Search

This thesis was scanned from the print manuscript for digital preservation and is copyright the author. Researchers can access this thesis by asking their local university, institution or public library to make a request on their behalf. Monash staff and postgraduate students can use the link in the Reference field.

The issue of authenticity continues to pervade tourism studies. Hughes (1995) describes the issue as an obligato that runs through tourism research. MacCannell (1976) has suggested that tourism is a quest for the authentic precisely because it has become so scarce. It assumes that the quest for authenticity is focussed not only on people as objects, but also on material objects (Harkin 1995). Getz (1995:315) has defined authenticity as 'genuine, unadulterated or the real thing'. This article addresses authenticity in terms of the management of indigenous rock art sites in Victoria, Australia.

The purpose of this paper is to present a review of indigenous tourism in Victoria, in particular examining product, markets, and issues confronting indigenous tourism. A discussion of the key issues in the literature will ensue. The term 'indigenous tourism' will be defined, and a brief history of Aboriginal tourism in Victoria will be presented. The applicability of the Uluru model of hand over and lease back arrangements concerning National Parks and other publicly owned lands will also be considered.

This paper considers the naming history of indigenous rock art sites in the Grampians Gariwerd National Park in southwest Victoria, Australia. These sites are found to present management problems because many of the names are dysfunctional, and fail as information markers. Rather than contribute to the creation of positive atmosphere and sacralization, many site names have contributed to site vandalism, disfigurement of signage and negative word of mouth promotion. The function of site naming and their role in placemaking is reconsidered from the insights of leading theorists in attraction systems such as MacCannell, Gunn, and Leiper. Naming, it is argued, is a very important management tool in the protection and promotion of rock art tourism.

No abstract supplied

The purpose of this paper is to consider the ways in which traditional Aboriginal spatial organization influenced how western Victorian Aboriginal people understood Europeans. To come to terms with this understanding, it is essential to explore notions of violence and invasion in traditional Aboriginal formations. For example, if a history of invasion within and between Aboriginal groups can be shown to have existed, then the question of the relevance of the ethnic origin of the invader must be examined - presumably, whether the invaders were foreign and enemy Aboriginal people, or foreign and enemy non-Aboriginal people, would not be of any particular consequence to the dispossessed clan. Regarding European associations with 'tenure' of Aboriginal land, western Victorian clans had to come to terms with three classes of Europeans: sea sojourners; land sojourners; and settlers. Clans attempted to understand their experiences of these three different classes of Europeans within a framework of traditional thought, and it is worth exploring these classes to uncover differences in the way they were perceived.

To some, places like Mapari in the Save Valley Conservancy (SVC) are the essence of Africa, a wilderness. However, their former inhabitants, who lost land to colonialism tell a different story, silenced for long. In 1920, the Bridges family established Devuli cattle ranch, destroying wildlife and the environment. Africans, including the Masikati people, became tenants and subjects of slavery and violence. Around 1967 Devuli evicted all Africans and later its subdivisions combined into the SVC for wildlife-based tourism. Today, some Masikati people live at Mapari’s boundary. This chapter spells out how living memories of settling on the land are tied to places and spiritual landmarks in the ranch, and until today, underpin claims to use and enter the lands. Place frames are constructed around these sites of memory which legitimise and activate border struggles, (criminalised) hunting, and other rights by various actors; place frames which their eviction after conservation seem to undermine. ispartof: Colonialism, Tourism and Place pages:147-162 ispartof: pages:147-162 status: published