Description
The purpose of this paper is to develop a typology of dark tourists through an investigation of
people’s motivations to visit burial grounds. This research extends Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum and
Seven Dark Suppliers framework by identifying nine types of dark tourists.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
A dark tourist spectrum
Rachael Raine
Article information:
To cite this document:
Rachael Raine, (2013),"A dark tourist spectrum", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 242 -
256
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-05-2012-0037
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:22 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 54 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2194 times since 2013*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Avital Biran, Kenneth F. Hyde, (2013),"New perspectives on dark tourism", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 191-198http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-05-2013-0032
Anna Farmaki, (2013),"Dark tourism revisited: a supply/demand conceptualisation", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 281-292http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-05-2012-0030
Philip Stone, (2013),"Dark tourism scholarship: a critical review", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7
Iss 3 pp. 307-318http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-06-2013-0039
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
A dark tourist spectrum
Rachael Raine
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a typology of dark tourists through an investigation of
people’s motivations to visit burial grounds. This research extends Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum and
Seven Dark Suppliers framework by identifying nine types of dark tourists.
Design/methodology/approach – A comparative case study approach was selected where 23
interviews were conducted at three burial grounds. Interview transcripts were analysed in order to
identify emerging themes in motives and experiences of dark tourism consumers. The sites selected
were Bunhill Fields Burial Ground, London, St Mary’s Graveyard, Whitby, and Weaste Cemetery, Salford.
Findings – From this research a Dark Tourist Spectrum has been formulated which presents a typology
of the dark tourist. The spectrumidenti?es different categories of visitors identi?ed at the burial grounds,
ranging from ‘‘darkest’’ to ‘‘lightest’’ tourists.
Research limitations/implications – Limitations of the research regard time and resource constraints.
This affected the sample size of participants for interview and the selection of sites as case studies.
Originality/value – This study begins to ?ll the gap in research on people’s motivations to visit sites that
lie within the mid-shades of Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum, speci?cally burial grounds. This research
contributes to a deeper understanding of dark tourism consumption with a new model presented in the
form of a Dark Tourist Spectrum.
Keywords Tourism, Death, Burial, Motivation (psychology), Burial ground, Cemetery, Graveyard,
Dark tourism spectrum
Paper type Case study
Introduction
Visitation to sites associated with death and suffering is of signi?cance in the tourism
industry. The phenomenon, known as ‘‘dark tourism’’, has attracted the attention of
academics. This paper involves an investigation into why people visit dark sites by exploring
the motives of visitors to three burial grounds:
1. Bunhill Fields Burial Ground, London;
2. St Mary’s Graveyard, Whitby; and
3. Weaste Cemetery, Salford.
The research expands upon Stone’s (2006) Dark Tourism Spectrum, where a typology of
dark tourist attractions is presented in a darkest to lightest framework. Stone suggests there
are levels of ‘‘darkness’’ for different dark sites, ranging from the lightest ‘‘Dark Fun
Factories’’, including the Merlin Entertainments Group’s dungeon attractions, through to the
darkest ‘‘Dark Camps of Genocide’’, including Holocaust death camps and sites of Nazi war
crimes. Extending upon Stone’s research, this paper presents a Dark Tourist Spectrum,
identifying types of dark tourists, presented in a darkest to lightest framework.
PAGE 242
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013, pp. 242-256, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 DOI 10.1108/IJCTHR-05-2012-0037
Rachael Raine is based at
the School of Art and
Design, University of
Salford, Salford, UK.
The author was awarded
funding for postgraduate study
from the Arts and Humanities
Research Council Studentship
Competition 2009. The funder
had no involvement in research
study, design or submission as
the funding was awarded
before the research degree
commenced.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
The term ‘‘dark tourism’’ was ?rst coined by Lennon and Foley (2000) in Dark Tourism: The
Attraction of Death and Disaster, which has become the most widely cited reference on the
subject (Sharpley and Stone, 2009). However, this work was not the ?rst to draw attention to
the phenomenon of ‘‘darkness’’ in tourism. In 1989, Uzzell discussed ‘‘hot interpretation’’
(Uzzell, 1989) of war and con?ict sites (see Sharpley, 2009). In addition, Rojek (1993)
discussed the emergence of ‘‘black spots’’, which ‘‘refer to the commercial developments of
grave sites and sites in which celebrities or large numbers of people have met with sudden
and violent death’’ (p. 136). Another early re?ection on dark tourismincludes Seaton’s (1996)
reference to ‘‘thanatourism’’ (p. 15) and Tunbridge and Ashworth discussing ‘‘atrocity as
entertainment attraction’’ (Tunbridge and Ashworth, 1996, p. 114) and introducing the term
‘‘horror tourism’’ (p. 129), which they explore in terms of heritage management.
This paper is focused on visitor motivations to visit dark sites, to discover why people visit dark
sites as part of leisure and tourism itineraries. There has been research in this area, but visitor
motivation is considered an area of dark tourism research that requires further attention
(Stone, 2006). The following section provides a brief account of research in this area.
Visitor motivations to visit dark sites
Dark tourismis both supply and demand driven, and it is important to understand both in order
to gain a fuller understanding of the phenomenon of dark tourism. Several researchers have
investigated consumer demand for dark tourismby exploring people’s motivations to visit dark
sites. However there is a gap in research in this area; as Stone states, we must ‘‘address the
fundamental question of why tourists seek out such dark sites’’ (Stone, 2006, p. 114).
Several studies of visitor motivations to visit dark sites have focused on Holocaust death
camps as case studies (Sharpley, 2009). Richter (1999) discusses visitor research into
Dachau concentration camp, saying that although 13 million people visited Dachau
concentration camp between 1965 and 1988, no one surveyed their motivations to visit, or
the impact the site had on visitors, Richter states that people’s motives have therefore had to
be ‘‘assumed’’ (Richter, 1999, p.120). These assumed motives are described by Richter as
personal, such as family research; political, such as parties persecuted by the Nazis;
historical and educational, such as school visits; and humanitarian motives. Beech (2000)
draws attention to the complex task of exposing visitor motivations to visit dark sites, with
speci?c reference to Buchenwald concentration camp. Beech (2000) simply argues there
are two distinct types of visitor to concentration camps, those with a personal connection to
the site, and those without.
In general tourist motivation research, Tarlow (2005) proposes several theories of why
people visit dark sites by suggesting dark tourism comes in a variety of forms including; a
pretext to understanding our own age, romanticism, barbarism, part of national identity, a
sign of decadence, a mystical experience, and a spiritual experience. These forms seem to
suggest that visitor motives are based on forming and developing social and personal
identities. Tarlow (2005) also suggests that people seek the strange and different in the
protection of what is known. This could be one motivation to visit dark sites as the visitor can
experience something dangerous within the safety of the tourism environment. The research
of Ashworth and Hartmann (2005) links to Tarlow’s theory, as they suggest a number of
reasons for visiting dark sites including; the curiosity of seeing something unique and
unusual, feeling empathy towards victims of certain dark events, and the argument that
people are naturally attracted to horror. Blom (2000) suggests four similar motivations to visit
dark sites:
1. tourists seek to experience something different than happens in their everyday lives;
2. there is competitive demand in the tourism market to create new and unique attractions;
3. tourists are searching for ‘‘catharsis’’ (p. 34), which can be achieved by confronting
unpleasant events to which we have no personal or individual connection; and
4. the media exposes us to new places and people we would not be aware of under other
circumstances, thus generating interest in visiting such sites.
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 243
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Dunkley (2006) identi?es several reasons and interests to visit dark sites, including
contemplation, special interest, thrill/risk seeking, validation, authenticity, self-discovery,
iconic sites, convenience, morbid curiosity, pilgrimage, remembrance and empathy.
There is a particular gap in research into visitor motivations to visit burial sites speci?cally,
which is the primary concern of this paper. The Cemetery Research Group identi?es four
main motivations for visiting cemeteries. These include:
1. an interest in local history;
2. nature lovers;
3. those visiting for educative purposes; and
4. people who seek passive recreation by merely walking through the site (Thomas, 2007).
Theoretical implications for the dark tourist visiting burial grounds
Lennon and Foley believe that burial sites do not fall under the umbrella of dark tourism
because ‘‘Visits, whether by friends and relatives of the dead or by those with other motives,
can be broadly considered under similar categories to pilgrimage’’ (Lennon and Foley, 2000,
pp. 14-16). This assertion oversimpli?es the implications of burial grounds and their role in
society. For instance, Walter (2009) describes various relationships with the dead that are
available to the public in both the public and private spheres. These relationships have
signi?cance when exploring people’s motivations to visit burial grounds as these dark sites
are places where people can go to experience relationships with the dead. The relationships
include:
B information (Walter, 2009), where pathologists and archaeologists discover information
by looking at human remains;
B intercession, which involves meditations and prayers to saints and spirits;
B guidance, where people visit shrines to receive guidance from the dead;
B care, for example tending graves and making conversations with the dead to impart news
and enquire about the afterlife;
B remembrance, which involves visiting memorials to pay respects and to remember,
particularly war memorials and also includes family history research;
B education, where sites associated with the dead are used through educational tourismfor
the purpose of teaching history;
B entertainment, where the dead are used to entertain the masses, such as Gunther von
Hagens’ Body Worlds exhibition;
B memento mori, which involves ‘‘reminding people of their mortality’’ (p. 48); and
B haunting, referring to ‘‘those who have died in vain, in de-legitimated wars or meaningless
causes, as a group of collective dead, haunt society’’ (p. 49).
Considering these several relationships that can be experienced between people and the
dead, it will be interesting to consider how far the people interviewed in this study were
motivated to visit the site by desires to form these relationships; despite the fact Walter
(2009) himself states: ‘‘I do not claim that visitors to dark sites are motivated by a wish for
these relationships with the dead’’ (p. 51).
Walter’s ‘‘memento mori’ (or ‘‘reminders of death’’) relationship conveys the idea that society
no longer has a lens through which to make sense of life and death, as old religious
meta-narratives and public death rituals no longer play such signi?cant roles (Stone, 2012;
see also Walter, 2006). The reason this shift has taken place is due to the medicalisation of
death (Stone and Sharpley, 2008), as death is taken away from the public and placed into
the private medical sphere where it then becomes ‘‘invisible’’ (Stone, 2012; see also Stone,
2009b). As death is removed from the public sphere, representations of death are now
communicated to us via the media (Stone, 2012). Stone (2012) claims: ‘‘Dark tourism is a
modern mediating institution, which not only provides a physical place to link the living with
PAGE 244
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
the dead, but also allows a cognitive space for the Self to construct contemporary
ontological meanings of mortality’’ (p. 1565). In light of this theory, burial grounds may
become an increasingly important place where people go to experience ‘‘memento mori’’
and confront their mortality. As Seaton (1996) claims, dark tourismis the result of the fact that
people are ‘‘motivated by the desire for actual or symbolic encounters with death’’ (p. 15).
Burial grounds are places that allow people to face symbolic encounters with death, but
within the safety and comfort of the tourism environment (Tarlow, 2005; see also Stone,
2012).
Another key theoretical framework related to this study is Hennig’s (2002) theory that ‘‘One
speci?c function of tourism [. . .] is to allow the physical enactment of myths’’ (Hennig, 2002,
p. 174). Hennig states that these myths refer to ‘‘the ‘meaning of life’ and contain an idea of
redemption – overcoming the restrictions and dif?culties of quotidian existence’’ (p. 174).
Hennig (2002) proposes ?ve myths that are signi?cant for tourism: ‘‘nature, the noble
savage, art, individual freedom and self-realisation, equality and paradise’’ (p. 174). It is
interesting to explore the ‘‘art’’ myth in relation to dark tourism and visitation to burial
grounds. This myth relates to the appeal of visiting original works of art as opposed to
copies; this can also refer to visiting artists’ birthplaces, childhood residences and sites of
death. As Hennig (2002) illustrates:
A modern cult of the dead can be seen in Westminster Abbey, at the Pe`re Lachaise Cemetery in
Paris or at other gravesites of famous personalities. The main thing is not what can be seen there;
instead, the bones and spirit of the deceased hold a kind of magical attraction. An unde?ned force
seems to radiate from original works of art as well as the sites where past geniuses lived and died.
Anyone in the physical proximity of such places and objects can partake in this force (p. 179).
Hennig’s theory suggests that visitation to burial sites ‘‘allows the ritual enactment of
mythological ideas’’ (p. 185). Visitors may therefore be motivated to visit burial sites because
they can perform physical activities within fantasy worlds.
Philip Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum
This paper considers whether a typology of dark tourists can be created by interrogating
visitor motivations to visit burial grounds. The research aims to produce a typology to
compliment Stone’s (2006) existing Dark Tourism Spectrum. Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum
framework and the Seven Dark Supplier categorisation suggest there are different levels or
shades of macabre or darkness into which a dark tourism product can be categorised.
Ranging from darkest to lightest, a dark site is categorised in regards to its design features
and management strategies (Stone, 2006). The Seven Dark Suppliers of dark tourism
include:
B dark fun factories;
B dark exhibitions;
B dark dungeons;
B dark resting places;
B dark shrines;
B dark con?ict sites; and
B dark camps of genocide.
This paper suggests that the concept of ‘‘shades of darkness’’ can be applied to the
consumer as well as the supplier. This idea is based on Stone’s (2006) call for research to
‘‘begin to locate and identify the types of ‘‘dark tourists’’, within each of these products
types, and commence the fundamental task of extracting and interrogating the motives and
experiences of dark tourism consumers’’ (Stone, 2006, p. 158). This concept of applying
‘‘shades of darkness’’ to the tourist has been addressed by Sharpley (2009) in his ‘‘Matrix of
dark tourism demand and supply’’. Here Sharpley (2009) identi?es four shades of dark
tourism, including pale tourism, grey tourism demand, grey tourism supply; and black
tourism plotted against a continuum of dark tourism supply (of accidental to purposeful
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 245
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
tourist attractions). Sharpley (2009) suggests that there are darker and paler ends of dark
tourism consumption as people are motivated to visit dark sites for different reasons as
everyone experiences things differently. This ranges from a fascination with death to simply
the status of visiting a certain site. This paper intends to enrich Sharpley’s matrix by
presenting a Dark Tourist Spectrum with a detailed and complete typology of dark tourist
consumers including nine shades of the dark tourist.
It is not within the scope of this paper to explore visitors to each of Stone’s seven suppliers;
therefore, research will be made into the ‘‘Dark Resting Places’’ category, speci?cally burial
sites. This study therefore opens up the opportunity for further research to interrogate visitor
motivations to visit dark sites from other suppliers of Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum with the
view of creating a comprehensive dark tourist spectrum of visitors to several types of dark
tourist attractions.
Case studies
Bunhill Fields Burial Ground, London
This site was selected because it represents a burial site located in the UK’s capital city and
can often appear on itineraries for tourists in the area. The site also contains several famous
graves, including:
B John Bunyan, (1628-1688), author of The Pilgrim’s Progress;
B Daniel Defoe (1661-1731), author of Robinson Crusoe;
B Susanna Wesley (1669-1742), mother of John Wesley (1703-1791), the founder of the
Methodist Church; and
B the Romantic poet, William Blake (1757-1827).
The cemetery is a signi?cant burial site for non-conformists (Sacred Destinations, 2010a),
and is situated opposite the Methodist Wesley’s Chapel and Museum of Methodism. The
nine-acre site is managed by the City of London Council and is no longer used as a burial
ground.
St Mary’s Graveyard, Whitby
This graveyard was selected as it is a small burial ground located in Whitby, a popular tourist
destination situated on the North Yorkshire coastline. Whitby is particularly famous for its
literary reference in Bram Stoker’s Victorian gothic novel, Dracula, published in 1897, where
the town is featured in three chapters in the macabre tale. St Mary’s Church is a popular
tourist attraction and is listed on the Enjoy England website as a ‘‘must see and do
attraction’’ (Enjoy England, 2010). It was also listed in The Guardian newspaper as one of the
‘‘?ve best cemetery tours’’ in the world (The Guardian, 2008).
Weaste Cemetery, Salford
The site was selected as a case study because of how the site is promoted as a visitor
attraction in the area, while also being a working cemetery. In 2003, Lindsay Rodgers, who
was then manager of Salford’s cemeteries, stated that she wanted Weaste Cemetery to
become ‘‘a visitor attraction for the city’’ (BBC, 2003). On Salford Council’s website, a
promotional documentary about Weaste Cemetery is featured. Stone (2005) draws attention
to these developments, referring to a press release announcing ‘‘A grave bid to boost
tourism’’ (Stone, 2005, p. 110); Stone asserts that ‘‘as part of a wider ‘heritage trail,’ Salford
tourism chiefs have decided to turn the city’s cemeteries into visitor attractions, whereby
visitors can gaze upon the graves of Salford’s most famous sons and daughters’’ (p. 110).
Method
During the summer of 2010, visitors to three burial grounds were interviewed in order to
discover their motives for visiting, with the aim of formulating a typology of dark tourists from
the data collected. A comparative case study approach was most suited to this research as
PAGE 246
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
it allowed an in-depth study of particular burial sites. The three case studies were selected to
represent different types of burial sites in terms of type, size and geographical location.
Twenty-three interviews were conducted over a two-day period at each site: ten at St Mary’s
Graveyard, ten at Bunhill Fields Burial Ground, and three at Weaste Cemetery. Only three
interviews were conducted at Weaste Cemetery because most visitors to the site during the
data collection period were the bereaved, visiting the site for its primary purpose, to mourn
the dead. Those who appeared to be visiting a speci?c grave were not approached because
the motivations of these types of visitors were obvious and did not need interrogation. In
addition, interviewing the bereaved might have caused emotional distress. The structure of
the interviews was based on a series of open questions that aimed to address the research
topic of what motivates people to visit burial sites. Each interview lasted between ?ve and 15
minutes.
The methods of analysis and interpretation of data were based on Kvale’s (1996) Five
Approaches to Interview Analysis. Three of these ?ve approaches utilized for this study were
meaning condensation, meaning categorisation and meaning interpretation. The process of
meaning condensation involved transcribing the interviews then extracting the meanings
expressed by participants into small statements. Meaning categorisation involved coding
the interview into categories; Kvale (1996) states, ‘‘The categories can be developed in
advance or they can arise ad hoc during the analysis’’ (p. 192). The categories identi?ed
were based upon several theories of visitor motivations to visit dark sites discussed earlier in
this paper, particularly that of the Cemetery Research Group (2007), Blom (2000), Tarlow
(2005), Hennig (2002), and Walter (2009). Categories were also developed ad hoc during
the analysis of the interviews. Meaning interpretation involved producing a series of
descriptive statements, one for each interview, providing a deep analysis of the meanings
and implications of the interview. The descriptive statements were then compared to
formulate a comprehensive typology of visitors to the three burial sites studied.
At the same time as conducting interviews, unstructured observations were also made.
These observations allowed information about visitor demographics and behaviours to be
recorded and thus enriched the data collected from interviewing.
Findings – a Dark Tourist Spectrum
From analysis of the data collected from the interviews and observations at the three burial
sites, a typology of dark tourists has been created. The typology is presented as a dark
tourist spectrum of visitors to ‘‘dark resting places’’ (see Figure 1). The spectrum shows the
different categories of visitors identi?ed at the burial sites ranging from ‘‘darkest’’ to
‘‘lightest’’ dark tourists, in the same format as Stone’s (2009a, b) Dark Tourism Typology. The
categories along the spectrum are graded in relation to the level of engagement with the
visitor experience in terms of the site as a burial ground and a place associated with death.
They are also graded in terms of motivations to visit the site and whether these motivations
are speci?c and predetermined or non-speci?c and more spontaneous.
Themes have been identi?ed across the spectrum indicating shared characteristics
between the various categories in relation to visitor motivation and level of engagement.
These themes include Devotion, Experience, Discover, and Incidental. A pro?le of the
participants interviewed can be found in Table I, identifying the participants’ age, gender
and residence and categorizing them into visitor type and related theme.
The following section discusses the visitors identi?ed at each site in relation to the themes
identi?ed in the spectrum.
Devotion: mourners and pilgrims
The theme ‘‘Devotion’’ refers to personal and spiritual connections visitors have with a site.
The categories relate to several of Walter’s (2009) relationships with the dead, including
intercession, guidance, care, remembrance and momento mori as discussed previously.
These types of visitors are considered the darkest of the spectrum as they engage deeply
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 247
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
with the site as a place associated with death. For mourners this involves visiting speci?c
graves and performing meditations for the dead. The category ‘‘pilgrim’’ relates to visits
made by people to burial sites because of a personal connection to the site, such as
religious signi?cance, or the grave of a personal hero. As discussed by Hyde and Harman
(2011), pilgrimages can be secular as well as of religious signi?cance. The ‘‘mourners’’ are
‘‘darker’’ than the ‘‘pilgrims’’ category as they have a genuine connection to the person
buried at the site whereas pilgrims have no personal relationship with the deceased and are
therefore more distanced from the actual death.
Table I Pro?le of participants
Age range Gender Residence Site Type Theme
40-50 F London Bunhill Sightseer Incidental
50-60 M Brighton Bunhill Information seeker Discover
30-40 M London Bunhill Retreater Incidental
60-70 F Isle of Wight Bunhill Sightseers Incidental
60-70 F London
50-60 M Cleveland, OH, USA Bunhill Hobbyist Discover
40-50 F London Bunhill Retreater Incidental
20-30 F South Korea Bunhill Pilgrim Devotion
50-60 F Manchester Bunhill Sightseer Incidental
20-30 F London Bunhill Sightseers Incidental
20-30 M London
30-40 F Essex Bunhill Thrill Seeker Experience
50-60 M Manchester St Mary’s Hobbyist Discover
50-60 M Leeds St Mary’s Hobbyist Discover
40-50 M France St Mary’s Hobbyist Discover
60-70 M Wake?eld St Mary’s Information seekers Discover
60-70 F Wake?eld
20-30 F Hull St Mary’s Passive recreationist Incidental
20-30 F Liverpool St Mary’s Sightseer Incidental
40-50 M Edinburgh St Mary’s Information seeker Discover
20-30 F Hathersage St Mary’s Pilgrim Devotion
70-80 F Doncaster St Mary’s Hobbyist Discover
20-30 F Chester?eld St Mary’s Retreaters Incidental
20-30 M Chester?eld
30-40 M Salford Weaste Morbidly curious Experience
40-50 M Salford Weaste Passive recreationist Incidental
60-70 F Salford Weaste Passive recreationist Incidental
Figure 1 A dark tourist spectrum: perceived typology of visitors to dark resting places
within a ‘‘darkest-lightest’’ framework
PAGE 248
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
The theme ‘‘Devotion’’ relates to Tarlow’s theory that visitation to dark sites can be ‘‘a mystical
experience’’ (Tarlow, 2005, p. 54), where the visitor connects with the tragedy of the sufferer.
During this study, several people were identi?ed as visiting burial sites to engage in this
mystical experience. The most predominant type of visitor to Weaste Cemetery was
mourners, visiting speci?c graves.
At Bunhill Fields many people visited as pilgrims to see the graves of famous ?gures. One
interviewee identi?ed as a pilgrim was visiting Bunhill Fields from South Korea; she visited
the site with her father and his friend, who were both Methodist pastors. She was studying
theology in South Korea and came speci?cally to the site to visit John Wesley’s Chapel and
graves of non-conformists. For instance, one interviewee was visiting Bunhill Fields with her
daughter who speci?cally wanted to visit the grave of one of her favourite authors, Daniel
Defoe. Several visitors had tended to William Blake’s grave by leaving tributes by his
headstone. These pilgrimages to the resting places of the famous dead relates to Hennig’s
(2002) theory that people visit graves to experience a force (p. 179) and mystical connection
with the dead as they know they are close to their remains.
Another group of pilgrims identi?ed was those visiting burial sites because of its signi?cance
to their personal interests. St Mary’s Graveyard has connections with Bram Stoker’s novel
Dracula as the site is mentioned at several points in the narrative; this therefore attracts
fanatics of the gothic tale. It could be argued that the force described by Hennig (2002) can
also be experienced by these types of pilgrims, desiring to be close to the physical place
that is referenced in the novel. Because these visitors see the site as iconic, they will feel the
‘‘magical attraction’’ (p. 179) and experience the ‘‘unde?ned force’’ (p. 179) radiating from
the place. Unlike the general sightseer who visits the graveyard as a point of interest, these
pilgrims experience the same emotional power of visiting the grave of a personal hero. One
interviewee at St Mary’s Graveyard was identi?ed as this type of pilgrim, saying she was
motivated to visit the site because of her interest in Dracula and that the graveyard was
mentioned in the novel. She also expressed genuine interest in gothic culture and described
various ghost stories related to the site and area. This visitor is identi?ed as a pilgrim in the
sense that she loves the novel and ?lm Dracula, and the graveyard offers a physical place
associated with the story where she can perform the myth as described by Hennig (2002).
Experience: morbidly curious and thrill seekers
These people visit burial sites to confront and ‘‘experience’’ death. This theme strongly
relates to Ashworth and Hartmann’s (2005) notion that people are naturally attracted to
horror. These visitors are lighter than mourners and pilgrims, as they do not necessarily have
any personal connection to the site, and may visit several burial grounds, as opposed to
speci?c ones, to gain their ‘‘experience’’.
As previously discussed, Tarlow (2005) suggests visiting a dark site can be ‘‘A spiritual
experience’’ (p. 54). This differs from the ‘‘mystical experience’’ (p. 54) as it is less
associated with a connection between the visitor and sufferer: ‘‘the spiritual experience is
wider [. . .] based more on a common sense of humanity’’ (p. 54). This implies that the
spiritual experience is more of a general re?ection on death, and how it affects us and our
society. Those categorised under the theme ‘‘Experience’’ all share this spiritual experience
when visiting a dark site; whether they are the morbidly curious confronting death, or thrill
seekers desiring a macabre sensation by contemplating death. This theme also relates to
Seaton’s de?nition of dark tourismas ‘‘travel to a location wholly, or partially, motivated by the
desire for actual or symbolic encounters with death’’ (Seaton, 1996, p. 15). Burial sites offer
‘‘symbolic encounters with death’’ (Seaton, 1996, p. 15) through the observation of
headstones and reading inscriptions. For the morbidly curious this involves confronting
symbols of death in order to come to terms with their own mortality. As Warner (1959) states:
. . . the fundamental sacred problemof the graveyard is to provide suitable symbols to refer to and
express man’s hope of immortality [. . .] and to reduce his anxiety and fear about death as marking
the obliteration of his personality – the end of life for himself and for those he loves (Warner, 1959,
p. 285).
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 249
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Visitation to burial sites can reduce anxiety of dying and of losing loved ones as people are
able to confront symbols of death, thus coming to terms with man’s inevitable demise. An
interviewee at Weaste Cemetery was identi?ed as morbidly curious; when asked his
motivations to visit, he said he wants ‘‘to try to remove the taboo of death’’ and ‘‘normalize it’’
because ‘‘death is a part of life’’. He expressed that he wants to teach his son that death is ‘‘a
part of life’’ and he is starting this ‘‘froman early age’’ by bringing his son to play in the burial
ground. He is not attaching any melancholic associations to the visit, instead bringing his
son to play and perform ‘‘normal’’ activities within a site associated with death.
The thrill seekers relate closely to the morbidly curious as they too visit burial sites for
‘‘symbolic encounters with death’’ (Seaton, 1996, p. 15); however, their experience is more
revolved around entertainment and the desire to conjure a macabre sensation. This relates
to Walter’s (2009) ‘‘Entertainment’’ relationship with the dead. This entertainment aspect
makes thrill seekers ‘‘lighter’’ on the spectrum, as they are not engaging with the site on such
a spiritual level as the morbidly curious. Walter (2009) implies it is a management strategy of
using the dead to entertain visitors; however, visitors also seek out dark sites in order to be
entertained by the dead. As Ashworth and Hartmann (2005) argue, people have always
been drawn to horror because of the ‘‘the emotions of fear and fascination it evokes’’
(Ashworth and Hartmann, 2005, p. 9). This was the case for one thrill seeker at Bunhill Fields;
she expressed that she enjoys visiting burial sites because they are eerie. Also when asked
whether it could be considered morbid to visit a burial site, she said she believes it is a
morbid activity and that is what she particularly enjoys.
Discover: information seekers and hobbyists
These visitors explore and investigate burial sites to make various discoveries. This theme
supports the Cemetery Research Group’s observation that motivations to visit burial grounds
include those with an interest in local history and those visiting for educative purposes
(Thomas, 2007). This thematic group is considered ‘‘lighter’’ than the ‘‘Experience’’
grouping, as they do not necessarily engage with the site as a burial ground. They are
usually emotionally detached during their visit, and visiting for a pleasurable experience.
Hobbyists visit burial sites as they have an interest in a feature of the site relating to a hobby.
These visitors are considered lighter than information seekers as their visits are often
spontaneous to make general explorations. One common type of hobbyist was the
photographer. One interviewee at St Mary’s Graveyard described himself as a
non-professional photographer, ‘‘looking for atmospheric photographs’’. He summarised
his motivation to visit saying: ‘‘I visited more for the artistic impression that it gives than
anything else’’. Another interviewee at St Mary’s Graveyard also visited the site to take
photographs: ‘‘I like to photograph the gravestones, they’ve been there for so long now, they
give a good range of texture, from the weathering’’. When asked whether visiting burial
grounds could be seen as morbid, he responded saying:
I don’t think it’s morbid at all. I’mnot here in search of the grotesque or in search of the unusual. If I
happen to ?nd it, as being unusual, it could be advantageous for me to take it away as an image
for a piece of artwork perhaps, but I’m certainly not looking to use it as, as an emotional status.
This response illustrates the difference in motivation between the thrill seekers and
hobbyists; this visitor stated that he was not looking to experience the grotesque but instead
exploring the site in relation to his artistic pursuits.
Another type of hobbyist discovered from the interviews were those identi?ed as ‘‘burial site
visitors’’. One interviewee at St Mary’s Graveyard, visiting from France, said he visited the
site because of a general interest in burial grounds and how they differ around the world.
Another burial site visitor identi?ed at St Mary’s Graveyard explained that she always visits
the site when she is in Whitby. She expressed a general interest in the social histories that
can be discovered by visiting burial grounds. Another interviewee at Bunhill Fields, on
vacation from the USA, described various burial sites he has visited, including Lake View
Cemetery and St Mary’s Cemetery, both in Cleveland, Ohio.
PAGE 250
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Walter’s (2009) ‘‘information’’ relationship relates strongly to the category of information
seekers. This relationship refers to when pathologists and archaeologists ‘‘literally dig
around the remains of the dead in order to discover information’’ (Walter, 2009, p. 44).
Although Walter only references professionals in the seeking of information, tourists also use
burial sites to discover information. At St Mary’s Graveyard, a couple of information seekers
expressed an interest in discovering more about Whitby’s local history. One explained that
they use the graveyard to ?nd out about the history of Whitby, as Whitby has ‘‘got a
fascinating history [. . .] and the graveyard is part of that’’. The other supported this
motivation saying, ‘‘We come so often now [to Whitby] that you like to learn as much about
the place as you can’’. Another type of information seeker was identi?ed at St Mary’s
Graveyard; this interviewee visited the site speci?cally to explore the architecture of the
church.
A ?nal example of an information seeker was an interviewee at Bunhill Fields. This visitor was
a burial site visitor with a speci?c interest in memorialisation for an artist project he was
producing, titled ‘‘Shrine’’. He explained that he visits numerous burial sites around the world
to collect information for his project. He mentioned different types of burial sites during the
interview, including Pe` re Lachaise, prehistoric cemeteries, burial mounds, tombs,
megalithic chambers, and the catacombs of Paris. These references support his assertion
that he is ‘‘incredibly interested in cemeteries’’.
Incidental: sightseers, retreaters and passive recreationists
This is the lightest theme on the spectrum, as these people do not engage deeply with burial
sites as places associated with death. They are themed as ‘‘incidental’’ because the nature
of their visits is often unplanned and impulsive with no real agenda to visit the site for reasons
related to death and burials. Sightseers visit because it is a general place of interest in the
area. Retreaters enjoy burial sites as peaceful green spaces offering escape from the stress
of daily life. Retreaters are ‘‘lighter’’ than sightseers as they do not visit to engage with the
site as a burial ground in any way, whereas the sightseer may do so once they are there.
Passive recreationists are the lightest category of all because they do not engage with the
site in any way and use the site purely as an access route, or open space in which to walk.
This theme is the most signi?cant of the four themes as it includes the largest number of
people interviewed and observed (11 out of 23 interviewees are categorised as
‘‘incidental’’).
Blom (2000) suggests that people visit dark sites because there is a competitive demand in
the tourism market to create new and unique attractions. This theory relates to the category
‘‘sightseers’’ and is supported by the motives of a couple interviewed at Bunhill Fields. They
decided to visit the site as it was featured in a guidebook as an interesting cemetery in
London with ‘‘interesting graves’’ and ‘‘famous people buried’’, it was close to where they
were, and it was ‘‘cheap’’ (free entry). This supports Blom’s (2000) assertion that burial
grounds may be viewed as tourist attractions. One sightseer at Bunhill Fields expressed that
her main motivation to visit the site was to showher husband the famous graves of Blake and
Defoe as they were just ‘‘spending some time walking round’’ while their daughter was on a
course in the city. She explained she was ‘‘quite interested’’ in Defoe and quite interested in
the graves of the non-conformists, but these graves held no real signi?cance for her.
The category ‘‘retreaters’’ has not been identi?ed in any literature on dark tourism. This
category was however one of the most common types of visitor identi?ed at the burial sites.
At Bunhill Fields, the majority of visitors observed were using the site as a place of retreat
from the city; this included workers eating their lunch or people taking rest or naps on one of
the park benches. One interviewee at Bunhill Fields identi?ed as a retreater was using the
site as a green space to escape to during his lunch breaks. When asked why he visits the
site, he said he often walks there because it is ‘‘peaceful’’ and ‘‘a break from the city’’; he
also described it as a place to ‘‘recharge’’ for a moment during his working day.
Another retreater identi?ed at Bunhill Fields explained that her main motivation to visit the site
was because it offered a place of retreat for her: ‘‘it’s just nice to have half an hour out. That’s
one of the main things; it’s just peace and quiet and time out’’. She referred to the site as ‘‘a
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 251
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
lovely little retreat’’ several times during the interview. She also said, ‘‘it’s just a lovely place to
sit and read or, just some down time’’. She opposed the suggestion of developing facilities
for visitors, saying:
No, no. I think it would have quite an intrusive, contradictory effect. I think you’d end up getting too
many people in. Particularly, I have to say, in terms of families and kids running around screaming
[. . .] I don’t think somewhere like this, say it had tearooms, or something, it would be ghastly.
Because you’d have more litter.
These comments suggest that developing the site’s facilities would prevent it from being the
peaceful site of retreat that it is currently for her. She appeared to value the escape to nature
within an urban environment.
The category ‘‘passive recreationists’’ has been identi?ed by the Cemetery Research Group
as people who visit cemeteries for passive recreation by merely walking through the site
(Thomas, 2007). This type of visitor was identi?ed at the most common type of visitor at all
three burial grounds studied. Bunhill Fields and St Mary’s Graveyard were both used as
access routes by countless people. A passive recreationist interviewed at St Mary’s
Graveyard said her visit ‘‘was just spontaneous’’. She was merely passing through, and did
not engage with the site in any way. Numerous dog walkers were observed at all three sites.
Conclusion
This paper presents a dark tourist spectrum of visitors to burial sites, with a typology of dark
tourists arranged in a darkest-lightest framework. This study contributes to the body of
literature on motivations to visit dark tourist sites and extends Stone’s (2006) Dark Tourism
Spectrum by showing that consumers, as well as suppliers, can be arranged into types.
Several implications have emerged from this study relating to dark tourism theory. Some
people visit burial grounds to experience relationships with the dead (Walter, 2009) and for
‘‘symbolic encounters with death’’ (Seaton, 1996, p. 15). Lennon and Foley’s (2000)
dismissal of burial sites as dark tourist sites, due to assumptions that visits are motivated by
reasons of pilgrimage, overlooks the complexity of visitation to burial sites and neglects to
identify them as sites that attract people for a variety of different reasons. Data collected
during this research supports the notion that people visit burial grounds on pilgrimages,
visiting the graves of lost loved ones (mourners) and sites of spiritual and personal
signi?cance (pilgrims), however, people also visit burial sites with several other motives; in
fact only a small percentage of visitors interviewed and observed were identi?ed under the
theme ‘‘Devotion’’. Burial sites are used for more than just places to perform devotions to the
deceased.
Another key theoretical implication surrounding to this study relates to Walter’s (2009)
‘‘Entertainment’’ relationship, where people are motivated to visit dark sites to be entertained
by death or the dead. As discussed by Postman (1985), traditional ways of understanding
the world, such as religion, have diminished and the media has now become our
meta-narrative for society, and the media presents everything as a form of entertainment.
This in turn affects how we view and comprehend death, as it is now presented to us as a
form of entertainment via the lens of the media. This is represented in the ‘‘thrill seekers’’
category, where people visit burial grounds to experience thrilling sensations by being at a
place where the dead are buried. The idea of ?nding death thrilling and entertaining is
perhaps a result of the media’s portrayal of death as entertainment. The category
‘‘sightseers’’ also relates to this, as discovered at Bunhill Fields, where a couple were visiting
the site because it was promoted in a guidebook as a ‘‘must see’’ attraction. Indeed, some
tourist demand for new visitor attractions might be met by promoting sites associated with
death as visitor attractions.
The ?nal theoretical implication identi?ed in this study relates to Hennig’s (2002) notion of
tourism allowing the physical enactment of modern myths. Speci?cally relevant is Hennig’s
(2002) ‘‘nature’’ myth, which concerns the concept of nature as a renewing force. This theory
directly impacts tourism, as people seek out places to visit which provide natural settings to
PAGE 252
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
experience this force. Burial sites offer a setting for contact with nature; several interviewees
expressed positive admiration of the natural environments burial sites provide. Several
interviewees also chose to visit the burial grounds for a moment of peace and to revive
themselves during their busy day (retreaters). The natural element of burial sites also makes
them attractive places to take a walk or use as access routes; most visitors to Bunhill Fields
used the site for this purpose (passive recreationists). This evidence supports the notion that
some people desire to visit burial grounds because of contact with nature that offers a
renewing force. It has been argued that burial sites not only offer contact with nature, but also
provide places to contemplate man’s mortality and confront symbols of death, such as
headstones. This supports Stone’s (2012) theory that people are motivated to visit dark
tourist sites as they offer places to contemplate death, as death has largely been removed
from the public sphere and we no longer have ways of coming to terms with our mortality.
Burial grounds provide visual symbols that man will one day become nature again once he
returns to the ground after death; this is the ultimate enactment of Hennig’s myth.
The ?ndings from this study present several implications for managers of burial sites. Firstly,
this paper emphasises that burial sites are not just places where people go on pilgrimage or
mourn the dead; there is a wider audience that site managers should consider. As
demonstrated by the Dark Tourist Spectrum, there are several types of visitors, all seeking
different experiences from their visit. Because of this, managers can promote burial sites as
tourist attractions as well as places to mourn and visit the speci?c dead. This has already
been seen by the efforts of Salford City Council for Weaste Cemetery where the site is
promoted as an educational resource (BBC, 2003); this may attract information seekers.
Highlighting key features of the site in promotions, such as architecture and wildlife, will also
attract hobbyists. Managers of burial sites similar to St Mary’s Graveyard could market the
site as a unique and ‘‘entertaining’’ attraction because of its associations with Dracula, thus
appealing to thrill seekers and sightseers. However, when developing burial grounds for
tourism, managers must take care to maintain the site as a natural environment and not add
excessive infrastructures that would deter from the site as a place of escape and contact
with nature, as burial sites need to provide peaceful spaces for visitors to contemplate death
and mortality.
Limitations and recommendations
Several studies have explored visitor motivations to visit dark sites, particularly focusing on
Holocaust death camps; however, little literature exists on visitor motivations to visit burial
sites speci?cally. It is therefore recommended that research continue into the area of dark
tourism demand. There are methodological limitations in this study, speci?cally the sample
size for the study. The limitation of the interviews being conducted at three UK burial sites
over a two-day period at each site also means the results presented cannot automatically be
generalised. It is therefore recommended to collect data from burial grounds across the
globe over longer periods, and to collect data from sites that are considered popular tourist
attractions such as Highgate Cemetery, London or Pe` re Lachaise, Paris. It would be
interesting to collect data during different times of the year to see if seasonality affects visitor
motivations. Conducting focus groups as well as interviews and observations to collect data
may produce additional ?ndings.
It would be valuable for managers of burial sites to consider the implications presented in
this paper; to assess the role of burial sites in the tourism market by using the typology
presented here as a framework for targeting wider audiences.
References
Ashworth, G. and Hartmann, R. (Eds) (2005), Horror and Human Tragedy Revisited: The Management of
Sites of Atrocities for Tourism, Cognizant Communication Corporation, Elmsford, NY.
BBC (2003), ‘‘Famous graves in heritage trail’’, available at:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/
manchester/3304197.stm (accessed 25 July 2010).
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 253
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Beech, J. (2000), ‘‘The enigma of holocaust sites as tourist attractions: the case of Buchenwald’’,
Managing Leisure, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 29-41.
Blom, T. (2000), ‘‘Morbid tourism: a postmodern market niche with an example from Althorp’’, Norsk
Geogra?sk Tidsskrift – Norwegian Journal of Geography, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 29-36.
Dann, G.M.S. (2005), ‘‘Children of the dark’’, in Ashworth, G. and Hartmann, R. (Eds), Horror and Human
Tragedy Revisited: The Management of Sites of Atrocities for Tourism, Communication Corporation,
Elmsford, NY.
Denscombe, M. (2003), The Good Research Guide: For Small-Scale Social Research Projects, 2nd ed.,
Open University Press, Maidenhead.
Dunkley, R. (2006), ‘‘The ‘Thanatourist’: a fascination with death and atrocity’’, available at:http://pages.
123-reg.co.uk/pstone1-995478/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilder?les/riadunkleypresentationTSeven
tlondonoct2006.pdf (accessed 23 June 2010).
Enjoy England (2010), ‘‘Whitby’’, available at: www.enjoyengland.com/destinations/?nd/yorkshire/north-
yorkshire/whitby.aspx (accessed 25 June 2010).
(The) Guardian (2008), ‘‘Five best cemetery tours’’, available at: www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2008/oct/
25/?vebest-cemetery-tours (accessed 1 July 2010).
Hennig, C. (2002), ‘‘Tourism: enacting modern myths’’, in Dann, G.M.S. (Ed.), The Tourist as a Metaphor
of the Social World, CABI, Wallingford.
Hyde, K. and Harman, S. (2011), ‘‘Motives for a secular pilgrimage to the Gallipoli battle?elds’’, Tourism
Management, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 1343-1351.
Kvale, S. (1996), Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Lennon, J. and Foley, M. (2000), Dark Tourism: The Attraction of Death and Disaster, Continuum, London.
Postman, N. (1985), Amusing Ourselves to Death, Cox and Wyman, Reading.
Richter, L.K. (1999), ‘‘The politics of heritage tourism development: emerging issues for the new
millennium’’, in Pearce, D.G. and Butler, R.W. (Eds), Contemporary Issues in Tourism Development,
Routledge, London.
Rojek, C. (1993), Ways of Escape: Modern Transformations in Leisure and Travel, Macmillan,
Basingstoke.
Sacred Destinations (2010a), ‘‘Bunhill Fields, London’’, available at www.sacred-destinations.com/
england/london-bunhill-?elds (accessed 11 July 2010).
Seaton, A.V. (1996), ‘‘Guided by the dark: from thanatopsis to thanatourism’’, International Journal of
Heritage Studies, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 234-244.
Sharpley, R. (2009), ‘‘Shedding light on dark tourism: an introduction’’, The Dark Side of Travel:
The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism, Channel View Publications, Bristol.
Stone, P.R. (2005), ‘‘Dark tourismconsumption: a call for research’’, e-Reviewof TourismResearch, Vol. 3
No. 5, pp. 109-117.
Stone, P.R. (2006), ‘‘A dark tourism spectrum: towards a typology of death and macabre related tourist
sites, attractions and exhibitions’’, Tourism: An Interdisciplinary International Journal, Vol. 52 No. 2,
pp. 145-160.
Stone, P.R. (2009a), ‘‘It’s a bloody guide: fun fear and a lighter side of dark tourism at The Dungeon
visitor attractions, UK’’, in Sharpley, R. and Stone, P.R. (Eds), The Dark Side of Travel: The Theory and
Practice of Dark Tourism, Channel View Publications, Bristol.
Stone, P.R. (2009b), ‘‘Making absent death present: consuming dark tourism in contemporary society’’,
in Sharpley, R. and Stone, P.R. (Eds), The Dark Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism,
Channel View Publications, Bristol.
Stone, P.R. (2012), ‘‘Dark tourism and signi?cant other death: towards a model of mortality mediation’’,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 1565-1587.
Stone, P.R. and Sharpley, R. (2008), ‘‘Consuming dark tourism: a thanatological perspective’’, Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 574-595.
PAGE 254
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Tarlow, P. (2005), ‘‘Dark tourism: the appealing ‘dark’ side of tourism and more’’, in Novelli, M. (Ed.),
Niche Tourism: Contemporary Issues, Trends and Cases, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Thomas, D. (2007), ‘‘An investigation of cemeteries as a heritage resource’’, MA dissertation, University
of Salford, Salford.
Tunbridge, J.E. and Ashworth, G.J. (1996), Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a
Resource in Con?ict, Wiley, Chichester.
Uzzell, D. (1989), ‘‘The hot interpretation of war and con?ict’’, in Uzzell, D. (Ed.), Heritage Interpretation,
Vol. 1: The Natural and Built Environment, Belhaven Press, London.
Walter, T. (2006), ‘‘Disaster, modernity, and the media’’, in Garces-Foley, K. (Ed.), Death and Religion in a
Changing World, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.
Walter, T. (2009), ‘‘Dark tourism: mediatingbetween the dead and the living’’, in Sharpley, R. andStone, P.R.
(Eds), The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism, Channel View Publications,
Bristol.
Warner, W. (1959), The Living and the Dead, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Further reading
A Church Near You (2009), ‘‘St Mary Whitby’’, available at: www.achurchnearyou.com/whitby-st-mary/
(accessed 1 July 2010).
BBC (2004), ‘‘John Wesley at Epworth’’, available at www.bbc.co.uk/humber/famous_folk/wesley/
biography.shtml (accessed 11 July 2010).
Biran, A., Poria, Y. and Oren, G. (2011), ‘‘Sought experiences at (dark) heritage sites’’, Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 820-841.
Carr, G. (2010), ‘‘Shining a light on dark tourism: German bunkers in the British channel islands’’, Public
Archaeology, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 64-84.
Complete Internet Services (2010), ‘‘Goths’’, available at: www.whitby.co.uk/goths.html (accessed1 July
2010).
Hughes, R. (2008), ‘‘Dutiful tourism: encountering the Cambodian genocide’’, Asia Paci?c Viewpoint,
Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 318-330.
Korstanje, M.E. and Clayton, A. (2012), ‘‘Tourism and terrorism: con?icts and commonalities’’,
Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 8-25.
Korstanje, M.E. and Clayton, A. (2012), ‘‘Tourism and terrorism: con?icts and commonalities’’,
Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 8-25.
Lippard, L.R. (1999), On the Beaten Track: Tourism, Art and Place, The New York Press, New York, NY.
Muzaini, H., Teo, P. and Yeoh, B.S.A. (2007), ‘‘Intimations of postmodernity in dark tourism: the fate of
history at Fort Siloso, Singapore’’, Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 28-45.
Pearce, D.G. and Butler, R.W. (Eds) (1999), Contemporary Issues in Tourism Development, Routledge,
London.
Sacred Destinations (2010b), ‘‘Whitby’’, available at: www.sacred-destinations.com/england/whitby-st-
mary-church.htm (accessed 25 June 2010).
Salford City Council (2010a), ‘ ‘Salford’s local history’ ’, available at: www.salford.gov.uk/
salfordlocalhistory.htm (accessed 6 July 2010).
Salford City Council (2010b), ‘‘Regeneration’’, available at: www.salford.gov.uk/regeneration.htm
(accessed 6 July 2010).
Salford City Council (2012), ‘‘Weaste Cemetery’’, available at: www.salford.gov.uk/weastecemetery.htm
(accessed 25 April 2012).
Slade, P.R. (2003), ‘‘Gallipoli thanatourism: the meaning of ANZAC’’, Annals of TourismResearch, Vol. 30
No. 4, pp. 779-794.
Stone, P.R. (2011), ‘‘Dark tourism and the cadaveric carnival: mediating life and death narratives at
Gunter von Hagens’ Body Worlds’’, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 7, pp. 685-701.
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 255
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Strange, C. and Kempa, M. (2003), ‘‘Shades of dark tourism: Alcatraz and Robben Island’’, Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 386-405.
Whitby Folk Week (2010), ‘‘Whitby Folk Week’’, available at: www.whitbyfolk.co.uk/contact_us.html
(accessed 1 July 2010).
Whitby Online (2010a), ‘‘A brief history of Whitby’’, available at: www.whitbyonline.co.uk/whitbyhistory/
(accessed 1 July 2010).
Whitby Online (2010b), ‘‘Bram Stoker 1847-1912’’, available at: www.whitbyonline.co.uk/whitbyhistory/
bramstoker.php (accessed 1 July 2010).
Wilson, J. (2008), Prison: Cultural Memory of Dark Tourism, Peter Lang, New York, NY.
About the author
Rachael Raine was awarded a ?rst class BA (Hons) degree in English with History at the
University of Salford in 2008 and then awarded a Distinction in MA Heritage Studies at the
University of Salford in 2010. Rachael Raine can be contacted at: [email protected]
PAGE 256
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Beth A. Wielde Heidelberg. 2015. Managing ghosts: exploring local government involvement in dark tourism. Journal of
Heritage Tourism 10, 74-90. [CrossRef]
2. Avital Biran, Kenneth F. Hyde. 2013. New perspectives on dark tourism. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and
Hospitality Research 7:3, 191-198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_960696997.pdf
The purpose of this paper is to develop a typology of dark tourists through an investigation of
people’s motivations to visit burial grounds. This research extends Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum and
Seven Dark Suppliers framework by identifying nine types of dark tourists.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
A dark tourist spectrum
Rachael Raine
Article information:
To cite this document:
Rachael Raine, (2013),"A dark tourist spectrum", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 242 -
256
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-05-2012-0037
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:22 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 54 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2194 times since 2013*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Avital Biran, Kenneth F. Hyde, (2013),"New perspectives on dark tourism", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 191-198http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-05-2013-0032
Anna Farmaki, (2013),"Dark tourism revisited: a supply/demand conceptualisation", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 281-292http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-05-2012-0030
Philip Stone, (2013),"Dark tourism scholarship: a critical review", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7
Iss 3 pp. 307-318http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-06-2013-0039
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
A dark tourist spectrum
Rachael Raine
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a typology of dark tourists through an investigation of
people’s motivations to visit burial grounds. This research extends Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum and
Seven Dark Suppliers framework by identifying nine types of dark tourists.
Design/methodology/approach – A comparative case study approach was selected where 23
interviews were conducted at three burial grounds. Interview transcripts were analysed in order to
identify emerging themes in motives and experiences of dark tourism consumers. The sites selected
were Bunhill Fields Burial Ground, London, St Mary’s Graveyard, Whitby, and Weaste Cemetery, Salford.
Findings – From this research a Dark Tourist Spectrum has been formulated which presents a typology
of the dark tourist. The spectrumidenti?es different categories of visitors identi?ed at the burial grounds,
ranging from ‘‘darkest’’ to ‘‘lightest’’ tourists.
Research limitations/implications – Limitations of the research regard time and resource constraints.
This affected the sample size of participants for interview and the selection of sites as case studies.
Originality/value – This study begins to ?ll the gap in research on people’s motivations to visit sites that
lie within the mid-shades of Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum, speci?cally burial grounds. This research
contributes to a deeper understanding of dark tourism consumption with a new model presented in the
form of a Dark Tourist Spectrum.
Keywords Tourism, Death, Burial, Motivation (psychology), Burial ground, Cemetery, Graveyard,
Dark tourism spectrum
Paper type Case study
Introduction
Visitation to sites associated with death and suffering is of signi?cance in the tourism
industry. The phenomenon, known as ‘‘dark tourism’’, has attracted the attention of
academics. This paper involves an investigation into why people visit dark sites by exploring
the motives of visitors to three burial grounds:
1. Bunhill Fields Burial Ground, London;
2. St Mary’s Graveyard, Whitby; and
3. Weaste Cemetery, Salford.
The research expands upon Stone’s (2006) Dark Tourism Spectrum, where a typology of
dark tourist attractions is presented in a darkest to lightest framework. Stone suggests there
are levels of ‘‘darkness’’ for different dark sites, ranging from the lightest ‘‘Dark Fun
Factories’’, including the Merlin Entertainments Group’s dungeon attractions, through to the
darkest ‘‘Dark Camps of Genocide’’, including Holocaust death camps and sites of Nazi war
crimes. Extending upon Stone’s research, this paper presents a Dark Tourist Spectrum,
identifying types of dark tourists, presented in a darkest to lightest framework.
PAGE 242
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013, pp. 242-256, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 DOI 10.1108/IJCTHR-05-2012-0037
Rachael Raine is based at
the School of Art and
Design, University of
Salford, Salford, UK.
The author was awarded
funding for postgraduate study
from the Arts and Humanities
Research Council Studentship
Competition 2009. The funder
had no involvement in research
study, design or submission as
the funding was awarded
before the research degree
commenced.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
The term ‘‘dark tourism’’ was ?rst coined by Lennon and Foley (2000) in Dark Tourism: The
Attraction of Death and Disaster, which has become the most widely cited reference on the
subject (Sharpley and Stone, 2009). However, this work was not the ?rst to draw attention to
the phenomenon of ‘‘darkness’’ in tourism. In 1989, Uzzell discussed ‘‘hot interpretation’’
(Uzzell, 1989) of war and con?ict sites (see Sharpley, 2009). In addition, Rojek (1993)
discussed the emergence of ‘‘black spots’’, which ‘‘refer to the commercial developments of
grave sites and sites in which celebrities or large numbers of people have met with sudden
and violent death’’ (p. 136). Another early re?ection on dark tourismincludes Seaton’s (1996)
reference to ‘‘thanatourism’’ (p. 15) and Tunbridge and Ashworth discussing ‘‘atrocity as
entertainment attraction’’ (Tunbridge and Ashworth, 1996, p. 114) and introducing the term
‘‘horror tourism’’ (p. 129), which they explore in terms of heritage management.
This paper is focused on visitor motivations to visit dark sites, to discover why people visit dark
sites as part of leisure and tourism itineraries. There has been research in this area, but visitor
motivation is considered an area of dark tourism research that requires further attention
(Stone, 2006). The following section provides a brief account of research in this area.
Visitor motivations to visit dark sites
Dark tourismis both supply and demand driven, and it is important to understand both in order
to gain a fuller understanding of the phenomenon of dark tourism. Several researchers have
investigated consumer demand for dark tourismby exploring people’s motivations to visit dark
sites. However there is a gap in research in this area; as Stone states, we must ‘‘address the
fundamental question of why tourists seek out such dark sites’’ (Stone, 2006, p. 114).
Several studies of visitor motivations to visit dark sites have focused on Holocaust death
camps as case studies (Sharpley, 2009). Richter (1999) discusses visitor research into
Dachau concentration camp, saying that although 13 million people visited Dachau
concentration camp between 1965 and 1988, no one surveyed their motivations to visit, or
the impact the site had on visitors, Richter states that people’s motives have therefore had to
be ‘‘assumed’’ (Richter, 1999, p.120). These assumed motives are described by Richter as
personal, such as family research; political, such as parties persecuted by the Nazis;
historical and educational, such as school visits; and humanitarian motives. Beech (2000)
draws attention to the complex task of exposing visitor motivations to visit dark sites, with
speci?c reference to Buchenwald concentration camp. Beech (2000) simply argues there
are two distinct types of visitor to concentration camps, those with a personal connection to
the site, and those without.
In general tourist motivation research, Tarlow (2005) proposes several theories of why
people visit dark sites by suggesting dark tourism comes in a variety of forms including; a
pretext to understanding our own age, romanticism, barbarism, part of national identity, a
sign of decadence, a mystical experience, and a spiritual experience. These forms seem to
suggest that visitor motives are based on forming and developing social and personal
identities. Tarlow (2005) also suggests that people seek the strange and different in the
protection of what is known. This could be one motivation to visit dark sites as the visitor can
experience something dangerous within the safety of the tourism environment. The research
of Ashworth and Hartmann (2005) links to Tarlow’s theory, as they suggest a number of
reasons for visiting dark sites including; the curiosity of seeing something unique and
unusual, feeling empathy towards victims of certain dark events, and the argument that
people are naturally attracted to horror. Blom (2000) suggests four similar motivations to visit
dark sites:
1. tourists seek to experience something different than happens in their everyday lives;
2. there is competitive demand in the tourism market to create new and unique attractions;
3. tourists are searching for ‘‘catharsis’’ (p. 34), which can be achieved by confronting
unpleasant events to which we have no personal or individual connection; and
4. the media exposes us to new places and people we would not be aware of under other
circumstances, thus generating interest in visiting such sites.
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 243
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Dunkley (2006) identi?es several reasons and interests to visit dark sites, including
contemplation, special interest, thrill/risk seeking, validation, authenticity, self-discovery,
iconic sites, convenience, morbid curiosity, pilgrimage, remembrance and empathy.
There is a particular gap in research into visitor motivations to visit burial sites speci?cally,
which is the primary concern of this paper. The Cemetery Research Group identi?es four
main motivations for visiting cemeteries. These include:
1. an interest in local history;
2. nature lovers;
3. those visiting for educative purposes; and
4. people who seek passive recreation by merely walking through the site (Thomas, 2007).
Theoretical implications for the dark tourist visiting burial grounds
Lennon and Foley believe that burial sites do not fall under the umbrella of dark tourism
because ‘‘Visits, whether by friends and relatives of the dead or by those with other motives,
can be broadly considered under similar categories to pilgrimage’’ (Lennon and Foley, 2000,
pp. 14-16). This assertion oversimpli?es the implications of burial grounds and their role in
society. For instance, Walter (2009) describes various relationships with the dead that are
available to the public in both the public and private spheres. These relationships have
signi?cance when exploring people’s motivations to visit burial grounds as these dark sites
are places where people can go to experience relationships with the dead. The relationships
include:
B information (Walter, 2009), where pathologists and archaeologists discover information
by looking at human remains;
B intercession, which involves meditations and prayers to saints and spirits;
B guidance, where people visit shrines to receive guidance from the dead;
B care, for example tending graves and making conversations with the dead to impart news
and enquire about the afterlife;
B remembrance, which involves visiting memorials to pay respects and to remember,
particularly war memorials and also includes family history research;
B education, where sites associated with the dead are used through educational tourismfor
the purpose of teaching history;
B entertainment, where the dead are used to entertain the masses, such as Gunther von
Hagens’ Body Worlds exhibition;
B memento mori, which involves ‘‘reminding people of their mortality’’ (p. 48); and
B haunting, referring to ‘‘those who have died in vain, in de-legitimated wars or meaningless
causes, as a group of collective dead, haunt society’’ (p. 49).
Considering these several relationships that can be experienced between people and the
dead, it will be interesting to consider how far the people interviewed in this study were
motivated to visit the site by desires to form these relationships; despite the fact Walter
(2009) himself states: ‘‘I do not claim that visitors to dark sites are motivated by a wish for
these relationships with the dead’’ (p. 51).
Walter’s ‘‘memento mori’ (or ‘‘reminders of death’’) relationship conveys the idea that society
no longer has a lens through which to make sense of life and death, as old religious
meta-narratives and public death rituals no longer play such signi?cant roles (Stone, 2012;
see also Walter, 2006). The reason this shift has taken place is due to the medicalisation of
death (Stone and Sharpley, 2008), as death is taken away from the public and placed into
the private medical sphere where it then becomes ‘‘invisible’’ (Stone, 2012; see also Stone,
2009b). As death is removed from the public sphere, representations of death are now
communicated to us via the media (Stone, 2012). Stone (2012) claims: ‘‘Dark tourism is a
modern mediating institution, which not only provides a physical place to link the living with
PAGE 244
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
the dead, but also allows a cognitive space for the Self to construct contemporary
ontological meanings of mortality’’ (p. 1565). In light of this theory, burial grounds may
become an increasingly important place where people go to experience ‘‘memento mori’’
and confront their mortality. As Seaton (1996) claims, dark tourismis the result of the fact that
people are ‘‘motivated by the desire for actual or symbolic encounters with death’’ (p. 15).
Burial grounds are places that allow people to face symbolic encounters with death, but
within the safety and comfort of the tourism environment (Tarlow, 2005; see also Stone,
2012).
Another key theoretical framework related to this study is Hennig’s (2002) theory that ‘‘One
speci?c function of tourism [. . .] is to allow the physical enactment of myths’’ (Hennig, 2002,
p. 174). Hennig states that these myths refer to ‘‘the ‘meaning of life’ and contain an idea of
redemption – overcoming the restrictions and dif?culties of quotidian existence’’ (p. 174).
Hennig (2002) proposes ?ve myths that are signi?cant for tourism: ‘‘nature, the noble
savage, art, individual freedom and self-realisation, equality and paradise’’ (p. 174). It is
interesting to explore the ‘‘art’’ myth in relation to dark tourism and visitation to burial
grounds. This myth relates to the appeal of visiting original works of art as opposed to
copies; this can also refer to visiting artists’ birthplaces, childhood residences and sites of
death. As Hennig (2002) illustrates:
A modern cult of the dead can be seen in Westminster Abbey, at the Pe`re Lachaise Cemetery in
Paris or at other gravesites of famous personalities. The main thing is not what can be seen there;
instead, the bones and spirit of the deceased hold a kind of magical attraction. An unde?ned force
seems to radiate from original works of art as well as the sites where past geniuses lived and died.
Anyone in the physical proximity of such places and objects can partake in this force (p. 179).
Hennig’s theory suggests that visitation to burial sites ‘‘allows the ritual enactment of
mythological ideas’’ (p. 185). Visitors may therefore be motivated to visit burial sites because
they can perform physical activities within fantasy worlds.
Philip Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum
This paper considers whether a typology of dark tourists can be created by interrogating
visitor motivations to visit burial grounds. The research aims to produce a typology to
compliment Stone’s (2006) existing Dark Tourism Spectrum. Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum
framework and the Seven Dark Supplier categorisation suggest there are different levels or
shades of macabre or darkness into which a dark tourism product can be categorised.
Ranging from darkest to lightest, a dark site is categorised in regards to its design features
and management strategies (Stone, 2006). The Seven Dark Suppliers of dark tourism
include:
B dark fun factories;
B dark exhibitions;
B dark dungeons;
B dark resting places;
B dark shrines;
B dark con?ict sites; and
B dark camps of genocide.
This paper suggests that the concept of ‘‘shades of darkness’’ can be applied to the
consumer as well as the supplier. This idea is based on Stone’s (2006) call for research to
‘‘begin to locate and identify the types of ‘‘dark tourists’’, within each of these products
types, and commence the fundamental task of extracting and interrogating the motives and
experiences of dark tourism consumers’’ (Stone, 2006, p. 158). This concept of applying
‘‘shades of darkness’’ to the tourist has been addressed by Sharpley (2009) in his ‘‘Matrix of
dark tourism demand and supply’’. Here Sharpley (2009) identi?es four shades of dark
tourism, including pale tourism, grey tourism demand, grey tourism supply; and black
tourism plotted against a continuum of dark tourism supply (of accidental to purposeful
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 245
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
tourist attractions). Sharpley (2009) suggests that there are darker and paler ends of dark
tourism consumption as people are motivated to visit dark sites for different reasons as
everyone experiences things differently. This ranges from a fascination with death to simply
the status of visiting a certain site. This paper intends to enrich Sharpley’s matrix by
presenting a Dark Tourist Spectrum with a detailed and complete typology of dark tourist
consumers including nine shades of the dark tourist.
It is not within the scope of this paper to explore visitors to each of Stone’s seven suppliers;
therefore, research will be made into the ‘‘Dark Resting Places’’ category, speci?cally burial
sites. This study therefore opens up the opportunity for further research to interrogate visitor
motivations to visit dark sites from other suppliers of Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum with the
view of creating a comprehensive dark tourist spectrum of visitors to several types of dark
tourist attractions.
Case studies
Bunhill Fields Burial Ground, London
This site was selected because it represents a burial site located in the UK’s capital city and
can often appear on itineraries for tourists in the area. The site also contains several famous
graves, including:
B John Bunyan, (1628-1688), author of The Pilgrim’s Progress;
B Daniel Defoe (1661-1731), author of Robinson Crusoe;
B Susanna Wesley (1669-1742), mother of John Wesley (1703-1791), the founder of the
Methodist Church; and
B the Romantic poet, William Blake (1757-1827).
The cemetery is a signi?cant burial site for non-conformists (Sacred Destinations, 2010a),
and is situated opposite the Methodist Wesley’s Chapel and Museum of Methodism. The
nine-acre site is managed by the City of London Council and is no longer used as a burial
ground.
St Mary’s Graveyard, Whitby
This graveyard was selected as it is a small burial ground located in Whitby, a popular tourist
destination situated on the North Yorkshire coastline. Whitby is particularly famous for its
literary reference in Bram Stoker’s Victorian gothic novel, Dracula, published in 1897, where
the town is featured in three chapters in the macabre tale. St Mary’s Church is a popular
tourist attraction and is listed on the Enjoy England website as a ‘‘must see and do
attraction’’ (Enjoy England, 2010). It was also listed in The Guardian newspaper as one of the
‘‘?ve best cemetery tours’’ in the world (The Guardian, 2008).
Weaste Cemetery, Salford
The site was selected as a case study because of how the site is promoted as a visitor
attraction in the area, while also being a working cemetery. In 2003, Lindsay Rodgers, who
was then manager of Salford’s cemeteries, stated that she wanted Weaste Cemetery to
become ‘‘a visitor attraction for the city’’ (BBC, 2003). On Salford Council’s website, a
promotional documentary about Weaste Cemetery is featured. Stone (2005) draws attention
to these developments, referring to a press release announcing ‘‘A grave bid to boost
tourism’’ (Stone, 2005, p. 110); Stone asserts that ‘‘as part of a wider ‘heritage trail,’ Salford
tourism chiefs have decided to turn the city’s cemeteries into visitor attractions, whereby
visitors can gaze upon the graves of Salford’s most famous sons and daughters’’ (p. 110).
Method
During the summer of 2010, visitors to three burial grounds were interviewed in order to
discover their motives for visiting, with the aim of formulating a typology of dark tourists from
the data collected. A comparative case study approach was most suited to this research as
PAGE 246
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
it allowed an in-depth study of particular burial sites. The three case studies were selected to
represent different types of burial sites in terms of type, size and geographical location.
Twenty-three interviews were conducted over a two-day period at each site: ten at St Mary’s
Graveyard, ten at Bunhill Fields Burial Ground, and three at Weaste Cemetery. Only three
interviews were conducted at Weaste Cemetery because most visitors to the site during the
data collection period were the bereaved, visiting the site for its primary purpose, to mourn
the dead. Those who appeared to be visiting a speci?c grave were not approached because
the motivations of these types of visitors were obvious and did not need interrogation. In
addition, interviewing the bereaved might have caused emotional distress. The structure of
the interviews was based on a series of open questions that aimed to address the research
topic of what motivates people to visit burial sites. Each interview lasted between ?ve and 15
minutes.
The methods of analysis and interpretation of data were based on Kvale’s (1996) Five
Approaches to Interview Analysis. Three of these ?ve approaches utilized for this study were
meaning condensation, meaning categorisation and meaning interpretation. The process of
meaning condensation involved transcribing the interviews then extracting the meanings
expressed by participants into small statements. Meaning categorisation involved coding
the interview into categories; Kvale (1996) states, ‘‘The categories can be developed in
advance or they can arise ad hoc during the analysis’’ (p. 192). The categories identi?ed
were based upon several theories of visitor motivations to visit dark sites discussed earlier in
this paper, particularly that of the Cemetery Research Group (2007), Blom (2000), Tarlow
(2005), Hennig (2002), and Walter (2009). Categories were also developed ad hoc during
the analysis of the interviews. Meaning interpretation involved producing a series of
descriptive statements, one for each interview, providing a deep analysis of the meanings
and implications of the interview. The descriptive statements were then compared to
formulate a comprehensive typology of visitors to the three burial sites studied.
At the same time as conducting interviews, unstructured observations were also made.
These observations allowed information about visitor demographics and behaviours to be
recorded and thus enriched the data collected from interviewing.
Findings – a Dark Tourist Spectrum
From analysis of the data collected from the interviews and observations at the three burial
sites, a typology of dark tourists has been created. The typology is presented as a dark
tourist spectrum of visitors to ‘‘dark resting places’’ (see Figure 1). The spectrum shows the
different categories of visitors identi?ed at the burial sites ranging from ‘‘darkest’’ to
‘‘lightest’’ dark tourists, in the same format as Stone’s (2009a, b) Dark Tourism Typology. The
categories along the spectrum are graded in relation to the level of engagement with the
visitor experience in terms of the site as a burial ground and a place associated with death.
They are also graded in terms of motivations to visit the site and whether these motivations
are speci?c and predetermined or non-speci?c and more spontaneous.
Themes have been identi?ed across the spectrum indicating shared characteristics
between the various categories in relation to visitor motivation and level of engagement.
These themes include Devotion, Experience, Discover, and Incidental. A pro?le of the
participants interviewed can be found in Table I, identifying the participants’ age, gender
and residence and categorizing them into visitor type and related theme.
The following section discusses the visitors identi?ed at each site in relation to the themes
identi?ed in the spectrum.
Devotion: mourners and pilgrims
The theme ‘‘Devotion’’ refers to personal and spiritual connections visitors have with a site.
The categories relate to several of Walter’s (2009) relationships with the dead, including
intercession, guidance, care, remembrance and momento mori as discussed previously.
These types of visitors are considered the darkest of the spectrum as they engage deeply
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 247
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
with the site as a place associated with death. For mourners this involves visiting speci?c
graves and performing meditations for the dead. The category ‘‘pilgrim’’ relates to visits
made by people to burial sites because of a personal connection to the site, such as
religious signi?cance, or the grave of a personal hero. As discussed by Hyde and Harman
(2011), pilgrimages can be secular as well as of religious signi?cance. The ‘‘mourners’’ are
‘‘darker’’ than the ‘‘pilgrims’’ category as they have a genuine connection to the person
buried at the site whereas pilgrims have no personal relationship with the deceased and are
therefore more distanced from the actual death.
Table I Pro?le of participants
Age range Gender Residence Site Type Theme
40-50 F London Bunhill Sightseer Incidental
50-60 M Brighton Bunhill Information seeker Discover
30-40 M London Bunhill Retreater Incidental
60-70 F Isle of Wight Bunhill Sightseers Incidental
60-70 F London
50-60 M Cleveland, OH, USA Bunhill Hobbyist Discover
40-50 F London Bunhill Retreater Incidental
20-30 F South Korea Bunhill Pilgrim Devotion
50-60 F Manchester Bunhill Sightseer Incidental
20-30 F London Bunhill Sightseers Incidental
20-30 M London
30-40 F Essex Bunhill Thrill Seeker Experience
50-60 M Manchester St Mary’s Hobbyist Discover
50-60 M Leeds St Mary’s Hobbyist Discover
40-50 M France St Mary’s Hobbyist Discover
60-70 M Wake?eld St Mary’s Information seekers Discover
60-70 F Wake?eld
20-30 F Hull St Mary’s Passive recreationist Incidental
20-30 F Liverpool St Mary’s Sightseer Incidental
40-50 M Edinburgh St Mary’s Information seeker Discover
20-30 F Hathersage St Mary’s Pilgrim Devotion
70-80 F Doncaster St Mary’s Hobbyist Discover
20-30 F Chester?eld St Mary’s Retreaters Incidental
20-30 M Chester?eld
30-40 M Salford Weaste Morbidly curious Experience
40-50 M Salford Weaste Passive recreationist Incidental
60-70 F Salford Weaste Passive recreationist Incidental
Figure 1 A dark tourist spectrum: perceived typology of visitors to dark resting places
within a ‘‘darkest-lightest’’ framework
PAGE 248
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
The theme ‘‘Devotion’’ relates to Tarlow’s theory that visitation to dark sites can be ‘‘a mystical
experience’’ (Tarlow, 2005, p. 54), where the visitor connects with the tragedy of the sufferer.
During this study, several people were identi?ed as visiting burial sites to engage in this
mystical experience. The most predominant type of visitor to Weaste Cemetery was
mourners, visiting speci?c graves.
At Bunhill Fields many people visited as pilgrims to see the graves of famous ?gures. One
interviewee identi?ed as a pilgrim was visiting Bunhill Fields from South Korea; she visited
the site with her father and his friend, who were both Methodist pastors. She was studying
theology in South Korea and came speci?cally to the site to visit John Wesley’s Chapel and
graves of non-conformists. For instance, one interviewee was visiting Bunhill Fields with her
daughter who speci?cally wanted to visit the grave of one of her favourite authors, Daniel
Defoe. Several visitors had tended to William Blake’s grave by leaving tributes by his
headstone. These pilgrimages to the resting places of the famous dead relates to Hennig’s
(2002) theory that people visit graves to experience a force (p. 179) and mystical connection
with the dead as they know they are close to their remains.
Another group of pilgrims identi?ed was those visiting burial sites because of its signi?cance
to their personal interests. St Mary’s Graveyard has connections with Bram Stoker’s novel
Dracula as the site is mentioned at several points in the narrative; this therefore attracts
fanatics of the gothic tale. It could be argued that the force described by Hennig (2002) can
also be experienced by these types of pilgrims, desiring to be close to the physical place
that is referenced in the novel. Because these visitors see the site as iconic, they will feel the
‘‘magical attraction’’ (p. 179) and experience the ‘‘unde?ned force’’ (p. 179) radiating from
the place. Unlike the general sightseer who visits the graveyard as a point of interest, these
pilgrims experience the same emotional power of visiting the grave of a personal hero. One
interviewee at St Mary’s Graveyard was identi?ed as this type of pilgrim, saying she was
motivated to visit the site because of her interest in Dracula and that the graveyard was
mentioned in the novel. She also expressed genuine interest in gothic culture and described
various ghost stories related to the site and area. This visitor is identi?ed as a pilgrim in the
sense that she loves the novel and ?lm Dracula, and the graveyard offers a physical place
associated with the story where she can perform the myth as described by Hennig (2002).
Experience: morbidly curious and thrill seekers
These people visit burial sites to confront and ‘‘experience’’ death. This theme strongly
relates to Ashworth and Hartmann’s (2005) notion that people are naturally attracted to
horror. These visitors are lighter than mourners and pilgrims, as they do not necessarily have
any personal connection to the site, and may visit several burial grounds, as opposed to
speci?c ones, to gain their ‘‘experience’’.
As previously discussed, Tarlow (2005) suggests visiting a dark site can be ‘‘A spiritual
experience’’ (p. 54). This differs from the ‘‘mystical experience’’ (p. 54) as it is less
associated with a connection between the visitor and sufferer: ‘‘the spiritual experience is
wider [. . .] based more on a common sense of humanity’’ (p. 54). This implies that the
spiritual experience is more of a general re?ection on death, and how it affects us and our
society. Those categorised under the theme ‘‘Experience’’ all share this spiritual experience
when visiting a dark site; whether they are the morbidly curious confronting death, or thrill
seekers desiring a macabre sensation by contemplating death. This theme also relates to
Seaton’s de?nition of dark tourismas ‘‘travel to a location wholly, or partially, motivated by the
desire for actual or symbolic encounters with death’’ (Seaton, 1996, p. 15). Burial sites offer
‘‘symbolic encounters with death’’ (Seaton, 1996, p. 15) through the observation of
headstones and reading inscriptions. For the morbidly curious this involves confronting
symbols of death in order to come to terms with their own mortality. As Warner (1959) states:
. . . the fundamental sacred problemof the graveyard is to provide suitable symbols to refer to and
express man’s hope of immortality [. . .] and to reduce his anxiety and fear about death as marking
the obliteration of his personality – the end of life for himself and for those he loves (Warner, 1959,
p. 285).
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 249
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Visitation to burial sites can reduce anxiety of dying and of losing loved ones as people are
able to confront symbols of death, thus coming to terms with man’s inevitable demise. An
interviewee at Weaste Cemetery was identi?ed as morbidly curious; when asked his
motivations to visit, he said he wants ‘‘to try to remove the taboo of death’’ and ‘‘normalize it’’
because ‘‘death is a part of life’’. He expressed that he wants to teach his son that death is ‘‘a
part of life’’ and he is starting this ‘‘froman early age’’ by bringing his son to play in the burial
ground. He is not attaching any melancholic associations to the visit, instead bringing his
son to play and perform ‘‘normal’’ activities within a site associated with death.
The thrill seekers relate closely to the morbidly curious as they too visit burial sites for
‘‘symbolic encounters with death’’ (Seaton, 1996, p. 15); however, their experience is more
revolved around entertainment and the desire to conjure a macabre sensation. This relates
to Walter’s (2009) ‘‘Entertainment’’ relationship with the dead. This entertainment aspect
makes thrill seekers ‘‘lighter’’ on the spectrum, as they are not engaging with the site on such
a spiritual level as the morbidly curious. Walter (2009) implies it is a management strategy of
using the dead to entertain visitors; however, visitors also seek out dark sites in order to be
entertained by the dead. As Ashworth and Hartmann (2005) argue, people have always
been drawn to horror because of the ‘‘the emotions of fear and fascination it evokes’’
(Ashworth and Hartmann, 2005, p. 9). This was the case for one thrill seeker at Bunhill Fields;
she expressed that she enjoys visiting burial sites because they are eerie. Also when asked
whether it could be considered morbid to visit a burial site, she said she believes it is a
morbid activity and that is what she particularly enjoys.
Discover: information seekers and hobbyists
These visitors explore and investigate burial sites to make various discoveries. This theme
supports the Cemetery Research Group’s observation that motivations to visit burial grounds
include those with an interest in local history and those visiting for educative purposes
(Thomas, 2007). This thematic group is considered ‘‘lighter’’ than the ‘‘Experience’’
grouping, as they do not necessarily engage with the site as a burial ground. They are
usually emotionally detached during their visit, and visiting for a pleasurable experience.
Hobbyists visit burial sites as they have an interest in a feature of the site relating to a hobby.
These visitors are considered lighter than information seekers as their visits are often
spontaneous to make general explorations. One common type of hobbyist was the
photographer. One interviewee at St Mary’s Graveyard described himself as a
non-professional photographer, ‘‘looking for atmospheric photographs’’. He summarised
his motivation to visit saying: ‘‘I visited more for the artistic impression that it gives than
anything else’’. Another interviewee at St Mary’s Graveyard also visited the site to take
photographs: ‘‘I like to photograph the gravestones, they’ve been there for so long now, they
give a good range of texture, from the weathering’’. When asked whether visiting burial
grounds could be seen as morbid, he responded saying:
I don’t think it’s morbid at all. I’mnot here in search of the grotesque or in search of the unusual. If I
happen to ?nd it, as being unusual, it could be advantageous for me to take it away as an image
for a piece of artwork perhaps, but I’m certainly not looking to use it as, as an emotional status.
This response illustrates the difference in motivation between the thrill seekers and
hobbyists; this visitor stated that he was not looking to experience the grotesque but instead
exploring the site in relation to his artistic pursuits.
Another type of hobbyist discovered from the interviews were those identi?ed as ‘‘burial site
visitors’’. One interviewee at St Mary’s Graveyard, visiting from France, said he visited the
site because of a general interest in burial grounds and how they differ around the world.
Another burial site visitor identi?ed at St Mary’s Graveyard explained that she always visits
the site when she is in Whitby. She expressed a general interest in the social histories that
can be discovered by visiting burial grounds. Another interviewee at Bunhill Fields, on
vacation from the USA, described various burial sites he has visited, including Lake View
Cemetery and St Mary’s Cemetery, both in Cleveland, Ohio.
PAGE 250
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Walter’s (2009) ‘‘information’’ relationship relates strongly to the category of information
seekers. This relationship refers to when pathologists and archaeologists ‘‘literally dig
around the remains of the dead in order to discover information’’ (Walter, 2009, p. 44).
Although Walter only references professionals in the seeking of information, tourists also use
burial sites to discover information. At St Mary’s Graveyard, a couple of information seekers
expressed an interest in discovering more about Whitby’s local history. One explained that
they use the graveyard to ?nd out about the history of Whitby, as Whitby has ‘‘got a
fascinating history [. . .] and the graveyard is part of that’’. The other supported this
motivation saying, ‘‘We come so often now [to Whitby] that you like to learn as much about
the place as you can’’. Another type of information seeker was identi?ed at St Mary’s
Graveyard; this interviewee visited the site speci?cally to explore the architecture of the
church.
A ?nal example of an information seeker was an interviewee at Bunhill Fields. This visitor was
a burial site visitor with a speci?c interest in memorialisation for an artist project he was
producing, titled ‘‘Shrine’’. He explained that he visits numerous burial sites around the world
to collect information for his project. He mentioned different types of burial sites during the
interview, including Pe` re Lachaise, prehistoric cemeteries, burial mounds, tombs,
megalithic chambers, and the catacombs of Paris. These references support his assertion
that he is ‘‘incredibly interested in cemeteries’’.
Incidental: sightseers, retreaters and passive recreationists
This is the lightest theme on the spectrum, as these people do not engage deeply with burial
sites as places associated with death. They are themed as ‘‘incidental’’ because the nature
of their visits is often unplanned and impulsive with no real agenda to visit the site for reasons
related to death and burials. Sightseers visit because it is a general place of interest in the
area. Retreaters enjoy burial sites as peaceful green spaces offering escape from the stress
of daily life. Retreaters are ‘‘lighter’’ than sightseers as they do not visit to engage with the
site as a burial ground in any way, whereas the sightseer may do so once they are there.
Passive recreationists are the lightest category of all because they do not engage with the
site in any way and use the site purely as an access route, or open space in which to walk.
This theme is the most signi?cant of the four themes as it includes the largest number of
people interviewed and observed (11 out of 23 interviewees are categorised as
‘‘incidental’’).
Blom (2000) suggests that people visit dark sites because there is a competitive demand in
the tourism market to create new and unique attractions. This theory relates to the category
‘‘sightseers’’ and is supported by the motives of a couple interviewed at Bunhill Fields. They
decided to visit the site as it was featured in a guidebook as an interesting cemetery in
London with ‘‘interesting graves’’ and ‘‘famous people buried’’, it was close to where they
were, and it was ‘‘cheap’’ (free entry). This supports Blom’s (2000) assertion that burial
grounds may be viewed as tourist attractions. One sightseer at Bunhill Fields expressed that
her main motivation to visit the site was to showher husband the famous graves of Blake and
Defoe as they were just ‘‘spending some time walking round’’ while their daughter was on a
course in the city. She explained she was ‘‘quite interested’’ in Defoe and quite interested in
the graves of the non-conformists, but these graves held no real signi?cance for her.
The category ‘‘retreaters’’ has not been identi?ed in any literature on dark tourism. This
category was however one of the most common types of visitor identi?ed at the burial sites.
At Bunhill Fields, the majority of visitors observed were using the site as a place of retreat
from the city; this included workers eating their lunch or people taking rest or naps on one of
the park benches. One interviewee at Bunhill Fields identi?ed as a retreater was using the
site as a green space to escape to during his lunch breaks. When asked why he visits the
site, he said he often walks there because it is ‘‘peaceful’’ and ‘‘a break from the city’’; he
also described it as a place to ‘‘recharge’’ for a moment during his working day.
Another retreater identi?ed at Bunhill Fields explained that her main motivation to visit the site
was because it offered a place of retreat for her: ‘‘it’s just nice to have half an hour out. That’s
one of the main things; it’s just peace and quiet and time out’’. She referred to the site as ‘‘a
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 251
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
lovely little retreat’’ several times during the interview. She also said, ‘‘it’s just a lovely place to
sit and read or, just some down time’’. She opposed the suggestion of developing facilities
for visitors, saying:
No, no. I think it would have quite an intrusive, contradictory effect. I think you’d end up getting too
many people in. Particularly, I have to say, in terms of families and kids running around screaming
[. . .] I don’t think somewhere like this, say it had tearooms, or something, it would be ghastly.
Because you’d have more litter.
These comments suggest that developing the site’s facilities would prevent it from being the
peaceful site of retreat that it is currently for her. She appeared to value the escape to nature
within an urban environment.
The category ‘‘passive recreationists’’ has been identi?ed by the Cemetery Research Group
as people who visit cemeteries for passive recreation by merely walking through the site
(Thomas, 2007). This type of visitor was identi?ed at the most common type of visitor at all
three burial grounds studied. Bunhill Fields and St Mary’s Graveyard were both used as
access routes by countless people. A passive recreationist interviewed at St Mary’s
Graveyard said her visit ‘‘was just spontaneous’’. She was merely passing through, and did
not engage with the site in any way. Numerous dog walkers were observed at all three sites.
Conclusion
This paper presents a dark tourist spectrum of visitors to burial sites, with a typology of dark
tourists arranged in a darkest-lightest framework. This study contributes to the body of
literature on motivations to visit dark tourist sites and extends Stone’s (2006) Dark Tourism
Spectrum by showing that consumers, as well as suppliers, can be arranged into types.
Several implications have emerged from this study relating to dark tourism theory. Some
people visit burial grounds to experience relationships with the dead (Walter, 2009) and for
‘‘symbolic encounters with death’’ (Seaton, 1996, p. 15). Lennon and Foley’s (2000)
dismissal of burial sites as dark tourist sites, due to assumptions that visits are motivated by
reasons of pilgrimage, overlooks the complexity of visitation to burial sites and neglects to
identify them as sites that attract people for a variety of different reasons. Data collected
during this research supports the notion that people visit burial grounds on pilgrimages,
visiting the graves of lost loved ones (mourners) and sites of spiritual and personal
signi?cance (pilgrims), however, people also visit burial sites with several other motives; in
fact only a small percentage of visitors interviewed and observed were identi?ed under the
theme ‘‘Devotion’’. Burial sites are used for more than just places to perform devotions to the
deceased.
Another key theoretical implication surrounding to this study relates to Walter’s (2009)
‘‘Entertainment’’ relationship, where people are motivated to visit dark sites to be entertained
by death or the dead. As discussed by Postman (1985), traditional ways of understanding
the world, such as religion, have diminished and the media has now become our
meta-narrative for society, and the media presents everything as a form of entertainment.
This in turn affects how we view and comprehend death, as it is now presented to us as a
form of entertainment via the lens of the media. This is represented in the ‘‘thrill seekers’’
category, where people visit burial grounds to experience thrilling sensations by being at a
place where the dead are buried. The idea of ?nding death thrilling and entertaining is
perhaps a result of the media’s portrayal of death as entertainment. The category
‘‘sightseers’’ also relates to this, as discovered at Bunhill Fields, where a couple were visiting
the site because it was promoted in a guidebook as a ‘‘must see’’ attraction. Indeed, some
tourist demand for new visitor attractions might be met by promoting sites associated with
death as visitor attractions.
The ?nal theoretical implication identi?ed in this study relates to Hennig’s (2002) notion of
tourism allowing the physical enactment of modern myths. Speci?cally relevant is Hennig’s
(2002) ‘‘nature’’ myth, which concerns the concept of nature as a renewing force. This theory
directly impacts tourism, as people seek out places to visit which provide natural settings to
PAGE 252
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
experience this force. Burial sites offer a setting for contact with nature; several interviewees
expressed positive admiration of the natural environments burial sites provide. Several
interviewees also chose to visit the burial grounds for a moment of peace and to revive
themselves during their busy day (retreaters). The natural element of burial sites also makes
them attractive places to take a walk or use as access routes; most visitors to Bunhill Fields
used the site for this purpose (passive recreationists). This evidence supports the notion that
some people desire to visit burial grounds because of contact with nature that offers a
renewing force. It has been argued that burial sites not only offer contact with nature, but also
provide places to contemplate man’s mortality and confront symbols of death, such as
headstones. This supports Stone’s (2012) theory that people are motivated to visit dark
tourist sites as they offer places to contemplate death, as death has largely been removed
from the public sphere and we no longer have ways of coming to terms with our mortality.
Burial grounds provide visual symbols that man will one day become nature again once he
returns to the ground after death; this is the ultimate enactment of Hennig’s myth.
The ?ndings from this study present several implications for managers of burial sites. Firstly,
this paper emphasises that burial sites are not just places where people go on pilgrimage or
mourn the dead; there is a wider audience that site managers should consider. As
demonstrated by the Dark Tourist Spectrum, there are several types of visitors, all seeking
different experiences from their visit. Because of this, managers can promote burial sites as
tourist attractions as well as places to mourn and visit the speci?c dead. This has already
been seen by the efforts of Salford City Council for Weaste Cemetery where the site is
promoted as an educational resource (BBC, 2003); this may attract information seekers.
Highlighting key features of the site in promotions, such as architecture and wildlife, will also
attract hobbyists. Managers of burial sites similar to St Mary’s Graveyard could market the
site as a unique and ‘‘entertaining’’ attraction because of its associations with Dracula, thus
appealing to thrill seekers and sightseers. However, when developing burial grounds for
tourism, managers must take care to maintain the site as a natural environment and not add
excessive infrastructures that would deter from the site as a place of escape and contact
with nature, as burial sites need to provide peaceful spaces for visitors to contemplate death
and mortality.
Limitations and recommendations
Several studies have explored visitor motivations to visit dark sites, particularly focusing on
Holocaust death camps; however, little literature exists on visitor motivations to visit burial
sites speci?cally. It is therefore recommended that research continue into the area of dark
tourism demand. There are methodological limitations in this study, speci?cally the sample
size for the study. The limitation of the interviews being conducted at three UK burial sites
over a two-day period at each site also means the results presented cannot automatically be
generalised. It is therefore recommended to collect data from burial grounds across the
globe over longer periods, and to collect data from sites that are considered popular tourist
attractions such as Highgate Cemetery, London or Pe` re Lachaise, Paris. It would be
interesting to collect data during different times of the year to see if seasonality affects visitor
motivations. Conducting focus groups as well as interviews and observations to collect data
may produce additional ?ndings.
It would be valuable for managers of burial sites to consider the implications presented in
this paper; to assess the role of burial sites in the tourism market by using the typology
presented here as a framework for targeting wider audiences.
References
Ashworth, G. and Hartmann, R. (Eds) (2005), Horror and Human Tragedy Revisited: The Management of
Sites of Atrocities for Tourism, Cognizant Communication Corporation, Elmsford, NY.
BBC (2003), ‘‘Famous graves in heritage trail’’, available at:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/
manchester/3304197.stm (accessed 25 July 2010).
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 253
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Beech, J. (2000), ‘‘The enigma of holocaust sites as tourist attractions: the case of Buchenwald’’,
Managing Leisure, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 29-41.
Blom, T. (2000), ‘‘Morbid tourism: a postmodern market niche with an example from Althorp’’, Norsk
Geogra?sk Tidsskrift – Norwegian Journal of Geography, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 29-36.
Dann, G.M.S. (2005), ‘‘Children of the dark’’, in Ashworth, G. and Hartmann, R. (Eds), Horror and Human
Tragedy Revisited: The Management of Sites of Atrocities for Tourism, Communication Corporation,
Elmsford, NY.
Denscombe, M. (2003), The Good Research Guide: For Small-Scale Social Research Projects, 2nd ed.,
Open University Press, Maidenhead.
Dunkley, R. (2006), ‘‘The ‘Thanatourist’: a fascination with death and atrocity’’, available at:http://pages.
123-reg.co.uk/pstone1-995478/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilder?les/riadunkleypresentationTSeven
tlondonoct2006.pdf (accessed 23 June 2010).
Enjoy England (2010), ‘‘Whitby’’, available at: www.enjoyengland.com/destinations/?nd/yorkshire/north-
yorkshire/whitby.aspx (accessed 25 June 2010).
(The) Guardian (2008), ‘‘Five best cemetery tours’’, available at: www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2008/oct/
25/?vebest-cemetery-tours (accessed 1 July 2010).
Hennig, C. (2002), ‘‘Tourism: enacting modern myths’’, in Dann, G.M.S. (Ed.), The Tourist as a Metaphor
of the Social World, CABI, Wallingford.
Hyde, K. and Harman, S. (2011), ‘‘Motives for a secular pilgrimage to the Gallipoli battle?elds’’, Tourism
Management, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 1343-1351.
Kvale, S. (1996), Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Lennon, J. and Foley, M. (2000), Dark Tourism: The Attraction of Death and Disaster, Continuum, London.
Postman, N. (1985), Amusing Ourselves to Death, Cox and Wyman, Reading.
Richter, L.K. (1999), ‘‘The politics of heritage tourism development: emerging issues for the new
millennium’’, in Pearce, D.G. and Butler, R.W. (Eds), Contemporary Issues in Tourism Development,
Routledge, London.
Rojek, C. (1993), Ways of Escape: Modern Transformations in Leisure and Travel, Macmillan,
Basingstoke.
Sacred Destinations (2010a), ‘‘Bunhill Fields, London’’, available at www.sacred-destinations.com/
england/london-bunhill-?elds (accessed 11 July 2010).
Seaton, A.V. (1996), ‘‘Guided by the dark: from thanatopsis to thanatourism’’, International Journal of
Heritage Studies, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 234-244.
Sharpley, R. (2009), ‘‘Shedding light on dark tourism: an introduction’’, The Dark Side of Travel:
The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism, Channel View Publications, Bristol.
Stone, P.R. (2005), ‘‘Dark tourismconsumption: a call for research’’, e-Reviewof TourismResearch, Vol. 3
No. 5, pp. 109-117.
Stone, P.R. (2006), ‘‘A dark tourism spectrum: towards a typology of death and macabre related tourist
sites, attractions and exhibitions’’, Tourism: An Interdisciplinary International Journal, Vol. 52 No. 2,
pp. 145-160.
Stone, P.R. (2009a), ‘‘It’s a bloody guide: fun fear and a lighter side of dark tourism at The Dungeon
visitor attractions, UK’’, in Sharpley, R. and Stone, P.R. (Eds), The Dark Side of Travel: The Theory and
Practice of Dark Tourism, Channel View Publications, Bristol.
Stone, P.R. (2009b), ‘‘Making absent death present: consuming dark tourism in contemporary society’’,
in Sharpley, R. and Stone, P.R. (Eds), The Dark Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism,
Channel View Publications, Bristol.
Stone, P.R. (2012), ‘‘Dark tourism and signi?cant other death: towards a model of mortality mediation’’,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 1565-1587.
Stone, P.R. and Sharpley, R. (2008), ‘‘Consuming dark tourism: a thanatological perspective’’, Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 574-595.
PAGE 254
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Tarlow, P. (2005), ‘‘Dark tourism: the appealing ‘dark’ side of tourism and more’’, in Novelli, M. (Ed.),
Niche Tourism: Contemporary Issues, Trends and Cases, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Thomas, D. (2007), ‘‘An investigation of cemeteries as a heritage resource’’, MA dissertation, University
of Salford, Salford.
Tunbridge, J.E. and Ashworth, G.J. (1996), Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a
Resource in Con?ict, Wiley, Chichester.
Uzzell, D. (1989), ‘‘The hot interpretation of war and con?ict’’, in Uzzell, D. (Ed.), Heritage Interpretation,
Vol. 1: The Natural and Built Environment, Belhaven Press, London.
Walter, T. (2006), ‘‘Disaster, modernity, and the media’’, in Garces-Foley, K. (Ed.), Death and Religion in a
Changing World, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.
Walter, T. (2009), ‘‘Dark tourism: mediatingbetween the dead and the living’’, in Sharpley, R. andStone, P.R.
(Eds), The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism, Channel View Publications,
Bristol.
Warner, W. (1959), The Living and the Dead, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Further reading
A Church Near You (2009), ‘‘St Mary Whitby’’, available at: www.achurchnearyou.com/whitby-st-mary/
(accessed 1 July 2010).
BBC (2004), ‘‘John Wesley at Epworth’’, available at www.bbc.co.uk/humber/famous_folk/wesley/
biography.shtml (accessed 11 July 2010).
Biran, A., Poria, Y. and Oren, G. (2011), ‘‘Sought experiences at (dark) heritage sites’’, Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 820-841.
Carr, G. (2010), ‘‘Shining a light on dark tourism: German bunkers in the British channel islands’’, Public
Archaeology, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 64-84.
Complete Internet Services (2010), ‘‘Goths’’, available at: www.whitby.co.uk/goths.html (accessed1 July
2010).
Hughes, R. (2008), ‘‘Dutiful tourism: encountering the Cambodian genocide’’, Asia Paci?c Viewpoint,
Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 318-330.
Korstanje, M.E. and Clayton, A. (2012), ‘‘Tourism and terrorism: con?icts and commonalities’’,
Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 8-25.
Korstanje, M.E. and Clayton, A. (2012), ‘‘Tourism and terrorism: con?icts and commonalities’’,
Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 8-25.
Lippard, L.R. (1999), On the Beaten Track: Tourism, Art and Place, The New York Press, New York, NY.
Muzaini, H., Teo, P. and Yeoh, B.S.A. (2007), ‘‘Intimations of postmodernity in dark tourism: the fate of
history at Fort Siloso, Singapore’’, Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 28-45.
Pearce, D.G. and Butler, R.W. (Eds) (1999), Contemporary Issues in Tourism Development, Routledge,
London.
Sacred Destinations (2010b), ‘‘Whitby’’, available at: www.sacred-destinations.com/england/whitby-st-
mary-church.htm (accessed 25 June 2010).
Salford City Council (2010a), ‘ ‘Salford’s local history’ ’, available at: www.salford.gov.uk/
salfordlocalhistory.htm (accessed 6 July 2010).
Salford City Council (2010b), ‘‘Regeneration’’, available at: www.salford.gov.uk/regeneration.htm
(accessed 6 July 2010).
Salford City Council (2012), ‘‘Weaste Cemetery’’, available at: www.salford.gov.uk/weastecemetery.htm
(accessed 25 April 2012).
Slade, P.R. (2003), ‘‘Gallipoli thanatourism: the meaning of ANZAC’’, Annals of TourismResearch, Vol. 30
No. 4, pp. 779-794.
Stone, P.R. (2011), ‘‘Dark tourism and the cadaveric carnival: mediating life and death narratives at
Gunter von Hagens’ Body Worlds’’, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 7, pp. 685-701.
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 255
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Strange, C. and Kempa, M. (2003), ‘‘Shades of dark tourism: Alcatraz and Robben Island’’, Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 386-405.
Whitby Folk Week (2010), ‘‘Whitby Folk Week’’, available at: www.whitbyfolk.co.uk/contact_us.html
(accessed 1 July 2010).
Whitby Online (2010a), ‘‘A brief history of Whitby’’, available at: www.whitbyonline.co.uk/whitbyhistory/
(accessed 1 July 2010).
Whitby Online (2010b), ‘‘Bram Stoker 1847-1912’’, available at: www.whitbyonline.co.uk/whitbyhistory/
bramstoker.php (accessed 1 July 2010).
Wilson, J. (2008), Prison: Cultural Memory of Dark Tourism, Peter Lang, New York, NY.
About the author
Rachael Raine was awarded a ?rst class BA (Hons) degree in English with History at the
University of Salford in 2008 and then awarded a Distinction in MA Heritage Studies at the
University of Salford in 2010. Rachael Raine can be contacted at: [email protected]
PAGE 256
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 3 2013
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Beth A. Wielde Heidelberg. 2015. Managing ghosts: exploring local government involvement in dark tourism. Journal of
Heritage Tourism 10, 74-90. [CrossRef]
2. Avital Biran, Kenneth F. Hyde. 2013. New perspectives on dark tourism. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and
Hospitality Research 7:3, 191-198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
2
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_960696997.pdf