TOWARDS NEW HORIZONS IN DARK TOURISM

Chapter

TOWARDS NEW HORIZONS IN DARK TOURISM STUDIES Maximiliano E. Korstanje* University of Palermo, Argentina

ABSTRACT This chapter discusses on the needs of introducing new methodologies in dark tourism fields. At the same time, it is necessary to revisit the limitations and controversies in the current specialized literature. Because of dark tourism arose as an emergent theme in tourism academy, scholars have little information on this theme. We juxtaposed my own experience in the fieldwork as researchers with the outcomes of colleagues who have delved in dark tourism site. We discuss the preliminary outcomes of some authorative voices as Phillip Stone, Richard Sharpley and Anthony Seaton. They start from a biased diagnosis of Thanaptosis which merits to be discussed. In this essay we hold the thesis that knowledge-production in this field stagnated because of two main reasons. Firstly, scholars do not dissociate what is cognition from emotionality, confusing perception with interpretation. Secondly, fieldworkers over-valorize some obstructive methods as questionnaires or formal interviews over qualitative viewpoints. Helping to expand their current understanding of dark tourism, this work dissects on what are the next horizons for research. Dark tourism studies, nowadays, lack of concise epistemological discussion to understand “thanaptosis,” as well *

[email protected].

2

Maximiliano E. Korstanje as an excess of credibility for what tourists say. Open or close-ended questionaries’ are administered in these sites by students or fieldworkers who somehow conditions interviewees to respond what they expect. In other conditions, interviewees are not familiar with their inner-life, answering what is socially accepted. Last but not least, the term “thanaptosis,” as it was used in specialized literature, needs further clarification.

Keywords: dark tourism, research, fieldwork, epistemology, consumption

INTRODUCTION One of the fathers of modern anthropology, Claude Levi-Strauss (1968) theorized on the epistemological boundaries between observed and observer. He found that ethnographers, as fieldworkers, not only were accustomed to watch to understand social facts but to interview others to know further on their experiences. The fact was that what we feel, as well as those events we face, is often interpreted according to a cultural matrix that precedes human action. What are the real implications of this for us? Basically, there is a clear gap (dissociation) between people overtly say from what really accomplish. Although Levi-Strauss was a staunch enemy of ethnomethodology, he was right in one thing. Sometimes, whether ethnographers gather enough information which is extracted from natives´ experience, people lie or in some other conditions, they remain unfamiliar of their behaviours. In the fields of tourism, within dark tourism situates as sub-field, professional researchers are prone to administer open-ended questionaries’ or informal interviews applied on tourists and visitors as the only valid methodology to understand their studied object. For them, dark tourism seems to be a social expression, recently emerged, where visitors manifest their interests for others´ death, or traumatic events), where death is the key-factor to gain attraction. (Foley & Lennon, 1996; Seaton, 1996; Miles, 2002; Strange & Kempa, 2003; Wight, 2006; Stone 2006; Jamal & Lelo, 2008; Robb, 2009; Stone & Sharpley, 2008; Sharpley, 2005; Stone, 2012; Kang et al., 2012; Raine 2013). At a first glance these earlier-mentioned studies were of paramount importance to construct a conceptual platform that explains these new trends, but further discussion is needed to resolve the methodological limitations of applied-research. Much of the problem how tourism fieldworkers process the obtained information comes from the previous theoretical framework they developed (Korstanje 2011b).

Towards New Horizons in Dark Tourism Studies

3

On another hand, if dark tourism can be defined as a valid instrument to accelerate times in post recovery process (Korstanje & Ivanov, 2012), or simply as a form of fictionalization which is disposed by politicians, it is interesting not to lose the sight, there are higher probabilities disasters repeat if community did not learn the lesson. In this short essay-review, we explore the main families of theories which focused on dark tourism, highlighting the own experience in fieldworks as Cromañón (Argentina), Ground-Zero (US) and Concepcion (Chile). Anthropologically speaking, what sites of dark tourism have in common seems to be aimed at ritualizing death; these shrines are constructed as iconic rituals oriented to understand disrupting events which threaten the sense of security of community.

THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF DEATH Thanatology sheds light on the intersection of culture and death in order for expanding the current understanding on death tolerance. While tribal communities have historically developed a higher tolerance to death, in fact because the belief in after-life secularized societies show some problems to understand death in all its dimensions (Bardis 1981; 1986). For example, interesting evidence collected by Korstanje (2006) reveals that upper-classes are reluctant to death while blue-collar workers have developed more efficient adaptive mechanisms (Korstanje 2006). In this respect, Bardis (1986) argues convincingly that “blacks” acquired further acceptance to death than white males in US. The same can be applied to urban-dwellers who are insensitive to religion, in comparison to farmers or people who live in rural zones. The German Philosopher (F. Feuerbach, IV) anticipated that religion and economy are inevitably entwined. Following this, J. Huizinga (1993) confirmed, death never was an obstacle for medieval man simply because religion played a vital role as intermediary between faith and the quest for life. In middle Ages, the concept of sacred-ness was something more than a mere Spectacle. It regulated the daily life and hopes famers endorsed to Catholic Church as a leading institution which marked the moral rule. As Philosopher Hans Belting (2007) puts it, whenever kings died, masks emulate the face of King as a reminder of his presence in difficult times. At some extent, the philosophy of image evinces, we are prone to draw visual icons (as dark tourism shrines) not only because of our fragility, but as reminder to the threshold of time. As this backdrop, B. Malinowski (1948) acknowledges that death represented an old problem for humankind. Once the disaster takes hit,

4

Maximiliano E. Korstanje

survivors face days of extreme fear and anxieties. In order for alleviating this sentiment of anxiety, survivors build monuments, shrines, houses in the geographical point where events happened (Malinowski 1948). The expansion of secularization, which was conducive to the weakness of beliefs, ties and trust, paved the pathways for the rise of uncertainness. In this respect, Phillipe Aries (1975) says that while medieval men kept lower expectancy of life, they were attached to religion. Now, people live much time than their ancestors, but death became in “taboo,” a frightening object to avoid.

Discussing Dark Tourism Doubtless, patterns of leisure and consumption have been substantially changed over recent decades. If our grand-parents travelled to paradisiacal destinations to spend their vacations, new emergent segments are captivated by sites of mass-death, suffering and mourning. Dark or Thana-Tourism, though other terms apply as Bottom-tourism or disaster-tourism, signal to a recent phenomenon where visitors consume others´ death as a form of personal development. In fact, dark tourism has woken up a hot debate among academicians. In this point of entry, two great families of theorists are distinguished. On one hand, a bunch of experts understand dark tourism as a sign of sadism, or the decomposition of social ties (Bloom, 2000; Baudrillard, 1996; 2006; Koch, 2005), but for others, it exhibits an alternative instrument for resilience to mediate between life and death (Lennon & Folley, 2000; Miles, 2002; Stone & Sharpley, 2008). While those cities, towns or areas which are devastated by disasters as quakes, hurricanes or any other type, dark tourism offers a fertile ground for a faster recovery, not only because of profits, but the lesson learned. However, under some conditions when “the tragedy” is commoditized, some risks surface. If in dark tourism sites, death is sold as a commodity, no less true is that this product captivates interests in others. In retrospect, the mutilated identity of community can be revitalized by the imposition of heritage which leads towards dark consumption (Poria 2007; Chauhan & Khanna, 2009). In this vein, Stone & Sharpley (2008) alert that many researchers misunderstand the roots of dark tourism with other similarlyminded segments. What is important to discuss is to what extent experience (of the tourists) are framed under shared values which leads to foster social cohesion (Stone & Sharpley 2008). From medieval times, lay-people alluded to death of others to understand their own life, Stone adds (2012), and this happens because dark tourism represents “a pilgrimage or an individual


5

experience resulted from the needs of contemplating others´ death” to interpret the proper life. Undoubtedly, as Biran, Poria and Oren applied research seems to be more descriptive than explanatory. These limitations ushered researchers in marginal factors, instead of paying attention to the role played by “thanaptosis,” as the touchstone of this much deep-seated issue. Like heritageseekers, dark site visitors are in quest of answers which can be found in history, tragedy or death. What visitors look for is not other thing than an “authentic experience.” In an interesting research, Dorina Buda & Alison McIntosh (2013) toyed with the idea that dark tourism should be framed into the logic of voyeurism. Taking their cues from psychanalytic theory, which delved into desire as a catalyst for movement, they explain that experiences as dark only may be molded through consumption of the danger. Embedded within a logic of emulation where visitors want to feel like or what victims felt, dark tourism still opens the doors for interesting investigation in the fields of psychology, sociology and education. In addition, E. H. Cohen (2011) has observed that dark tourism serves as an educational instrument which gives a message to society. The meaning conferred to territory plays a vital role at this stage. Visitors tend to think as authentic those sites where the memorized event took room. Instead, whether museums or shrines are built on allegorical reasons in sites that nothing has to do with the founding trauma, they are pondered as inauthentic. Cohen’s outcomes not only reveal the political root of dark tourism, but also the importance of location whenever the self encounters with tragedy. Dark tourism sites are politically designed to express a message to community. Victims and their families not only have diverse ways of negotiating that message but also by appropriating an interpretation of social trauma. Dark tourism alludes to a psychological need of figuring one death by imagining the other´s death. Nonetheless, the myopia of scholars to understand dark tourism rests on two primary aspects. There are no clear boundaries or indicators to mark a unified site of memory which cannot be subject to political struggle. Furthermore, starting from the premise heritage depends on the political interests, sometimes the national discourse around dark sites are not accepted one side of community (White & Frew, 2013; Korstanje 2011). Additionally, Korstanje & Clayton (2012) acknowledged that tourism would be an splendid opportunity to make business to help others (social marketing), but the risks of fictionalizing disasters, or even terrorism consists in forgetting or remembering partially the reasons behind the traumatic event. If this happens, the probabilities for community to face a new similar blow turn higher. To what extent, visitors of Ground Zero are familiar with the history of

6


terrorism in Middle East, or what would know a person in Auschwitz-Birkenau of the economic conditions that facilitated Hitler rise to power?. One of the authorative voices in this theme, Phillip Stone (2006), professor at University of Central Lancashire confirms dark tourism evolves to a much wider spectrum which oscillates from darkest to lightest expressions. While the former is characterized by devotional manifestations where pain runs very high, the latter corresponds with cultural forms of entertainment. The degree of suffering is vital to pass from a darkest to a lightest item in Stone’s model. This reminds that dark fun factories can offer dark landscapes as fictionalized products, which is perceived as less authentic by visitors, while other more macabre subtypes can reject mass-tourism as a main economic option. In recent years, some sociologists, who situates as detractors of this segment, have adamantly criticized tourism in post disaster areas, because it serves as a mechanism where material asymmetries of classes are enlarged. In context of total obliteration, affected families are economically assisted, but relegated to live in peripheral zones, while the centre is fulfilled by international mega resorts, skyscrapers, and commercial malls. For these voices, dark tourism is the ring to the finger for capitalist investors recycles regions at lower costs while enhancing higher profits (Korstanje & Clayton, 2012; Klein, 2007; Korstanje, 2011a, 2011b; Tarlow & Korstanje, 2013; Verma & Jain, 2013; Tzanelli 2016). In this respect, Korstanje & Ivanov (2012) argue convincingly that tourism is a vehicle that helps community to recover from adversities and disasters. Even tourism revitalizes communities from a collective trauma re-delineating the borders of authority. By the introduction of financial business, politicians buttress their legitimacy before citizenry. Some risks arise when politicians take advantage of disasters to impose economic programs otherwise would be rejected by worker unions. In a seminal edition, L White & E. Frew (2013) discuss the roots of dark tourism from many angles. They hold the thesis that victims negotiate the message possessing their own interpretation of trauma, which manipulated or not, express a political message to community. The anticipation of death by means of others connotes to a “psychological need” to understand “adversity.” Last but not least, Sather Wagstaff (2011) conducts an interesting selfethnography in Ground-Zero, NY, where she found that the proliferation of sentiment of loss and mourning lead to social trust. If we start from the premise that the self mediates between memory and future, dark shrines helps dealing with pain or emotions associated to disasters. From Hiroshima to Ground-zero, we are twinned up by the capacity to share feeling (which means


7

situate in the place of others). This reflects, for example, the international solidarity received by US after the terrorist attacks in 2001. Since death strengthens social bondage, as founding event 9/11 fabricated “a shared experience” which was adopted by other states, audiences and cultures. The meaning of heritage in her development does not take the same signification than other authors. Sather-Wagstaff said that heritage corresponds with the political manipulation that is oriented to alienate citizens from the real message of disaster. This happens because of two main reasons. First and foremost, affected privileged classes shied away from their responsibilities that pushed community to disaster, and secondly, the manipulation of suffering would be an efficient mechanism of ideology. As Sather Wagstaff put it, “Sites of historical and cultural importance that represent violent events are particularly prone to a social misunderstanding about their emergence; it is believed that they have come into existence only through the events that take place at particular location: war results in battlefields, genocides produce mass graves, the assassination site of a political leader delineates a national sacred place. However, historical commemorative places are not made as important sites simply because of the events that may physically mark them as distinct places through bloodshed or the destruction of building or landscapes. These places are made through ongoing human practices in time and I argue, across multiple spaces and places.” (p. 47)

Not surprisingly, Ground-zero exhibits two important aspects which merit to be discussed. Its symbolic hole is filled by the conflicts of involving actors, which range from politicians, families, neighbors and investors. All them struggle to impose their own discourse about 9/11. Sooner or later, stronger stakeholders monopolize the interpretation of the event in view of their own interests.

The Fieldworks in Dark Tourism Research Recently, Jonathan Skinner edited by book entitled Writing the Dark Side of Travel where invited authors discuss to what extent we can homogenize a great variety of subthemes. At time of studying dark tourism, many marginal topics as battlefront commemorations, genocides and disaster converge. Based

8


on a post-Marxist position, Skinner dangles the possibility postmodernism cements the rise of a new hedonist experience, where the others´ suffering revitalizes the deteriorated ego. Genocide museums not only remember a moral tragedy but disseminate a code enrooted in politics. The role of ethnologist consists in deciphering that code by writing and describing the context. The written word (text) is of paramount importance to understand the allegory of dark tourism sites. The discrepancies among authors who conform this book respecting to the archetype of death represents a serious problems to arrive to a all-embracing theory which allows expanding the current understanding of the issue. Editor J. Skinner warns that chapters included in this project do not examine the death but how it is interpreted by local cultures or story tellers. These tales are embedded in the text, not in history (Skinner 2012). Although this book exhibits a strong sensibility in the role played by the ethnography to unearth covered voices, some limitations and doubts arise. Skinner and his collaborators start from the premise of Seaton or Sharpley who posit an exaggerated trust in the perception, emotions and opinion of visitors or tourists. This point begs two interesting questions, how may we know interviewees are not lying or simply they are not familiar with the psychological laws of their behavior? It is unfortunate that the epistemology of tourism has some limitations to dissociate interpretation (emotionally-oriented) from perception (cognitiveoriented). To put this in other terms, risks perception stems from the cognitive structure while fear comes from the deepness of emotionality. I can perceive a destination as unsecure, but this does not impede I travel there in my holidays (Korstanje 2016). Besides, these investigations are designed to take tourists as the main source of veracity in the field. Although social anthropologists have already recognized that this represents one of the problems of positivism, which assumes asking is only pathway towards truth, somehow approaches in dark tourism alludes to what tourists feel to reconstruct the epistemological object of dark tourism. This stance ignores that likely people lie to protect their interests, or in other they are not cognizant of their real emotions, in which case all information we gathered can be biased by our prejudices (Korstanje 2016). To clarify this better, let´s explain my own experience in Cromañón Sanctuary, a site (night-club) where a fire suffocated almost 194 youth attendants in 2004. One day, a teenager came to me to explain me further on the slippery matter I was involved. I kindly accepted his invitation and switched on my tape recorder. While I supposed he was much to say, the


9

interview lasted almost 6 hours. The information I obtained from this young was very important for me at a preliminary stage. Nonetheless, with the passing of months I have advanced my ethnography comparing the collated information by what I can hear and see. Not only I realized that the original interview was completely false, because the involved key-informant wanted to attract attention and exaggerated his stories, but he felt the needs to tell something to me. The importance of this story was not determined by its credibility. He had not lost anyone in the disaster of Cromañon, though developed a strange attachment for the event, for the other´s suffering. This empathy led him to alter his sense of reality. Paradoxically, although this interview was a fake, it underpinned the main hypotheses in my research opening the doors to new cosmologies and opportunities to be empirically validated. This story though false shed light on my investigation, reminding exactly what we have discussed. Not always, what people say is real. If psychoanalysis has left a legacy, it relates to the fact that the self never reconstructs things as they really happen, but only interpret combining deep unconscious forces with “the narcissist object,” as Haydèe Faimberg (2005) observed in her book The Telescoping Generations. Since Freud formulated the “Oedipus complex,” which was based on Oedipus myth, we started to understand not only the profundity of mind, but the role played by secrecy in individual behaviour. While Oedipus was defenseless trapped in a grim future, which resulted from a bloody past, his problem was not associated to the horrendous crime he perpetrated but to deceit (which means the secret he carried during his life). What this myth reminds, Faimberg explains, is that a most part of our acts are determined by the figure of our parents, likely even not remembering events as they happened in history, but only in the way they were deciphered by us. Our cognition as well as everything we say about us stems from a fake-story which is fabricated by our emotional inner-world. “We usually acknowledge after Freud, from a psychoanalytical perspective, that the Oedipus myth concerns Oedipus parricidal and incestuous desires and we view them as a paradigm of the unconscious desires felt by all men for their parents. The paradigm is usually called the direct Oedipus complex. Let us repeat it once again, Oedipus` destiny is not governed solely by the prophecy- by what, according to what just has been said, can legitimately be called the Oedipus complex- but also by an unspoken message.” (Faimberg, 2005: 67)

10


As this backdrop, many disciplines emerged during XXs decade, are prone to hear from interviewees as valid source of information to reconstruct an allencompassing explanation that obscures rather than clarifies. In some circumstances, obtained information is misunderstood, duplicated, or exaggerated according to the cognitive frames of fieldworkers. Many other projects pursue diffuse goals. While improving the condition of life of communities castigated by disasters is a valuable goal, this places us far away from a real understanding of dark tourism. It is true that policy makers should read what social scientists produce, but in our discipline the borders between tourism-management and scientific-research are blurred. More interested in protecting profits than understanding the anthropological roots of dark tourism, part of dark tourism literature should be re-considered.

CONCLUSION In view of limitations in space and time, I am unable to review all authorative voices in dark tourism in this essay, but in some respect we have detailed the main guidelines and horizons of the discipline to date. Though dark tourism offers an interesting platform to be investigated from an interdisciplinary viewpoint, researchers bemoan the lack of shared epistemology that helps understand the issue, adjoined to serious methodological limitations that obscure the outcomes. As fieldworker in dark tourism, I have come across with different obstacles, which were overcome appealing to “common sense.” Dark tourism studies, nowadays, lack of concise epistemological discussion to understand “thanaptosis,” as well as an excess of credibility for what tourists say. Open or close-ended questionaries’ are administered in these sites by students or fieldworkers who somehow conditions interviewees to respond what they expect. In other conditions, interviewees are not familiar with their inner-life, answering what is socially accepted. Last but not least, the term “thanaptosis,” as it was used in specialized literature, needs further clarification. In the reading of many texts I have found in almost all them the same mistake. The specialized literature suggests that dark tourism is based on “thanaptosis,” a term coined by Seaton or Sharpley, to denote “the fascination (interest) for others´ death to anticipate the own death.” However, far from being real, Thanaptosis was a word originally formulated by American Poet William Cullen Bryant (1817) alluding to the power of nature to recycle life. For the sake of clarity, let´s explain that Bryant endorses to Thanaptosis a


11

different meaning than today is used. It consisted in understanding we cannot retain life, because in so doing, we neglect death, which is inevitable. To resolve the puzzle of human existence, which is the only specie have consciousness of death, we have to turn our eyes toward nature, where our death ignites a vital process in earth for others live. Life and death are inevitably entwined. From the moment we are born, we are slowly dying. While the place we left in this earth is used for new-born others, no less true is that sometimes, death of others help us to interpret the proper life. This connotation, at a closer look, sounds very different than Shapley’s understanding. In any case, Bryant (1817) is interested in life and death as forces which are alternated and complemented in nature. He has never associated Thanaptosis to “heritage,” as it was misunderstood by current readers.

REFERENCES Aries, P. (1975). Western attitudes toward death: From the Middle Ages to the present (Vol. 3). Maryland, John Hopkins University Press. Bardis, P. D. (1981). History of Thanatology: Philosophical, Religious, Psychological, and Sociological Ideas Concerning Death, from Primitive Times to the Present. Washington DC, University Press of America. Bardis, P. D. (1986). “Thanatometer. A scale for the measurement of awareness and acceptance of death.” South African Journal of Sociology, 17(3), 71-74. Baudrillard, J. (1996). The perfect crime. London, Verso. Belting, H. (2007). Antropología de la imagen. Madrid, Editorial Katz. Biran, A. Poria, Y. and Oren G. (2011). “Sought Experience at Dark Heritage sites.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 38 (3): 820-841. Blom, T. (2000). “Morbid-Tourism – a postmodern market niche with an example from Althrop.” Norwegian Journal of Geography. Vol. 54 (1), pp. 29-36. Buda, D. M., & McIntosh, A. J. (2013). Dark tourism and voyeurism: tourist arrested for “spying” in Iran. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(3), 214-226. Chauhan, V. & Khanna, S. (2009). “Tourism: a tool for crafting peace process in Kashmir, J&K, India.” Tourismos: an international multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism. Vol. 4 (2): 69-89.

12


Cohen, E. H. (2011). “Educational dark tourism at an in populo site: The Holocaust museum in Jerusalem.” Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 193-209. Faimberg, H (2005) The Telescoping Generations: listening to the narcissistic links between generations. East Sussex, Routledge. Feuerbach, L. (2009). The Essence of Christianity. Madrid, Clasicos de la Cultura, Trotta Editorial. Foley, M., & Lennon, J. J. (1996). JFK and dark tourism: A fascination with assassination. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 2(4), 198-211. Huizinga, J. (1993) The Waning of Middle Age. Hodder & Stoughton Limited. Jamal, T., & Lelo, L. (2011). “Exploring the conceptual and analytical framing of dark tourism: From darkness to intentionality.” Tourist experience: Contemporary perspectives, 29-42. Kang, E. J., Scott, N., Lee, T. J., & Ballantyne, R. (2012). “Benefits of visiting a ‘dark tourism’site: The case of the Jeju April 3rd peace park, Korea.” Tourism Management, 33(2), 257-265. Klein, N. (2007). The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. New York, Macmillan. Korstanje, M. E., & Clayton, A. (2012). “Tourism and terrorism: conflicts and commonalities.” Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 4(1), 8-25. Korstanje, M. E., & Ivanov, S. (2012). “Tourism as a Form of New Psychological Resilience: The Inception of Dark Tourism.” Cultur: Revista de Cultura e Turismo, 6(4), 56-71. Korstanje, M. (2006). “Lo religioso en el siglo XXI: transformación de creencias y prácticas.” Ciencias Sociales online, 3(3), 28-55. Korstanje, M. E. (2011). “Reconnecting with poverty: New challenges of disaster management.” International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 2(2), 165-177. Korstanje, M. E. (2011b). “Detaching the elementary forms of dark-tourism.” Anatolia, 22(3), 424-427. Korstanje M. E (2016) The Rise of Thana Capitalism and Tourism. Abingdon, Routledge. Koch, A. (2005). “Cyber citizen or cyborg citizen: Baudrillard, political agency, and the commons in virtual politics.” Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 20(2-3), 159-175. Lennon, J. and Foley, M. (2000). Dark Tourism: The attraction of Death and Disasters. London, Thomson Learning.


13

Lemke, T. (2001). “The birth of bio-politics': Michel Foucault's lecture at the College de France on neo-liberal governmentality.” Economy and society, 30(2), 190-207. Levi-Strauss, C (1968) Structural Anthropology. Harmondsworth, Penguin Books. Malinowski, B. (1948). Magic, Science and Religion: And Other Essays, by Bronislaw Malinowski. Selected, and with an Introduction by Robert Redfield. Boston, Beacon Press. Miles, W. (2002).”Auschwitz: museum interpretation and Darker Tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 29 (4), pp. 1175-1178. Poria, Y. (2007). “Establishing cooperation between Israel and Poland to save Auschwitz Concentration Camp: globalising the responsibility for the Massacre.” International Journal of Tourism Policy, 1(1), 45-57. Raine, R. (2013) “A Dark Tourism spectrum.” International Journal of Culture, tourism and hospitality Research. Vol. 7 (3): 242-256. Robb, E. M. (2009). “Violence and recreation: Vacationing in the realm of dark tourism.” Anthropology and Humanism, 34(1), 51-60. Sather-Wagstaff, J. (2011). Heritage that hurts: Tourists in the memoryscapes of September 11 (Vol. 4). California, Left Coast Press. Seaton, A. V. (1996). “Guided by the dark: From thanatopsis to thanatourism.” International Journal of Heritage Studies, 2(4), 234-244. Sharpley, R. (2005). Travels to the edge of darkness: towards a typology of dark tourism. Taking tourism to the limits: Issues, concepts and managerial perspectives, 217-228. Skinner, J (2012) Writing the dark side of Travel. New York, Berghan Books. Stone, P. (2006) “A Dark Tourism Spectrum: towards a typology of death and macabre related tourist sites, attraction and exhibitions.” Tourism Vol 54 (2): 145-160. Stone, P. and Sharpley, R. (2008). “Consuming Dark-Tourism a Thanatological Perspective.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 35 (2), pp. 574-595. Stone, P. (2012) “Dark tourism as mortality capital.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol 39 (3): 1565-1587. Strange, C., & Kempa, M. (2003). Shades of dark tourism: Alcatraz and Robben Island. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(2), 386-405. Tarlow, P. & Korstanje M. (2013) “How do you build the trip product? Tourism as a tool for post disaster recovery Fukuyima, Japan.” Pasos: revista de turismo y patrimonio cultural. Vol 10 (5): 629-369.


14

Tzanelli, R. (2016). Thanatourism and Cinematic Representations of Risk: Screening the End of Tourism. Abingdon, Routledge. Verma, S., & Jain, R. (2013). Exploiting Tragedy for Tourism. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(8), 9-13. Wight, A. C. (2006). “Philosophical and methodological praxes in dark tourism: Controversy, contention and the evolving paradigm.” Journal of Vacation Marketing, 12(2), 119-129. White, L. & Frew E. (2013) Dark Tourism: place and identity: managing and interpreting dark places. London, Routledge. SCH