INTERPRETIVE DESIGN

INTRODUCTION

Interpretive design is a complete science of its own, dedicated to the conveyance of information through many means. Ultimately its serves to expand the understanding and appreciation of cultural, historic, or environmental factors of a site. Interpretation often takes the form of signage or other illustrative media, in an attempt to guide a visitor’s understanding of the site in front of them. However, interpretation can be a more subtle undertaking, emphasizing the message at hand through environmental cues, demonstration areas, and other means.

HISTORY OF INTERPRETIVE DESIGN

Tilden Freeman wrote the seminal work regarding the field of Interpretive Design, the volume after which many modern accounts are refined, called Interpreting Our Heritage. For Freeman, the main purpose of interpretation is to “awaken people’s curiosity.” He also emphasized the importance of passive interpretation, where the visitors are free to take or leave the information at their leisure (Freeman 1977). If the purpose of interpretation was to simply impart knowledge, then a book, movie, or a webpage would suffice. Interpretation differs from a book or a website in that for it to be interpretation, dissemination of information must take place at the site itself, which serves to reveal information, rather than simply imparting it. Freeman himself defines interpretation as “an educational activity which aims to reveal meaning and relationships through the use of original objects, by firsthand experiments, and by illustrative media, rather than to simply communicate factual information” (Freeman 1977:8). He also sets forth his “6 Principles of Interpretation”, to help guide those looking to undertake an interpretive effort. Those principles are as follows: interpretation needs to be related to the experiences or personality of the visitor; interpretation is not information, rather it is revelation based on information; interpretation is an art influenced by many other arts; interpretation is not instruction but provocation; interpretation presents a whole rather than a part; and that interpretation addressed to children should be a different message, not a dilution of the original message (Freeman 1977). These principles possibly can and should be modified; however, they are an excellent starting off point for interpretative efforts across the board. Freeman also emphasized the importance of illustrating interesting facts and figures that people can relate to on a personal level, and project themselves into the story, engaging with the subject on a more personal level. Involving people in this process of learning and discovering, of giving them a problem to solve, is what more effectively engages a visitor and makes them receptive to the message that the site is trying to convey.

INTERPRETATION FOR CHILDREN

Children are an important demographic for interpretation, as school groups and families on holiday comprise a large demographic group of visitors to sites with interpretive emphasis. This creates an opportunity to tailor interpretation efforts to the interests and strengths of children – under the age of twelve, for our purposes. Though it may be instinctual to dilute information to make a topic easier for children to understand, Freeman argues that children do not find topics difficult to understand if they find the topic interesting. Children are more interested in facts and figures, especially superlatives (Freeman 1977), as they are at a developmental stage where they are trying to determine how the world works, and how things can be placed in comparison to each other. Children are also more interested when all of their senses are engaged, not just by sight and sound (which are easy) but by touch, taste, and smell (Freeman 1977). This presents a unique challenge for interpretation, as sight and sound are generally easy, but how can you taste the past? What does history sound like? Lessons that can be applied to the experience of the children under twelve can also be applied to adults. Most people, whether under 12 or over, retain more information when they are feeling actively engaged with the topic.

LESSONS FROM INTERPRETATION

Interpretation is important at cultural, historic, and environmental sites, as often a visit to the site itself is the only experience the visitor might ever have with the topic (Freeman 1977). It is especially important to use the opportunity for interpretation to make the argument for preservation – why is the site worth preserving? When people have a firsthand experience with the site in question, they are more likely to support preservation efforts in the future, both at that specific site and others. The visitor is an important part of the interpretation equation because they have the ability to affect the world around them, and the interpreter is important because they serve as an intermediary between the visitor and the site that is to be interpreted (Pierssené 1999). Interpretation is not important just for the sake of the ongoing preservation of the specific site; the role of education is important in the life of a visitor, as it can help the visitor to understand and appreciate how the world around them works. According to Pierssené, “learning’s usefulness does not consist merely in factual knowledge or technical skills. Wisdom is a higher quality, and so is imagination. Wisdom and imagination are both built on knowledge” (Pierssené 1999:20). Knowledge is what is imparted through effective interpretation, which leads to both imagination and wisdom. Pierssene suggests that this wisdom serves the visitor at the interpretive site, but can expand into the rest of their lives.

NEW INTERPRETATION TECHNIQUES

Interpretation is generally undertaken, and is indeed more effective, at the site itself, rather than being taught; a dialogue is being created between the resource being interpreted and the visitor. In this, interpretation cannot take place in a vacuum; the individual must actually visit the site in question. Special events, such as demonstrations, special historic anniversary celebrations, and the like can be a good way to help interpret history (Pierssené 1999), as well as to encourage new and returning visitors to the site. Effectiveness of interpretation is also important, as word of mouth is strong currency in encouraging new and returning visitors. The most important concern is disseminating information that the population will be interested in receiving.

Interpretation has a short shelf life, and must be constantly re-evaluated for the accuracy of the information, and the effectiveness of the message’s delivery. Pierssené also offers a checklist for effective interpretive planning that builds on Freeman’s guidelines and adds a new series of factors to consider when planning an interpretive project. These suggested guidelines include: relating directly to what the visitor can personally see or experience; dealing with the “how” or “why” of a situation; expressing a fact or story that can be built upon; creating an underlying appeal to a visitor’s humanity; and hinting at general principles that a visitor can see exemplified throughout the site, if they keep their eyes open (Pierssené 1999:87). The last concern of effective interpretation design is that of productivity. Although it is difficult to quantify, evaluating the effectiveness of interpretive efforts is an effective step to take in this evaluation, through visitor observations, exit interviews, and other means.

RECONSTRUCTION: RIGHT OR WRONG?

PRESERVATION + INTERPRETATION IN THE SOUTHWEST

Although there is a long history of ruins reconstruction in the Southwest, the major landholders and cultural institutions who manage the ruins have their own guidelines for dealing with preservation and reconstruction efforts. As discussed previously, the National Park Service generally does not support reconstruction efforts, except for cases in which there is enough research and documentation to eliminate guesswork in the production of the final product. Sites that are managed by the Park Service are maintained continuously in the condition that they were in when they came under the stewardship of the NPS. A noninvasive approach to preservation is favored by the Arizona State Parks (Neal 2004), which often takes the form of reburial, or covering the excavation with enough local fill to protect the remains, to preserve the site for future public and professional education. At sites where maintenance and security is potentially problematic, this is an especially effective solution. Even though the site may be reburied, environmental mitigation still needs to be undertaken to minimize the effects of site erosion caused by wind, rainfall, and runoff (Neal 2004). If these environmental preventions are undertaken, the site will require little subsequent maintenance. Neal also argues that “generally, sites that we as archaeologists and resource managers are not prepared to protect, manage, and properly investigate and interpret should not be developed for the public” (2004:243). If this is in fact the case, and reconstruction is ruled out, how can the site that can’t be seen be effectively interpreted for a visiting public?

NEXT PAGE | HERITAGE GARDENS