram Photos and Videos.” Instagram. Accessed April 30, 2018. https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/hiroshimapeacememorial/.
“Abstract Word Cloud for Dark Tourism with Related Tags and Terms.” 123RF Stock Photos. Accessed May 08, 2018. https://www.123rf.com/photo_16772889_abstract-word-cloud-for-dark-tourism-with-related-tags-and-terms.html.
“Auschwitz Memorial and Museum (@auschwitzmemorial) • Instagram Photos and Videos.” Instagram. Accessed April 30, 2018. https://www.instagram.com/auschwitzmemorial/.
Biran, Poria, and Oren. “SOUGHT EXPERIENCES AT (DARK) HERITAGE SITES.” Annals of Tourism Research38, no. 3 (2011): 820–41.
Coldwell, Will. “Dark Tourism: Why Murder Sites and Disaster Zones Are Proving Popular with Travellers.” The Guardian. October 31, 2013. Accessed April 23, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2013/oct/31/dark-tourism-murder-sites-disaster-zones.
Jimura, Takamitsu. “The relationship between World Heritage designation and local identity.” World heritage, tourism and identity: Inscription and co-production (2015): 81–91.
Light, Duncan. “Progress in Dark Tourism and Thanatourism Research: An Uneasy Relationship with Heritage Tourism.” Tourism Management 61, no. C (2017): 275–301.
MailOnline, Emily Payne for. “So Popular, They’re Turning People Away: Auschwitz Becomes the World’s Most Unlikely Tourist Hot Spot Thanks to a 40% Surge Visitor Numbers.” Daily Mail Online. April 23, 2015. Accessed April 23, 2018. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3052542/So-popular-turning-people-away-Auschwitz-world-s-unlikely-tourist-hot-spot-40-increase-visitors.html.
Museum, Hiroshima Peace Memorial. “Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum.” Just Use It! 広島平和記念資料館. Accessed April 30, 2018. http://hpmmuseum.jp/?lang=eng.
Museum, Hiroshima Peace Memorial. “Special Exhibitions.” Just Use It! 広島平和記念資料館. Accessed April 30, 2018. http://hpmmuseum.jp/modules/event/?lang=eng.
“The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” Reagan’s Star Wars | Cold War: A Brief History | History of the Atomic Age. Accessed April 23, 2018. http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/MED/med_chp9.shtml.
“The World’s 10 Best UNESCO World Heritage Sites, Rated by TripAdvisor ·.” ETB Travel News. November 29, 2017. Accessed April 23, 2018. http://middle-east.etbtravelnews.global/336114/the-worlds-10-best-unesco-world-heritage-sites-rated-by-tripadvisor/.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. “Auschwitz Birkenau German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940–1945).” UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Accessed April 23, 2018. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/31.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. “Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome).” UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Accessed April 23, 2018. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/775.
Wu, Chuntao, Carolin Funck, and Yoshitsugu Hayashi. “The Impact of Host Community on Destination (re)branding: A Case Study of Hiroshima.” International Journal of Tourism Research 16, no. 6 (2014): 546–55.
Www.auschwitz.org. “AUSCHWITZ-BIRKENAU.” Polski. Accessed April 30, 2018. http://auschwitz.org/en/education/iceah-general-information/mission-statement.
Yoshida, Bui, and Lee. “Does Tourism Illuminate the Darkness of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?” Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 5, no. 4 (2016): 333–40.
