ABSTRACT
Sites associated with conflict, atrocities, and terrorism are places where human emotions tend to run deep. Sometimes this is due to a personal connection, but emotional responses often resonate at a collective level – for example, Anzac Cove for Australians, Pearl Harbour and 9/11 for Americans, and Auschwitz for those with Jewish heritage. The presentation and display of objects, events, and past experiences at such sites is often designed to be ‘hot’ interpretation. In other words, it is specifically designed to ‘tap into’ personal emotions in order to harness emotional power for future good, such as the promotion of reconciliation, peace, and understanding).
‘Hot’ interpretation is particularly prevalent at museums and memorials associated with pain, suffering, and death. It rose to prominence in the late 1990s in response to the realization that visitors’ responses to past events are rarely only cognitive. Rather, places and issues that relate to personal values, beliefs, and memories are also highly likely to elicit emotional responses (Uzzell 1989). We argue that the number of sites memorializing traumatic events are likely to increase, with the rise of terrorism, mass shootings, and extreme weather events. Accordingly, there is a pressing need to develop, implement, and evaluate techniques and strategies for interpreting ‘hot’ issues. These interpretations play an important role in long-term visitor and community well-being. As such, they should genuinely contribute to that well-being. But research exploring the impact of deliberately provoking an emotional response from young visitors to exhibits is scarce.
This chapter will illustrate the ‘hot’ interpretation approach through case studies worldwide (including studies of Holocaust museums in Washington and Berlin; Robben Island and District Six museums in South Africa; the Australian War Museum, and Port Arthur convict museum in Australia; and the Jeju April 3rd Peace Park in Korea).
