In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

7. Socialism and Change: Seychelles The following chapter offers a discussion of anthropological data collected in Seychelles in June 2005. The chapter is divided into three parts. The first introduces Seychelles and the social factors influencing cultural interaction. The second part deals explicitly with institutional challenges to heritage management , and the third part offers some insight into occupation diversity as a form of cultural and industrial heritage in Mahé. Based on the perceived importance of intangible culture to identity and economy in the Seychelles, the report concludes that further investment in intangible heritage projects is required from the private sector and government. The Seychelles is emerging from almost two decades of socialist rule, is relatively homogeneous, and regionally less economically influential than Mauritius . The Seychelles also have long histories of oppression and currently seek a higher level of inclusion in international society. In the archipelago decisions about what and whose heritage to preserve, whether the heritage will be of universal value (and therefore worthy of inscription on the WHL), the extent to which certain heritage should be preserved, are heavily influenced by social and not simply material considerations. How do countries like the Seychelles reconcile the seemingly contradictory requirement of being their ‘true selves’ and producing a product for wealthy and powerful international counterparts? Heritage Issues and Management in the Seychelles My first encounter with the Seychelles occurred before I arrived on the islands in June 2005. I was informed by one of my project advisors that I should avoid going there because the state officials were not in favour of independent research . The advisor said that she had experienced many problems in attempting to take research materials back home and that she had been accused of copyright infringement. Each researcher coming to the Seychelles has to sign an ‘agreement ’ or research contract with the state in which the researcher has to identify Challenges to the Management of Intangible Cultural Heritage 72 her research topic, location of research, contacts in the ‘field’, residential address and the duration of the research. The National Heritage Division informed me that the agreement is a formal, governmentdocumentwhichaimstoprotectlocalresourcesfrombeingexploited by external interests. The document had come into being shortly after the Seychelles became a socialist state in 1977. The then newly elected cabinet emphasised the documentation and preservation of popular heritage resources as a way to achieve a more equitable society. For until then, British and French history , artefacts, languages and places of interest dominated the social scene. The research contract included a number of clauses which (to me) appeared to protect the interests of the Seychellois. However, the advisor was deeply concerned about statements aimed at curtailing her autonomy. In the contract, the heritage division is given the right to ‘monitor the research work of [the researcher] in the Republic of the Seychelles ... to cease any collaboration with [the researcher] if the end use of the final report will have a damaging effect on the image and the reputation of any individuals in the Republic of Seychelles’ (Draft Research Agreement June 2005). The contract also states that ‘The Seychellois community (informants ) reserves their constitutional right not to provide information to [the researcher] if they are not comfortable with any part of the exchange’. Although aware of potential problems that I might encounter once there, I decided to take a chance. I felt that I would be in a better position than my advisor because I spoke Kreol (the lingua franca of the islands) and had lived in an autocratic state. I believed that I would be more sensitive to the nuances of local experience and would be more likely to perceive the ambiguities of living in a pro-socialist state. Being from Mauritius, I was also sensitive to the vulnerability of small island states to the precarious tourism industry. I accepted that they have the right to protect their country from unnecessarily negative publicity. Although my first encounter with the National Heritage Division was awkward (I was not accustomed to signing ‘limiting’ research contracts), I found that ultimately, the Division did assist me in my research and that the research contract was not simply a piece of ‘red tape’. It was also an important source of information in terms of what local professionals thought of their heritage. For them, they had inalienable rights to it and were entitled to protect it from exploitation . Managing Heritage in the Seychelles Gabriel Essack, the principal research officer at the National Heritage Division, met me at the Victoria bus...

Share