Bodies, Battlefields and Biographies: Scars and the Construction of the Body as Heritage



There is a sense in which the body is considered as an historical entity with an ‘age’ and a ‘past’. If it can be considered in historical terms why can it not also be reflected upon in heritage terms, as a site of interpretation and re-representation which is not necessarily ‘true’ nor ‘accurate’, but may be considered as ‘meaningful’ and/or ‘authentic’ (Walsh 1992; McCrone et al. 1995; Urry 1996)? Relating heritage to history is, according to Brett (1996: 155), a struggle between two kinds of time: one is the real, concrete time and the other mythic time. It is our suggestion that scars of the body are sites of the struggle between making sense of what is real or mythic in one’s past and indeed one’s present. To remember a scar, and the process by which it was gained, is to interpret selectively one’s actions, relationships and emotions. The retelling of the scarring process allows individuals to recount what was meaningful about the event concerned and presents an opportunity to display or reveal to others what has been acquired by the engagement. The physical manifestation of a scar is bound in with mythic qualities as to its symbolic significance. In this sense we argue that the scar is akin to battlefields, castles, old ships or railway lines – the object is imbued with both real and mythic aspects which, through interpretation and sharing with others, constitute meaningful qualities of existence.


Heritage Site Discussion Theme Symbolic Order Good Story Scarring Incident 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams, B. 1990. Time and Social Theory. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  2. Brett, D. 1996. The Construction of Heritage. Cork: Cork University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Dunow, D. 1997. ‘Literary Models: Theoretical Considerations’, in Models of Narrative: Theory and Practice. Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.Google Scholar
  4. Easton, A. 1994. ‘The Body as History and “Writing the Body”: the example of Grace Nichols’, Journal of Gender Studies, 3 (1): 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Featherstone, M. 1991. ‘The Body in Consumer Culture’, in M. Featherstone, M. Hepworth and B. Turner (eds.) The Body: Social Process and Cultural Theory. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Foucault, M. 1988. ‘Technologies of the Self’, in L.H. Martin, H. Gutman and P.H. Hutton (eds.) Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
  7. Frank, A. 1991. ‘For a Sociology of the Body: an Analytical Review’, in M. Featherstone, M. Hepworth and B. Turner (eds.) The Body: Social Process and Cultural Theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  9. Goffman, E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  10. Goffman, E. 1963. Stigma. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  11. Grosz, E. 1995. Space, Time and Perception: Essays on the Politics of Bodies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Lowenthal, D. 1996. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. London: Viking.Google Scholar
  13. McCrone, D. et al. 1995. Scotland the Brand: The Making of the Scottish Tourist Industry. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Scott, J. 1991. ‘The Evidence of Experience’, Critical Inquiry, 17: 773–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Smith, S. 1993. ‘The Bodies of Contemporary Autobiographical Practice’, in Subjectivity, Identity and the Body: Women’s Autobiographical Practices in the Twentieth Century. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Turner, B. 1991. ‘The Discourse of Diet’, in M. Featherstone, M. Hepworth and B. Turner (eds.) The Body: Social Process and Cultural Theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Urry, J. 1996. ‘How Societies Remember the Past’, in S. Macdonald and G. Fyfe (eds.) Theorizing Museums. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  18. Walker, J. 1997. ‘The Traumatic Paradox: Documentary Films, Historical Fictions, and Cataclysmic Past Events’, Signs, 221 (4): 803–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Walsh, K. 1992. The Representation of the Past: Museums and Heritage in the Post-modern World. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Weigert, A.J. 1981. Sociology of Everyday Life. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  21. White, H. 1978. Tropics of Discourse. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© British Sociological Association 2001

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations