ABSTRACT
Chapter 5 focuses on the ways localities, nation-states, and international activist networks respond to cinematic touristification in critical or violent ways. It proposes that the notion of ‘technological hubris’, often attributed to world centres of development and their experts, should also be applied to proponents of local wisdom and their global networks (for example, activist cultures). Because established analytical frames on social movements do not help in the study of most expressions of discontent with cinematic tourist development, a new analytical model of study is devised. Three types of response are identified: ‘epistemic misalignment’ is rarely openly violent, but is regulated by a combative-adaptive response to development, which usually occurs in postcolonial contexts; ‘hostipitality’ can be more hostile and widespread, as it often focuses on ethnonational belonging and ritual expulsion of tourists as strangers; finally, ‘postindustrial disobedience’ makes labour disputes in cinematic tourist contexts its focus, when they are usually manifestations of identity battles. It is suggested that we consider these responses in terms of (lay) design of atmospheres: as affective manifestations of a rather animated and turbulent native dialogue with tourist industries and tourists. Through this dialogue, which first takes place in the non-representational domain (that is, in culturally-conditioned affective reaction), localities, and national centres restage their own atmospheric narratives for guests and themselves.
