Hopefully you are all well along in working on your second paper. I want to remind you that regardless of the subject you choose, it will be important to bring ideas from the readings to bear on making sense of that subject. While the relevance of specific readings will vary depending on your subject, here are some questions you might want to consider:

1. How is the tourist gaze in the setting you are studying socially structured--beforehand, on site, and (perhaps) afterwards? Who are the actors and what are the mechanisms by which the gaze is defined and conveyed to the tourist?

2. Are there ritual aspects to what you observe at your site? In what sense? How is the ritual process structured?

3. How central are issues of authenticity at your site? How is authenticity defined by the various categories of people involved? What strategies are pursued to assert authenticity? Is there evidence of a "questioning gaze"?

4. Is your site a clearly demarcated tourist site, or does it reflect what Urry calls "dedifferentiation" and what Franklin discusses as the "collapse" of the distinction between the everyday and the touristic? What are the implications of this?

5. What "invisible" actors are involved in the interaction that occurs at your tourist site? Are there ways in which the consequences of tourism are played out in other contexts besides touristic sites and encounters themselves?

6. How do the global and local interrelate in your tourist site? How do tourism and globalization relate in this instance?

7. How do the structure and experience at your tourist site reflect broader structures and preferences having to do with leisure and travel in the society generally?

8. What is the significance of theme parks and simulations? Do you see the characteristics of theme parks spreading into new areas, such as the site you are studying?

9. What kind of commoditization processes are occuring at your tourist site? Do they have consequences for such things as authenticity?

10. How do material things become "ethnographic objects" or museum displays more generally? What kinds of techniques and implicit narratives are involved?

11. Is the site you are studying presented as heritage? If so, what does this mean, and how does it reflect the presentation of the site? What alternative notions of heritage are possible?

12. What politics lie behind the site that you are studying? What do some sites exist and not others? Why are some stories told but not others?

These are only a smattering of possible questions that arise from the readings, and of course I don't expect anyone to take up all of them. But I put them forward as a means of helping you think about some of the connections between the site you are studying and the ideas in the readings. They are intended to be starting points for developing an overall argument or interpretation. All of your papers should have a basic thesis that you want to put forward and defend.

As I indicated last time, I think our time this Thursday is best devoted to reports on your research and findings. So please come prepared to discuss them.

Sincerely,
Dr. Wood