The Canadian National Vimy Memorial

Description
The purpose of this article is to expand the discussion pertaining to Vimy beyond traditional
historic and military circles and to illustrate that the site is a significant tourism attraction featuring evolving
management and interpretation approaches. This is achieved by describing the commemoration of First
World War sites and the evolution and transformation of visitor typologies at these sites. The conversation is
framed within a discussion of the role of heritage dissonance in management. Since this article was written
at the onset of the centennial of the Great War, an examination of the management of the Canadian National
Vimy Memorial, which includes a tourism perspective, is timely.

International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
The Canadian National Vimy Memorial: remembrance, dissonance and resonance
R. H. Lemelin Kelsey J ohansen
Article information:
To cite this document:
R. H. Lemelin Kelsey J ohansen , (2014),"The Canadian National Vimy Memorial: remembrance, dissonance and
resonance", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 8 Iss 2 pp. 203 - 218
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-09-2013-0059
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:24 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 89 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 88 times since 2014*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Maria Sakellari, (2014),"Film tourism and ecotourism: mutually exclusive or compatible?", International J ournal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 8 Iss 2 pp. 194-202 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-09-2013-0064
Sandra M. Sánchez-Cañizares, Ana María Castillo-Canalejo, (2014),"Community-based island tourism: the case of Boa
Vista in Cape Verde", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 8 Iss 2 pp. 219-233 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-04-2012-0015
Erol Duran, Bahattin Hamarat, Emrah Özkul, (2014),"A sustainable festival management model: the case of International
Troia festival", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 8 Iss 2 pp. 173-193 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJ CTHR-04-2013-0017
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
The Canadian National Vimy Memorial:
remembrance, dissonance and resonance
Raynald H. Lemelin and Kelsey Johansen
Raynald H. Lemelin is an
Associate Professor and
Kelsey Johansen is a
Lecturer, both are based
at Outdoor Recreation,
Parks and Tourism,
Lakehead University,
Thunder Bay, Canada.
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this article is to expand the discussion pertaining to Vimy beyond traditional
historic and military circles and to illustrate that the site is a signi?cant tourism attraction featuring evolving
management and interpretation approaches. This is achieved by describing the commemoration of First
World War sites and the evolution and transformation of visitor typologies at these sites. The conversation is
framed within a discussion of the role of heritage dissonance in management. Since this article was written
at the onset of the centennial of the Great War, an examination of the management of the Canadian National
Vimy Memorial, which includes a tourism perspective, is timely.
Design/methodology/approach – Consisting of participation observations and a review of literature,
documentation, government reports and Web sites describing the Canadian National Vimy Memorial,
this analysis is complemented by site visits and discussions with key personnel involved in the
management of the site.
Findings – Because this article precedes the upcoming centennial of the Great War, an examination of the
management of the Canadian National Vimy Memorial, which includes a tourismperspective, is timely. The
discussion andconclusion sections provide a suggestion of howdissonant heritage can be addressed, and
present an argument for the inclusion of new technologies in the management and interpretation of First
World War memorials and the celebrations associated with the centennial of 2014-2019 in order to embrace
new visitor types.
Research limitations/implications – This is a conceptual paper examining past and current
management strategies of the Canadian National Vimy Memorial. No participants or manager was
interviewed or surveyed.
Practical implications – Strategies to improve future management through the engagement of tourism
researchers, new technologies and by addressing dissonant heritage are provided through literature
review and on-site visits.
Social implications – Currently, the management of the Vimy Memorial caters largely to a certain segment of
Canadianpopulation. The?ndings suggest that by addressingother components of Canadiansociety andeven
other combatants, themanagement andinterpretationof thesitecouldbegreatlydiversi?edandcouldeventually
become a battle?eld like Gettysburg or Gallipoli, where all combatants are recognized and honored.
Originality/value – This is the ?rst paper examining the management of the Vimy Memorial from a
tourism perspective.
Keywords Management, Battle?eld tourism, Canadian National Vimy Memorial, First World War
centennial, Dissonant heritage, War memorials
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
In the early days of the First World War, the German army captured a long escarpment of land
known as Vimy Ridge, located about 175 kilometres north of Paris, near the city of Arras (an
important coal producing area in Northern France) (Veterans Affairs Canada, 2011). The
German army quickly reinforced this defensive position and successfully defended it against a
number of allied assaults by the French and British armies (Veterans Affairs Canada, 2011).
The Canadian Expeditionary Force (CEF) was relocated to the base of Vimy Ridge after
?ghting in the disastrous Somme engagement of 1916. After months of meticulous
Received 1 September 2013
Revised 18 December 2013
Accepted 20 January 2014
The authors would like to
thank Guy Turpin, Senior
Manager, Commemorative
Sites European Operations for
reviewing the original draft
and providing us with the
images.
DOI 10.1108/IJCTHR-09-2013-0059 VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014, pp. 203-218, © Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 203
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
preparation, all four divisions of the Canadian Corps (aided by the British 5th Division),
?ghting together for the ?rst time, stormed the Ridge on April 9, 1917. By mid-afternoon,
they had taken all their objectives except Hill 145 which was captured the following day. On
April 12, the 4th Canadian Division along with the British 24th Division took the Pimple at the
northern end of the Ridge (Veterans Affairs Canada, 2011). Historians attribute the success
of the Ridge’s capture to a mix of technical and tactical innovations, reconnaissance,
artillery support, and a poor response strategy by the German army (Hayes et al., 2007). Of
the 100,000 Canadians who fought in the engagement, approximately 11,000 were
wounded, 3,600 fatally. The successful completion of the Vimy mission solidi?ed the CEF’s
“reputation among allies and opponents as an elite ?ghting force” (Brown and Cook, 2011,
p. 37) throughout the remainder of the First World War. While the CEF would go on to ?ght
in other signi?cant battles in the First World War (Amiens, Cambrai, Passchendaele), Vimy
quickly acquired a largely mythical status in Canadian military lore. By the end of the First
World War, of the 620,000 Canadians who had served in the CEF, 66,000 had lost their lives
and 170,000 had been wounded (Hayes et al., 2007).
Despite providing the allies with a signi?cant victory on the Western Front in 1917,
discussions in tourism circles pertaining to the Vimy Ridge battle?eld (apart from Eagles
and McCool’s 2002 brief overview) remain largely undocumented. This is surprising
considering the extensive literature published regarding warfare tourism, a subcomponent
of dark tourism, and dissonant heritage which incorporates battle?elds, war memorials,
cemeteries, war museums and battle re-enactments (Butler and Suntikul, 2013; Gordon,
1998; Lloyd, 1998; Seaton, 2009, 2000; Smith, 1996; Weaver, 2000). In comparison,
battle?elds like the Battle of the Little Bighorn (Buchholtz, 2005, 2012; Lemelin et al., 2013),
Beaumont-Hamel (Gough, 2004, 2007), Gallipoli (Cheal and Grif?n, 2013; Hyde and
Harman, 2011; Slade, 2003), Gettysburg (Chronis, 2005; Gatewood and Cameron, 2004)
and Isandlwana and Rorke’s Drift (Venter, 2011; Werdler, 2012) have received
considerable attention within these areas of scholarship. The goal of this paper is to add
Vimy to this literature. Because dissonant heritage is central to discussion, we now examine
some of the early studies in this area.
The early pioneering work of Tunbridge and Ashworth (1996) “on dissonant heritage and
tourism at the Nazi concentration camps in Central and Eastern Europe was not recognized
until the early 2000s by dark-tourism commentators” (p. 6). This oversight is troublesome
considering that dissonance, irrespective of scale or context, “is intrinsic to all forms of
heritage” (Hartmann, 2013, p. 2). The reason for this is that all sites are multi-vocal, in most
cases involving the descendants of the victorious and vanquished, the perpetrators,
victims and bystanders and international visitors with little to no af?liations with these
battle?elds (Hartmann, 2013). As Ashworth et al. (2007) noted, the pluralization and
globalization of heritage places associated with violence and tragedy should come as no
surprise. However, as Lemelin et al. (2013) recently noted in their discussion of heritage
dissonance in con?ict sites in Australia and the USA, addressing these multiple voices in
an age of globalization, while important, requires collaboration and careful planning.
Dissonant heritage is particularly problematic when discussing the bene?ts or drawbacks
of battle?eld tourism. O’Sullivan (2012) and Schweizer (2000) report that tourism in Eastern
Europe “contributed to the massive political changes of 1989-1990” (Hartmann, 2013, p.4),
while visits to holocaust sites are de?ned as educational opportunities providing “lasting
learning opportunities” (Hartmann, 2013, p. 4). Visits to sites like Gallipoli have also been
linked to secular pilgrimages (Cheal and Grif?n, 2013; Hyde and Harman, 2011). On the
other hand, researchers have criticized the commodi?cation of these sites (Stone, 2006;
Wight, 2006), while Ashworth (2012) and Tomljenovic and Faulkner (2000) have “been
more cautious or skeptical about the positive role of tourism in the peace process and in the
promotion of intercultural understanding” (Hartmann, 2013, p. 4). As Hartmann (2013)
observed, warfare tourism may in some situations “contribute positively, or negatively, to
the resolution of ethnic or cultural divisions” (p. 6).
PAGE 204 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
The purpose of this paper is to expand the discussion of the Canadian National Vimy
Memorial beyond traditional historical and military circles to demonstrate that the site
is a signi?cant tourism attraction featuring evolving management and interpretation
approaches (Plate 1). Similar to Winter (2009) and Seaton’s (2000) work on Australian First
World War commemorative sites, we suggest that the role and management of the Canadian
National Vimy Memorial within the Canadian consciousness is a dynamic, often contested
Plate 1 Canadian National Vimy Memorial
VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 205
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
process of memory-making (the way in which people remember the past together as a
collective experience of the Great War) (Labayle, 2009; Pépin, 2012; Winegard, 2012).
Understanding the process of memory-making, memory erasure and memory commemoration
can be addressed through the negotiation of dissonance in heritage.
Since this paper is being written at the onset of the centennial of the Great War, we believe
this provides a timely opportunity to critically re?ect upon the implications of the Vimy Ridge
con?ict as a nation-de?ning moment in Canadian history and the site’s subsequent
management and interpretation. At the heart of this discussion is the need to make
commemoration relevant to people (from Canada and other visiting countries) two or three
generations removed from the con?ict. In other words, this paper asks what type of
management techniques, interpretative formats and even marketing approaches should
be, and are currently being, used to engage these visitors, and what can be learned from
the interpretation of battle?elds elsewhere. Based on ethnographic research and a review
of the literature, this case study ?lls a gap in leisure and tourism literature on the
management and interpretation of the Canadian National Vimy Memorial, as a national
monument, a national historical site and a tourism destination in Northern France. The
article is divided into the following sections:

a discussion of the commemoration of First World War sites and their visitation; and

critical re?ection on the designation, construction and commemoration of the Canadian
National Vimy Memorial.
The discussion and conclusion sections provide an argument for the inclusion of new
technologies in the management and interpretation of First World War memorials and the
celebrations associated with the centenary of 2014-2019 in order to address changing
demographics and needs among visitors.
The commemoration of World War I
No war prior to the Great War had created so much chaos and yielded so many dead and
missing men (Inglis, 1993). Therefore, it comes as no surprise that proposals for the
commemoration of the First World War began very early during ?rst world war. In 1915,
Alexander Douglas Gillespie suggested that the entire Western Front be transformed into
one long avenue known as the Via Sacra; Churchill recommended that the destroyed city
of Ypres (Belgium) be preserved as a reminder of the destruction (Gough, 2004). These
suggestions were rejected in preference for war monuments attesting “to the
accomplishments and sacri?ce of all the participants” (Hucker, 2007, p. 280).
As a result, the age of the traditional war monuments commemorating kings and generals
in the early 20th century was replaced by an era where every dead soldier, even the
unknown soldier, was perceived as a citizen meriting recognition and civic honor (Inglis,
1993). The task of recovering, identifying and giving the bodies of the British and their allies
a proper burial fell to the Imperial War Graves Commission (IWGC) (Hucker, 2007). Now
known as the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, the IWGC formulated three guiding
principles for burials and re-burials: “the memorials should be permanent; the headstones
should be uniform; and there should be no distinction made on account of military or civil
rank” (Hucker, 2007, p. 283).
As Hucker and Smith (2012) explain, this was momentous for it would take:
[. . .] more than twice the length of the con?ict to bury its dead. When the task was ?nally completed
at the end of the 1920s, more than 2,000 Imperial War Graves Commission cemeteries ran like a “via
dolorosa” [the path of grief] along the former battle lines in Europe (p. 70).
Thousands of memorials, in the smallest villages to the largest cities, were erected throughout
Australia, Europe and New Zealand to honor the dead (Lloyd, 1998). In Canada, the deep
scars left by the war compelled many Canadians to mark the nation’s sacri?ce through “the
construction of the Peace Tower and the National Cenotaph in the nation’s capital as well as the
PAGE 206 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
establishment of numerous memorials in large and small communities, many with the names of
the community’s fallen engraved upon them” (Brown and Cook, 2011, p. 38).
On the Western Front, the main theatre of the war, the construction of memorials such as
the Menin Gate, the Franco-British memorial at Thiepval, the Ossuarium of Douaumont, the
Australian National Memorial at Villers-Bretonneux, South Africa’s memorial at Delville
Wood and Canada’s national monument at Vimy Ridge, helped to frame the social memory
of the Great War (Inglis, 2005; Laqueur, 1994; Winter, 1995).
Tours to the Western Front battle?elds began soon after the Armistice was signed in 1918
with approximately 60,000 veterans and civilians from Britain making these visits (Brown
and Cook, 2011). Distance, time and cost proved to be a formidable barrier for many North
American pilgrims; yet, despite these challenges, 15,000 American veterans and families
visited the Western Front in 1927. Nearly a decade later, 6,000 Canadian veterans and their
families (including French and Japanese Canadians) traveled to France to witness the
unveiling of the Vimy Ridge memorial in 1936 (Brown and Cook, 2011).
Visitations to the Western Front declined dramatically after the declaration of war in Europe
in 1939 (Butler and Suntikul, 2013). That said, Dur?nger (2007) reported that some German
of?cers and soldiers visited the Canadian National Vimy Memorial during this time.
Although the Western Front continued to attract both pilgrims and First World War history
enthusiasts after the end of the Second World War (Seaton, 2000), during the 1950s and
1960s, war memorials, especially those associated with the First World War, were
perceived as “old-fashioned artifacts, out of step with the modern world” (Hucker and
Smith, 2012, p. 88). Public interest in the Great War and its memorials continued to decline,
and by the 1970s, it was expected that the veterans and the commemorations of the First
World War would pass away all together (Hucker and Smith, 2012). While it is debatable
whether the commemoration of First World War sites would have completely disappeared
in France and Belgium (Goliard, 2010, and Hertzog, 2012, who highlight French visitation
patterns to First World War sites), it is clear that the rise of documentaries, movies (e.g.
Gallipoli), books and graphic novels renewed interest in the First World War and its
memorials (Hyde and Harman, 2011; Offenstadt, 2010; Scates 2006; Winter 2006).
Although no documentation exists to support this, Canadian movies (e.g. Passchendaele,
2008 directed by Paul Gross), and books (e.g. The Stone Carvers by Urquhart, 2003, Three
Days Road by Joseph Boyden, 2006) suggested one local guide in Belgium, have also
helped to renew interest in the Great War and subsequently increased visitation to
memorials and battle?elds along the Western Front by Canadians. According to a recent
study, over seven millions visitors (half of which are foreign nationals) generated ? €45
million (roughly $62.5 million per annum CDN) through the visitation of First World War
battle?elds and cemeteries in Northern France alone (Zimmet, 2011). These numbers are
expected to increase dramatically throughout the centennial celebrations of the First World
War (Vanneste and Foote, 2013; Zimmet, 2011).
Despite this resurgence, the management of these sites has been predominantly driven by
the idea that battle?eld visits should primarily be in the name of commemoration and
remembrance (Lloyd, 1998; Seaton, 2000; Slade, 2003). The priority placed upon
pilgrimages to battle?elds, however, fails to address what other types of motivations,
including entertainment, education and commemoration in addition to spiritual journeys,
can in?uence these visitors (Dunkley et al. 2011; Offenstadt 2010; Slade 2003). From this
expanded perspective, remembrance is simply one of many motivational components for
visitation (Baldwin and Sharpley, 2009; Gatewood and Cameron, 2004).
Some management agencies have been reluctant to address these new demands for fear
that a general lack of knowledge and/or new interpretative strategies might con?ict with the
original designation of the site, or worse, be considered disrespectful. For example, Hyde
and Harman (2011) and Cheal and Grif?n (2013) suggested that different visitor motives at
Gallipoli can increase generational tensions and cultural rifts, while traditional approaches
VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 207
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
fail to consider why other visitors such as international tourists, without personal, familial or
national ties to these con?icts, may want to visit these sites.
The celebrations surrounding the centenaries of the American Civil War (Cook, 2007),
the Battle of Little Bighorn (Buchholtz, 2005) and the South African War (also known
as the Boer War) (Grundlingh, 2004) were not without their challenges. Indeed, the
absence or privileging of certain narratives during these events was met with
resistance, ridicule and the absence of key stakeholders. This suggests that the
commemoration of battle?elds centenaries is in essence, dissonant. Yet, in each
situation with perhaps the exception of the South African War commemoration
(Grundlingh, 2004), the centenaries were also used to rectify this heritage dissonance
by including those previously unheard voices (i.e. indigenous voices) through
interpretation strategies, and in the case of the Battle of Little Bighorn, implementing
collaborative management approaches. In these particular instances, the narratives
and symbols behind these centennials suggested that Bodnar (1993) and Linenthal
(1993) have helped to heal some of the hurt from the past by addressing political issues
in the present. The centenary of the First World War and the battle of Vimy Ridge in 2017
provide a tremendous opportunity to address heritage dissonance and create
resonance through heritage in a new generation of visitors. These con?icting
perspectives and potential contributions are re-examined in the discussion and
conclusion.
The commemoration of the Canadian National Vimy Memorial
In recognition of its sacri?ces in the First World War, Belgium donated land to Canada at
three selected sites, while France donated land at ?ve sites including the 107 hectare Vimy
parcel (Hucker, 2007). The original agreement between France and Canada states “for
cession to Canada of the free use of a parcel land on Vimy Ridge for the erection of a
monument to the memory of the Canadian Soldiers who died on the ?eld of honor in France in
the course of the War 1914-1918” (5 December 1922, number E102661, cited in Hucker and
Smith, 2012, p. 21). The Canadian government in turn pledged itself “to lay out this land into a
park and to erect thereon a monument to the memory of the Canadian soldiers who died on the
?eld of honor in France during the war 1914-1918” (Hucker and Smith, 2012, p. 21).
Of the eight monuments anticipated, one was to be designated as a national monument
(Hucker, 2007). Championed by the Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie
King, and designed by Canadian sculptor and architect Walter Seymour Allward, the
construction of the national monument at Vimy was initiated in 1925 and completed in 1936
(Hucker, 2009; Hucker and Smith, 2012; Pietrzak, 2006). By 1932, the impressive character
of the monument under construction “prompted Canadian of?cials to suggest that the site
should remain under Canadian control and not be handed over to the Imperial War Graves
Commission as initially intended” (Hucker and Smith, 2012, p. 83). After four years, the
Canadian Department of National Defence “assumed responsibility for the site” (Hucker
and Smith, 2012, p. 83). The Canadian National Vimy Memorial Site was unveiled on July
26, 1936 by King Edward VIII and the French President Albert Lebrun before a throng of
6,000 Canadians and an estimated 50,000-100,000 French and British citizens (Hucker,
2009; Parks Canada, 2005).
The Canadian National Vimy Memorial is composed of the monument and the memorial
park. Located on Hill 145, the highest point on the ridge, the twin white pylons, one bearing
the maple leaves of Canada and the other the ?eurs-de-lys of France, symbolize the
sacri?ces of both countries in the First World War. At the top of the memorial are the ?gures
representing Peace and Justice; below them on the back of the pylons are the ?gures
representing Truth and Knowledge. Around these ?gures are the shields of Canada, Britain
and France (see Plate 2). A cloaked ?gure stands at the front, or east side, of the monument
overlooking the Douai Plain (Hucker, 2009).
PAGE 208 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Representing a young nation mourning her dead, the sorrowful ?gure has been called
“la pleureuse” or the bereft (see Plate 3). At the base of the pylons is a young dying
soldier, the Spirit of Sacri?ce, and the Torch Bearer. On each side of the staircase are
the male and female Mourner ?gures (Hucker, 2009). Below is a sarcophagus (or
empty tomb), draped in laurel branches and bearing a helmet and sword. Carved on
the walls of the monument are the names of 11,285 Canadian soldiers who were killed
Plate 2 The Memorial Figures
VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 209
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
in France and whose ?nal resting places were then unknown (Veterans Affairs Canada,
2011).
At the ground level, the visible remnants of craters, dugouts, trenches, shell holes and tunnels
continue to provide physical evidence of the war. The idea of preserving the trenches and
tunnels was provided by Major Unwin Simson, the Canadian engineer overseeing the
construction of the monument (Hucker and Smith, 2012). Located at the western edge of the
Plate 3 The Bereft
PAGE 210 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
property are the Givenchy Road Cemetery, where 111 Canadian soldiers are buried, and
Canadian Cemetery No. 2, where ? 3,000 graves, 693 belonging to Canadian soldiers, are
found (Parks Canada, 2005). “Other structures on the site include the administrative of?ce (the
former Allward house), information kiosks and washrooms” (Parks Canada, 2005, p. 7). The
opening of the Vimy Interpretive Centre in 1997 was an early attempt at informing visitors about
the signi?cance of Canada’s contribution to the Great War (Hucker and Smith, 2012). Nearby
is the memorial commemorating the Moroccan Division of the French Army which took, but
could not hold, the Ridge in May 1915 (Frémaux, 2004).
The maintenance of the Vimy Memorial became the responsibility of two federal agencies:
1. the Department of National Defence; and
2. the Canadian Battle?elds Memorial Commission (Dur?inger, 2007).
By 1938, a resident custodian, and caretaker, was hired to manage the site (Dur?inger,
2007). Although Vimy Ridge was once again occupied by German forces from 1940 to
1944, the site was preserved and maintained by the German army through the orders of
Rommel, Hitler and Goring, all of whom had visited the memorial (Dur?inger, 2007;
Winegard, 2007). By September 1, 1944, Vimy was once again in allied hands (Dur?inger,
2007). Since then, the site has had permanent Canadian staff, interpretive programs and
regularly scheduled commemorative events which served the visitation needs of veterans
and the post-war generations. On April 10, 1997, the national memorial was declared a
Canadian National Historic Site, one of only two located off Canadian soil (the other being
the Beaumont-Hamel Newfoundland Memorial also designated in 1997) and managed by
Veteran Affairs Canada with the assistance of Parks Canada (Gough, 2004, 2007, 2008;
Hucker, 2009). As with all national historic sites, the management of Vimy is guided by
commemorative integrity[1] statements “developed to assist managers or owners in
managing all the resources for which they have responsibility” (Parks Canada, 2005, p. 10).
The objectives of the National Historic Site Program are:

to foster knowledge and appreciation of Canada’s past through a national program of
historical commemoration;

to ensure the commemorative integrity of national historic sites by protecting and
presenting them for the bene?t, education and enjoyment of this and future
generations, in a manner that respects the signi?cant and irreplaceable legacy
represented by these places and their associated resources; and

to encourage and support owners of national historic sites in their efforts to ensure
commemorative integrity (Parks Canada, 2005, p. 2).
Recognizing the impact of tourism and the changing needs of these visitors, in 2000,
Veteran Affairs Canada sponsored the ?rst international gathering of battle?eld
conservation experts featuring archaeologists, conservation architects, military historians
and landscape architects[2]. A key outcome from this meeting was the Vimy Declaration for
the Management of Historic Battle?eld Terrain also known as the “Vimy Declaration”
(subsequently revised by Scho?eld in 2009). Along with the removal of the word “park”
which was believed to be closely associated with a wider de?nition of tourism in general,
the Vimy Declaration recommended zoning restrictions along certain areas like the
trenches and updating interpretation content, venues and approaches (Gough, 2008).
While not directly stated, what emerged from the Vimy Declaration is the on-going value
placed upon pilgrimages and the desire for commemoration, with little to no discussion of
the changing values or diversity of these visitors and the bene?ts of tourism(Winter, 2011a).
In 2001, acknowledging the need for remedial work on the monument, the Government of
Canada established the Canadian Battle?eld Memorial Restoration Project with a mandate
to restore the monument to its former state (Hucker, 2009). On April 9, 2007, a re-dedication
ceremony which also marked the 90th Anniversary of the battle was attended by Queen
Elizabeth II, Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada, Prime Minister Dominique de
VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 211
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Villepin of France and ?25,000 people from military personnel to musicians and 5,000 high
schools students (Hucker and Smith, 2012; Winegard, 2007).
With an annual budget of CAD$3.7 million, Veterans Affairs Canada operates the two
national historic sites in France (Vimy and Beaumont-Hamel) (Kelly and Walters, 2012). In
2011, the Canadian National Vimy Memorial and the Beaumont-Hamel Newfoundland
Memorial National Historic Sites received 700,000 and 150,000 visitors, respectively (Kelly
and Walters, 2012).
In 2012, the Canadian government announced that it would be investing $5 million to
support the construction of a permanent education and visitor center at the Canadian
National Vimy Memorial in France. Estimated at $20 million dollars, the construction of the
education and visitor center “is expected to be completed by April 2017, the 100th
anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge” (The Vimy Foundation, 2012a). Through
commemoration and education, “the new Education Centre will provide an interactive
environment where countless visitors from around the world can learn about the remarkable
story of Canada’s coming of age during the First World War” (The Vimy Foundation, 2012b).
How, or if the new center will address dissonant heritage from a Canadian context, or how
it will address other non-Canadian voices present at Vimy, including the British, French,
Moroccan and Germans, is still subject to debate.
Elsewhere in Europe, millions of dollars are being allocated for creating exhibitions and
galleries, digitizing archives, creating Web sites, offering podcasts, supporting the arts and
sending youth delegations to the Western Front for the centenary (Hopkins and Taylor, 2013).
France will also host several conferences and festivals in honour of the Great War throughout
the centennial. The “centenaire” Web site portal in France (Mission Centenaire, 2013, pp.
14-18) along with more than 100 First World War information panels equipped with quick
response (QR) codes for smartphones that have been installed throughout memorial sites
managed by the Commonwealth War Graves Commissions in the UK. In addition to
interpretative information about either the associated cemetery or memorial sites, when
“scanned with a smartphone, the QR code provides access to information including personal
stories of some of the casualties buried or commemorated at the memorial” (The Independent,
2013). The goal is to provide the public with information including personal narratives and
sacri?ces of the men and women associated with the First World War. These types of
interpretative technological innovations provide various opportunities to educate youth, on- and
off-site, about the events pertaining to the First World War, while actively engaging them
through technology.
Recognising this past–present dynamic also means embracing new ideas, and new
commemorative forms, forms that speak to the mores of contemporary society. Above all, it means
embracing the idea of living memorials, memorials that chart not only the war’s cost in lives but that
also explore consequences and legacies. The concept of a living memorial is by no means without
precedent, but ours is an age peculiarly well equipped to develop the idea in exciting and innovative
ways. For ours is the digital age, the era of the virtual world (Edwards, 2013).
Installation of these technologies could also provide an opportunity to include the
interpretative narratives communicated to visitors, and thus address more contentious
aspects of the First World War like internments and prisoner of war camps, the treatment of
captured deserters, the Armenian genocide and the conscription crisis in Canada.
Discussion
Unlike the Plains of AbrahamBattle?elds Park in Quebec and the Batoche National Historic Site
in Saskatchewan which carry sociocultural and imperial legacies often dividing certain
segments of Canadian society (McCullough, 2002; Osborne, 2002), the Canadian National
Vimy Memorial largely unites Canadians like very few battle?elds can. In cases where
dissonant heritage results in the omission of interpretative narratives, addressing these omitted
narratives and stories, argue Lemelin and colleagues (2013), is an essential component of
PAGE 212 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
healing. For instance, to many French-Canadians, the First World War represents conscription,
an event which culminated in the Easter riots of 1918 and the death of four individuals (Auger,
2008; Labayle, 2009; Léger, 2001). Sadly, the “opposition to conscription by French
Canadians” narrative continues to dominate most of French and English Canada’s perceptions
of the Great War back in Canada; very little is being said about all the French-Canadian men
who voluntarily enlisted, fought and died in the Great War. Another narrative that needs to be
acknowledged is the role of Aboriginal peoples during the First World War. For it is unfortunate
that the Great War represents a time where Native, Inuit and Métis people enlisted and fought
for a country that did not recognize themas citizens, and upon their return, often did not provide
compensation for Aboriginal veterans (Summerby, 2005; Winegard, 2012). Are these stories,
along with countless other narratives, not worthy of commemoration? As Edwards (2013)
re?ected in a recent podcast, “the time is right to complicate our traditions of commemoration
– not as a means to denigrate or dismiss the sacri?ces asked of – and given by – [Canadian]
soldiers, but in order to recast the prism through which these sacri?ces are refracted”, retold,
or in some instances, heard for the very ?rst time. Incorporating multiple narratives into
interpretation strategies, suggest Peters and Higgins-Desboilles (2012), is important, especially
because many of the descendants of these soldiers and civilian workers are now, and will visit,
these sites in the future. One can imagine the impact such an initiative would have had on the
Calling Home Ceremonies held during the Aboriginal Spiritual Journey, a delegation consisting
of 20 Aboriginal Veterans of the Second World War and 13 Aboriginal Youth, visiting various
battle?eld like Vimy throughout Europe in 2005 (Veterans Affairs, 2011). As Baldwin and
Sharpley (2009) also remind us, Vimy is not only signi?cant to Canadians, for young Muslim
students visiting various sites along the Western Front have also been quite moved by the
Moroccan memorial and their narratives associated to Vimy Ridge. Thus, if there is one lesson
that can be acquired from the management of such battle?elds as Gallipoli and Gettysburg,
and Little Bighorn, it is the need for recognition of all combatants, and the participation of all
their descendents in the commemoration of these events. For Canada, the centennial of the
Great War and the centenary of Vimy Ridge provide for a time to address this dissonance.
Changing motivations and disconnection provide opportunities to educate and enhance
visitor experiences along the Western Front and Vimy Ridge while addressing
multi-stakeholder perspectives. Through websites and QR codes, as well as mobile
applications and social media tools like Twitter and Facebook, First World War Centenary
is reaching a younger and more diverse audience. Along with providing information about
the sites, personal narratives and maps, codes of conduct and interpretative materials in
various languages can also be incorporated. Tourism from this perspective is not a threat;
instead, it is an opportunity to engage, inform and educate a newer and more varied
generation of First World War visitors and stakeholders.
Miles (2012) and Jansen-Verbeke and George (2012) have noted that certain heritage sites
associated with the First World War found along the Western Front in Europe have evolved:
“from war landscapes to memoryscapes, from memoryscapes to heritage landscapes and
from heritage landscapes to tourism landscapes” (Hartmann, 2013, pp. 11-12). The
transformation of these sites of pilgrimage into destinations now catering to tourists has
been criticized (Lloyd, 1998; Seaton, 2000; Slade, 2003). However, research by Cheal and
Grif?n (2013) and Hyde and Harman (2011) suggest that certain battle?elds like Gallipoli
have now become sites of secular pilgrimages as well as tourism destinations.
How these First World War tourism landscapes will “support and expand the existing war
tourism sector or [. . .] reorient the meaning of the battle?elds toward peace and
reconciliation” (Hartmann, 2013, pp. 11-12) during the centenary of the Great War
(2014-2018) is open to debate. The construction of a new interpretation center at Vimy, and
the introduction of multimedia interpretative programming, provides an opportunity to tell
the story from other Canadian perspectives like those of Aboriginal peoples and
French-Canadians, and from the perspectives of other combatants like the British, the
French, the Moroccans and the Germans. While some visitors might disapprove of the
VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 213
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
inclusion of these narratives, the popularity of this site allows for a myriad of interpretation
strategies to be used (Butler and Suntikul, 2013). In this case, Vimy has the opportunity to
become a place where the histories of all the combatants are recognized, honored and
commemorated in ways that honor their defendant’s social memories of the Great War,
much like battle?elds of Gettysburgh (Allred, 1996; Chronis, 2005), Gallipoli (Cheal and
Grif?n, 2013; Hyde and Harman, 2011) and Little Bighorn (Buchholtz, 2012; Lemelin et al.,
2013) have. This is accomplished by acknowledging past omissions, incorporating the
formerly excluded and recognizing the memory of all combatants through the management
and interpretation of these battle?eld sites.
Conclusion
The management of the Canadian National Vimy Memorial, fromits completion in 1936 and the
preservation of the ridge “scars and all”, was a novel approach to battle?eld tourism “with no
known European precedent since classical times when the Athenians had preserved the
battle?eld at Marathon” (Hucker and Smith, 2012, p. 77). Today, the Canadian National Vimy
Memorial is the envy of nations like Australia (Kelly and Walters, 2012). Thus, it is not unfounded
when we say that few national historic sites in Canada or Europe can lay claim to
commemorating a nation-de?ning moment “sancti?ed by the blood of its military dead”
(Hucker, 2009, p. 90). Even fewer can state that they have been championed by a Prime
Minister (Mackenzie King), designed by an architectural genius (Walter Seymour Allward),
inaugurated by a King (Edward VIII), visited by a dictator (Adolf Hitler) and then re-dedicated
by a Queen (Elizabeth II). Despite its historical signi?cance, evolving management approaches
and popularity as a destination along the Western Front, the Canadian National Vimy Memorial
has largely been excluded fromdiscussions pertaining to battle?eld tourism. The consequence
of which has been that emerging tourismresearch aimed at addressing dissonant heritage has
been overlooked in the development of new management practices of the site. For tourism
researchers to capitalize on the projected tourism opportunities arising from the centennial, we
must be willing to challenge existing interpretive strategies and provide solutions to the
question of how we engage a new generation of visitors (for example, Canadians of Chinese
and Japanese ancestry, Francophone Canadians, Aboriginal peoples – Indian or First Nations,
Métis and Inuit and the descendants of British, French, Moroccan and Germany military
personnel), while addressing the omission of their collective social memories of the Great War
from interpretative narratives. Thus, we must create narratives that have the potential to
resonate with these visitors.
As important as the concept of dissonant heritage has been for understanding battle?eld
tourism and the management of Vimy Ridge, the positive attributes of healing and
resonance to the centenary of the Great War and the upcoming centenary of Vimy Ridge
should not be overlooked. Considering the shifting needs of a new generation of visitors to
Vimy and their relative distance from the con?ict era, we suggest that an interdisciplinary
research approach featuring tourism, leisure, psychology and sociology can help us to
understand the increasing complexity within which social memories are created and
re-recreated by various generations and to ensure that battle?eld tourism continues within
an environment of remembrance, knowledge and respect for generations to come.
Notes
1. “A site possesses commemorative integrity when the resources that symbolize or represent its
importance are not impaired or under threat, when the reasons for its signi?cance are effectively
communicated to the public and when the heritage value of the place is respected” (McCullough,
2002, p. 182).
2. No tourism expert is listed in the list of attendees, despite the fact that Winter (2011b) notes “tourism
is an important aspect of battle?eld visitation” (p. 3).
PAGE 214 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
References
Mission Centenaire. (2013), “La mission du centenaire”, available at: http://centenaire.org/fr (accessed
25 November 2013).
Allred, R. (1996), “Catharsis, revision, and re-enactment: negotiating the meaning of the American Civil
War”, Journal of American Culture, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 1-13.
Ashworth, G.J. (2012), “Do tourists destroy the heritage they have come to experience?”, in
Singh, T.V. (Ed), Critical Debates In Tourism, Channel View Publications, Bristol, pp. 278-286.
Ashworth, G.J., Graham, B. and Tunbridge, J.E. (2007), Pluralising Pasts: Heritage, Identity and Place
in Multicultural Societies, Pluto, London.
Auger, M.F. (2008), “On the brink of civil war: the Canadian government and the suppression of the
1918 Quebec Easter Riots”, The Canadian Historical Review, Vol. 89 No. 4, pp. 503-540.
Baldwin, F. and Sharpley, R. (2009), “Battle?eld tourism: bringing organised violence back to life”, in
Sharpley, R. and Stone, P.R. (Eds), The Darker Side of Travel, Channel View Publications, Buffalo,
pp. 186-206.
Bodnar, J. (1993), Remaking America: Public Memory, Commemoration, and Patriotismin the Twentieth
Century, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Boyden, J. (2006), Three Day Road, Penguin Books, Toronto.
Brown, E. and Cook, T. (2011), “The 1936 vimy pilgrimage”, Canadian Military History, Vol. 20 No. 2,
pp. 37-54.
Buchholtz, D. (2005), “Cultural politics or critical public history? Battling on the Little Bighorn”, Journal
of Tourism and Cultural Change, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 18-35.
Buchholtz, D. (2012), “The Battle of the Greasy Grass/Little Bighorn: Custer’s Last Stand in memory”,
History and Popular Culture, Routledge,New York, NY.
Butler, R. and Suntikul, W. (Eds) (2013), Tourism and War, Routledge, NY.
Cheal, F. and Grif?n, T. (2013), “Pilgrims and patriots: Australian tourist experience at Gallipoli”,
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 227-241.
Chronis, A. (2005), “Co-constructing heritage at the Gettysburg storyscape”, Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 386-406.
Cook, R.J. (2007), Troubled Commemoration: The American Civil War Centennial, 1961-1965, LA State
University Press, Baton Rouge, LA.
Dunkley, R., Morgan, N. and Westwood, S. (2011), “Visiting the trenches: exploring meanings and
motivations in battle?eld tourism”, Tourism Management, Vol. 32 No. 4 pp. 860-868.
Dur?nger, S. (2007), “Safeguarding sanctity: Canada and the Canadian National Vimy Memorial during
the Second World War”, in Hayes, G., Iarocci, A. and Betchhold, M. (Eds), Vimy Ridge: A Canadian
Reassessment, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Waterloo, ON, pp. 291-305.
Eagles, P. and McCool, S.F. (2002), “Tourism in national parks and protected areas”, Planning and
Management, CABI Publishing, Wallingford.
Edwards, S. (2013), “Viewpoint: how should we remember a war?”, Four Thought. BBC Radio 4.
6 November 2013, available at: www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24610481 (accessed 1 December
2013).
Frémaux, J., (2004), “Les contingents impériaux au cœur de la guerre”, Histoire économie et société,
Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 215-233.
Gatewood, J.B. and Cameron, C.M. (2004), “Battle?eld pilgrims at Gettysburg National Military Park”,
Ethnology, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 193-216.
Goliard, F. (2010), “Valorisation du patrimoine et renforcement du lien social: Le tourisme de memoire
en France”, in Breton, J.M. (Ed), Patrimoine, tourisme, environnement et développement durable, La
maison d’édition de Karthala, Paris, pp. 107-124.
Gordon, B.M. (1998), “Warfare and tourism: Paris in World War II”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 616-638.
Gough, P. (2004), “Sites in the imagination: the Beaumont Hamel Newfoundland memorial on the
Somme”, Cultural Geographies, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 235-258.
VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 215
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Gough, P. (2007), “Contested memories: contested site: Newfoundland and its unique heritage on the
Western Front”, The Round Table: The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs: Special issue:
Re-membrance and Commemoration in Commonwealth States, Vol. 96 No. 393, pp. 693-705.
Gough, P. (2008), “Commemoration of war”, in Graham, B. and Howard, P. (Eds), The Ashgate
Research Companion to Heritage and Identity, Ashgate, Burlington, VT, pp. 215-230.
Grundlingh, A. (2004), “Refraining remembrance: the politics of the centenary commemoration of the
South African War of 1899-1902”, Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 359-375.
Hartmann, R. (2013), “Dark tourism, thanatourism, and dissonance in heritage tourism management:
new directions in contemporary tourism research”, Journal of Heritage Tourism, Vol. 9 No. 2
Hayes, G., Larocci, A. and Betchhold, M. (Eds). (2007), Vimy Ridge: A Canadian Reassessment, Wilfrid
Laurier University Press, Waterloo, ON.
Hertzog, A. (2012), “Tourisme de mémoire et imaginaire touristique des champs de bataille”, available
at: www.viatourismreview.net/Article6.php (accessed 16 March 2012).
Hopkins, N. and Norton-Taylor, R. (2013), “Kickabout that captured futility of First World War to be
replayed for centenary”, The Guardian, Friday 8 February 2013, available at: www.guardian.co.uk/
world/2013/feb/08/?rst-world-war-kickabout-replayed-centenary (accessed 22 February 2013).
Hucker, J. (2007), “After the agony in stony places: the meaning and signi?cance of the Vimy
monument”, in Hayes, G. and Iarocci, A. and Bechthold, M. (Eds), Vimy Ridge: A Canadian
Reassessment, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON, pp. 279-290.
Hucker, J. (2009), “Battle and burial recapturing the cultural meaning of Canada’s national memorial
on Vimy Ridge”, The Public Historian, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 89-109.
Hucker, J. and Smith, J. (2012), Vimy: Canada’s Memorial to a Generation, Sanderling Press, Ottawa.
Hyde, K.F. and Harman, S. (2011), “Motives for a secular pilgrimage to the Gallipoli battle?elds”,
Tourism Management, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 1343-1351.
Independent. (2013), “Smartphone data for war memorials”, available at: www.independent.ie/world-
news/europe/smartphone-data-for-war-memorials-29081117.html (accessed 22 February 2013).
Inglis, K.S. (1993), “Entombing unknown soldiers: from London and Paris to Baghdad”, History and
Memory, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 7-31.
Inglis, K.S. (2005), Sacred Places: War Memorials in the Australian Landscape, The Miegunyah Press,
Melbourne.
Jansen-Verbeke, M. and George, W. (2012), “Re?ections on the Great War Centenary: from warscapes
to memoryscapes in 100 years”, in Butler, R. and Suntikul, W. (Eds), War and Tourism: A Complex
Relationship, Routledge, London, pp. 273-287.
Kelly, P. and Walters, P. (2012), “Disquiet for the Western Front over plans honouring centenary of
Anzac”, The Australian, July 07, 2012, available at: www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/disquiet-
for-the-western-front-over-plans-honouring-centenary-of-anzac/story-fn59niix-1226419219995 (accessed
12 November 2012).
Labayle, E. (2009), “La bataille de Vimy: De l’histoire a` la mémoire”, Bulletin d’histoire politique, Vol. 17
No. 2, available at: www.bulletinhistoirepolitique.org/le-bulletin/numeros-precedents/volume-17-
numero-2/la-bataille-de-vimy-de-l%E2%80%99histoire-a-la-memoire/ (accessed 12 November 2102).
Laqueur, T. (1994), “Memory and naming in the Great War”, in Gillis, J (Ed), Commemorations: The
Politics of National Identity, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 150-167.
Léger, C.E. (2001), Le bataillon acadien de la Première guerre mondiale, C.E. Léger, Moncton.
Lemelin, R.H., Powys Whyte, K., Johansen, K., Higgins Desbiolles, F., Wilson, C. and Hemming, S.
(2013), “Con?icts, battle?elds, indigenous peoples and tourism: addressing dissonant heritage in
warfare tourism in Australia and North America in the 21st century”, International Journal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 257-271.
Linenthal, E.T. (1993), Sacred Ground: Americans and Their Battle?elds, (2nd ed), University of Illinois
Press; Champaign IL.
Lloyd, D. (1998), Battle?eld Tourism: Pilgrimage and the Commemoration of the Great War in Britain,
Australia and Canada, Berg, NY, pp. 1919-1939.
PAGE 216 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
McCullough, A. (2002), “Parks Canada and the 1885 rebellion/uprising/resistance”, Prairie Forum,
Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 161-198.
Miles, S. (2012), “War memorials on the Western front: British tourists and the embodiment of memory”,
in Kagermeier, A. and Saarinen, J. (Eds), Transforming and Managing Destinations: Tourism and
Leisure in a Time of Global Change and Risk, University of Trier Press, Trier, pp. 179-186.
Offenstadt, N. (2010), 14-18 Aujourd’hui: La grande guerre dans la France contemporaine, Odine
Jacob, Paris.
Osborne, B.S. (2002), “Corporeal politics and the body politic: the re-presentation of Louis Riel in
Canadian identity”, International Journal of Heritage Studies, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 303-322.
O’Sullivan, J. (2012), “Hungary and the Cold War”, Hungarian Review, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 57-64.
Parks Canada (2005), “Vimy Ridge national historic site of Canada”, Commemorative Integrity
Statement, October 2005, Government report.
Passchendaele (2008), Movie directed by Paul Gross, 114 min.
Pépin, C. (2012), “1914-1918: la guerre des Canadiens-Français”, Revue historique des armées,
available at: http://rha.revues.org/index7426.html (accessed 11 February 2013).
Peters, A. and Higgins-Desboile, F. (2012), “De-marginalising tourism research: indigenous
Australians as Tourists”, Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 1-9.
Pietrzak, K. (2006), “Le mémorial de vimy par walter seymour allward (1925-1936) ou la sculpture au
service de la commémoration”, Livraisons d’histoire de l’architecture, Vol. 12 No. 12, pp. 101-110.
Scates, B. (2006), Return to Gallipoli: Walking the Battle?elds of the Great War, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Scho?eld, J. (2009), Vimy Declarationfor theManagement of HistoricBattle?eldTerrain, unpublishedreport,
available at: http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/memorials/overseas/?rst-world-war/
france/vimy/declaration (accessed 6 June 2014).
Schweizer, P. (2000), The Fall Of The Berlin Wall: Reassessing the Cases and Consequences of the End
Of the Cold War, Hoover Institution Press, Stanford, CA.
Seaton, A.V. (2000), “Another weekend away looking for dead bodies’: battle?eld tourism on the
Somme and in Flanders”: Battle?eld tourism on the Somme and in Flanders, Tourism Recreation
Research, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 63-77.
Seaton, T. (2009), “Purposeful otherness: approaches to the management of thanatourism”, in
Sharpley, R. and Stone, P. (Eds), The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism,
Channel View Publications, Toronto, pp. 75-108.
Slade, P. (2003), “Gallipoli thanatourism: the Meaning of ANZAC”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 30
No. 4, pp. 779-794.
Smith, V.L. (1996), “War and its tourist attractions”, in Pizam, A. and Mansfeld, Y. (Eds), Tourism, Crime
and International Security Issues, John Wiley and Sons, NY, New York, NY, pp. 247-264.
Stone, P. (2006), “A dark tourism spectrum: towards a typology of death and macabre related tourist
sites, attractions and exhibitions”, TOURISM: An Interdisciplinary International Journal, Vol. 54 No. 2,
pp. 145-160.
Summerby, J. (2005), Native Soldiers – Foreign Battle?elds, Veterans Affairs Canada, Ottawa Ontario.
The Vimy Foundation/La fondation Vimy (2012a), Government of Canada Invests in Permanent Visitor
Centre at Canadian National Vimy Memorial. www.vimyfoundation.ca/node/311 (accessed 6 June
2014).
The Vimy Foundation/La fondation Vimy (2012b), “Vimy Foundation Commends Federal Budget
Announcement for New Education Centre.” www.vimyfoundation.ca/node/305 (accessed 6 June 2014).
Tomljenovic, R. and Faulkner, B. (2000), “Tourism and world peace: a conundrum for the 21st century,”
in Faulkner, B., Moscardo, G. and Laws, E. (Eds), Tourism In The 21st Century, Continuum, London,
pp. 18-33.
Tunbridge, J.E. and Ashworth, G.J. (1996), Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past As A
Resource In Con?ict, Wiley, NY.
Urquhart, J. (2003), The Stone Carvers, Penguin Books, Toronto.
VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 217
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)
Vanneste, D. and Foote, K. (2013), “War, heritage, tourism, and the centenary of the Great War in Flanders
and Belgium”, in Butler, R. and Suntikul, W (Eds), Tourism and War, Routledge, NY, pp. 254-272.
Venter, D. (2011), “Battle?eld tourism in the South African context”, African Journal of Hospitality,
Tourism and Leisure, Vol. 1 No. 3.
Veterans Affairs Canada (2011), First Nations, Metis and Inuit Veterans Journey to Battle?elds of
Europe, Ottawa, Canada, Government Report.
Weaver, D.B. (2000), “The exploratory war-distorted destination life cycle”, The International Journal of
Tourism Research, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 151-161.
Werdler, K. (2012), “An introduction to dark tourism in Africa: contested heritage or opportunity for a
new proposition?”, Mawazo: The Journal of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Makerere
University, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 103-113.
Wight, A.C. (2006), “Philosophical and methodological praxes in dark tourism: controversy, contention
and the evolving paradigm”, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 119-129.
Winegard, T.C. (2007), “Here at Vimy: a retrospective – the 90th anniversary of the battle of Vimy
Ridge”, Canadian Military Journal, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 83-85.
Winegard, T.C. (2012), For King and Kanata: Canadian Indians and the First World War, University of
Manitoba Press, Winnipeg, MB.
Winter, C. (2006), Remembering War: The Great War Between Memory and History in the Twentieth
Century, Yale University Press, New Haven.
Winter, C. (2009), “Tourism, social memory and the great war”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 36
No. 4, pp. 607-626.
Winter, C. (2011a), “Battle?eld tourism and Australian Nationalism”, in Frew, E. and White, L. (Eds),
Tourism and National Identities: An International Perspective, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 176-189.
Winter, C. (2011b), “Visitors on the Somme: a study at Thiepval – 2011”, The Business School Working
Paper Series: 007 – 2011, University of Ballarat, Australia (20 pages).
Winter, J.M. (1995), Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning: The Great War in European Cultural History,
Cambridge University Press, NY.
Zimmet, J. (2011), “Commémorer la grande guerre (2014-2020): propositions pour un centenaire
international”, Government report, Rapport au Président de la République Ministère de la défense et
des anciens combattants.
Further reading
Daily Mail Reporter (2012), “Three topless women and the twin towers: Canadians baf?ed by picture of First
World War memorial on their new $20 dollar bill”, May 9, 2012, available at: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/
article-2141825/Canadas-new-20-dollar-naked-women-Twin-Towers-it.html#ixzz2GH2DX0Zc (accessed 4
November 2012).
Foote, K. (2009), “Heritage tourism, the geography of memory, and the politics of place in Southeastern
Colorado, in Hartmann, R (Ed),” The Southeast Colorado Heritage Tourism Project Report, Washington
Park Media, Denver, CO, pp. 37-50.
Guoqi, X. (2011), Strangers On The Western Front: Chinese Workers In The Great War, Harvard,
University, Cambridge, USA.
Singha, R. (2011), “The recruiter’s eye on ‘The Primitive: To France – and back – in the Indian Labour Corps,
1917-18”, in Kitchen, J.E., Miller, A. and Rowe, L. (Eds), Other Combattans, Other Fronts: Competing
Histories of the First World War, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle, UK, pp. 199-224.
Voice of America. (2010), “China’s WW I Effort Draws New Attention”, available at www.voanews.
com/content/chinas-world-war-one-effort-draws-new-attention-103623809/126459.html (accessed 12
November 2012).
Corresponding author
Raynald H. Lemelin can be contacted at: [email protected]
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
PAGE 218 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 8 NO. 2 2014
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
4

2
4

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
6

(
P
T
)

doc_590096109.pdf