See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/354276925

Authenticity in Tourism

Chapter · August 2021

CITATIONS READS

0 1,334

1 author:

Fuat Atasoy
Ankara University
15 PUBLICATIONS 13 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Fuat Atasoy on 23 October 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 1

AUTHENTICITY IN TOURISM
Fuat ATASOY*
Introduction
Cultural tourism involves visiting historical and archeological
sites, participating in the festivals of local communities, observing
traditional dances and rituals, and the transaction of local and
traditional goods (Okuyucu & Somuncu, 2012: 38). Heritage, on the
other hand, is defined as a concept that involves concrete objects such
as natural and cultural environments, sceneries, historical places, sites
and built environments, collections, and abstract objects such as past
and present cultural practices, knowledge, and life experiences
(McKercher & Cros, 2002: 7). Yale (1991: 21) defines heritage
tourism as “the type of tourism that is focused on what is inherited.”
Thus, for Yale (1991), what is inherited can have a wide array of
meanings to involve historical buildings, artworks, and beautiful
sceneries. The definition of heritage tourism when analyzed in the
light of these constituents as a part of cultural tourism, involves
religion, language, costume, cuisine, tradition, music, dance, folklore,
archeological artifacts, historical buildings and locations, artworks as
sociocultural heritage, and landscape, flora, fauna, and soil as natural
heritage (Özdemir, 2011: 131). In addition, heritage tourism consists
of walking among artifacts in an open space touristic location to
observe and experience these works. Thus, the notion of authenticity
gained importance in heritage tourism (Chhabra, 2010: 806).
Definition of Authenticity
According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines authentic and
authenticity as follows: 1) as true to reality and so worthy of
acceptance or belief; 2) being true to the original where essential
properties are replicable; 3) made in the same way as the original; 4)

*Fuat Atasoy (PhD), Department of Tourism & Hotel Management,

Vocational School of Beypazarı, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
Email: [email protected] & [email protected].
Orcid:0000000323362234
 2

not a counterfeit or replica: real, genuine; 5) as fitting one’s

personality, spirit, or character, sincere; 6) official; 7) real or genuine:
not copied or fictitious; 8) true and accurate; 9) exactly resembling the
original (www.merriam-webster.com, 2019).
Etymologically, the word authenticity is derived from the Greek
word “authentes” which has two meanings. One of these meanings is
“a person who has authority,” and the other is “hand crafted by
someone, handmade.” In the context of arts, it with reference to the
etymological root denoting “crafted by someone,” it refers to being
clearly attributed to a specific creator or author, and the uniqueness of
a work of art (Bendix, 1997:14-15). McKercher and Cros (2002: 73)
state that the word authenticity has etymologically Greco-Roman
roots, and was historically used to mean true, sincere, or original. They
also note the use of the word in 1849 to mean “self-sufficient,
admirable, accepted, proven, credible and authoritative.” According
to Cohen (1988: 375), authenticity emphasizes a quality of objects
belonging to premodern life and cultures that do not have the influence
of Western civilization for curators and ethnographers, as well as
being made from natural materials and crafted by hand. For Trilling
(1972: 93), the word authenticity reflects testing a work’s value as it
is exhibited in places such as museums and whether it intrinsically has
that value or deserves such appreciation. Cole (2007: 944), on the
other hand, defines authenticity as a concept that is used to refer to the
“primitive other” as used in contrast with Western modernity.
According to Wang (2000: 10), the mass tourism which was
mocked by Daniel J. Boorstin's attempt (1964) as part of the
understanding of “pseudo-events” was the initial point of contact
between tourism and modern society. In his work, Boorstin (1961,
1964, 1992) explicates that the falsity of experiences and the presence
of tourists in mass tourism sterilizes and commodifies cultures.
According to Boorstin (1961, 1964), tourists, by demanding rare
products, images, replicas, and staged attractions that have been
commodified, they desire what is authentic, which in turn makes the
concept of authenticity problematic. Boorstin (1961, 1964) states that
factitious structures that are built to impress audiences have become
the reality for American consumers. The public consumes such fake
events conjured in these simulated worlds in an entranced, non-critical
manner. As such replicated worlds become more and more familiar
 3

and become public knowledge, authenticity and factuality disappear.

For Boorstin (1964), tourists are rarely interested in the authentic side
of a foreign culture. Instead of what is authentic, they prefer a reality
that matches their imagination. For instance, an American tourist
experiencing Japan will conceive of a Japanese woman in the role of
a Geisha in their imagination, and it is almost impossible for the tourist
to imagine otherwise (Pretes, 1995: 2-3; Urry, 2002: 7; Leigh, Peters
& Shelton, 2006: 481; Reisinger & Steiner, 2006: 67)
Modern societies believe that authenticity belongs to premodern
times, other cultures, and simpler lifestyles where human beings could
be more at ease with themselves; in other words, that authenticity
belongs elsewhere. When individuals get caught in the daily hassle of
their lives, they are reminded of such sincerity and authenticity that
they believe to be elsewhere. For MacCannell (1999), it is precisely at
this point that travel arises as a collective endeavor that helps
overcome such discontinuity of modernity. Modern society
institutionalizes authentic attractions, thus introducing them into
modern life. When authentic values are ritualistically accepted as
objects with ultimate value, tourists begin to gather around such
attractions (MacCannell, 1999: 3, 13, 14, 160).
MacCannell (1973: 593-595) argues that, with reference to Everett
C. Hughes (1959) who likened the tourist to the “pilgrim,” tourists are
incapable of detecting authenticity in modern social life, and so they
turn into modern pilgrims who are in search of an authentic experience
but are constantly disappointed in their search. According to
MacCannell (1973), the journey of a pilgrim and that of a tourist have
the exact same motivations. This similarity is not apparent in the sense
of the organization of the journey, but also of the motivation that
drives the individual to take the journey. They both aim to experience
the authentic. Cohen (1979a: 188) disagrees with MacCannell (1973)
on the pilgrim metaphor. The first reason for this is because a pilgrim
always undertakes the journey to the spiritual land of his own religion,
but this land can be far beyond his own region or society. Thus, the
motivation is spiritual. The tourist, on the other hand, is motivated by
the pure eccentricity and novelty of other sceneries, lifestyles,
cultures. The second reason is that the tourist, by focusing o n the
experience, does not convert his lifestyle into those who he observes,
 4

and even rejects their authentic ways of living. In short, the tourist is
conscious of his “otherness” to the life of the “other.”
MacCannell’s (1973, 1976) work on tourist motivation and
authenticity remains greatly influential in tourism literature as a
scholar who first brought together tourism and sociology of modernity
(Jamal & Hill, 2002: 77; Wang, 2000: 10). While the original
conception of the notion of authenticity as outlined by Heidegger is
accepted in some tourism research, MacCannell’s front and back
area/stage approach adopted from Goffman’s stage theory became
more prominent (Pearce & Moscardo, 1986: 121-123). MacCannell
(1973: 589; 1999: 4) extended his work on authenticity to involve the
notions of front and back area of Erving Goffman (1959) and
advanced his critique of the modern social structure. In Table 1, the
front and back areas MacCannell (1973) outlines with reference to
Goffman (1959) are categorized:

Table 1. MacCannell’s Six Steps of Staged Authenticity

Stage 1 Goffman’s front stage: the stage tourists try to penetrate, overcome,
Stage 2 Front stage that is decorated to resemble or have the atmosphere of
ways. It reminds of the activities of the backstage. E.g. sausages hang
Stage 3 Front stage designed to look like the backstage. For television viewe
man who walked on the moon…
Stage 4 A backstage that is open to outsiders. Refers to a backstage with
official accounts of confidential diplomatic discussions…
Stage 5 The altered or refined backstage where tourists are allowed to glimp
when a visitor sees the cleaned and tidy version of one’s kitchen…
Stage 6 Goffman’s backstage. This is the social area that motivates touri
empirical actions in touristic areas are basically limited to areas that
and the areas that tourists are allowed to observe.

Reference: MacCannell (1973: 598).

MacCannell suggests that the front and back areas in tourist
environments ought to be considered as two ends of a process. Part of
the front stage is decorated like the backstage, and the backstage is
 5

constructed to attract those who are not interested in the environment

(MacCannell, 1973: 602). In staged authenticity, an environment is
designed where the tourist thinks he is free to roam yet he is constantly
straying further from the realities of the culture without his knowledge
(Pretes, 1995: 3). These structured social areas are closely related to
tourist behavior. The disruptions caused by modern life lead to a
fascination with the real lives of others. The desire to move beyond
the scenery and discover authenticity and sincerity enlivens the
modern individual’s free time. The transitory scenes and signs that are
the output of consumer culture draw attention to the artificiality and
superficiality of life. In turn, human beings demand the real and the
reality. Thus, the entertainment sector takes advantage of all this by
creating stage authenticity to satisfy this desire (Rojek, 1995: 124). As
seen in Table 1, the individual’s entry into touristic areas can be
designed as a social event that starts from the front areas and moves
into the back stages as a continuum. Observers can have the
opportunity to penetrate institutions that are normally closed to
outsiders or isolated individuals (such as banks, newsrooms, fire
stations, etc.) by forming social groups and witness the inner workings
of such environments. An example of this is when schoolchildren visit
a bank as part of a school trip and observing safes where millions of
dollars kept. Entering areas that are difficult to access causes
individuals to feel an excitement that they have not previously
experienced (MacCannell, 1973: 595-597).
“The touristic experience that comes out of the tourist setting is
based on authenticity, but this experience is superficial. From an
ethical point of view, it is less qualified than a pure experience. A mere
experience may be mystified, but a touristic experience is always
mystified, and the lie contained in the touristic experience, moreover,
presents itself as a truthful revelation” (MacCannell, 1973: 599). With
these words, MacCannell predicates that mass tourism is an area that
fully encloses and entraps the tourists, and that the modern tourist is
cursed with the inauthentic (Cohen, 1988: 373). MacCannell (1973) is
doubtful about the tourists’ capacity to truly witness the authenticity
in a foreign culture which mostly presents quasi experiences. This is
due to the fact that local communities in places that are experiencing
great flows of mass tourism create areas that are called the backstage
in order to protect themselves and their culture through isolation. In
 6

these back stage areas, local communities put on restricted shows for
tourists to witness (Reisinger & Steiner, 2006: 68). Staged authenticity
involves festivals, rituals, events, shows, and other performances that
appear authentic but are artificially put together or those that are
staged out of context for the viewing of tourists, and such
performances are mostly defined as authentic or inauthentic by
comparing them with how the locals act (Sharpley, 2006: 224;
Chhabra, Healy & Sills, 2003: 704). As a general rule, artificial back
stages rest on different preconditions such as secrecy, personalized
experience and limited access (Daugstad & Kirchengast, 2013: 187).
These areas can be artificially created to shape the perspective of
tourists towards attaining the confidence of the local culture, thus
preventing instances of trespassing. Staged authenticity arises from
the image created by the locals to reduce, limit, and control the effects
of the tourist’s all-encompassing gaze and from the socio-spatial
relations structured around the visitors’ attempts to consume places
(Crawshaw & Urry, 1997: 178).
While the situation for the tourists is as outlined above, the local
communities can vary in manners of exhibiting their cultures. The
local residents in a popular destination become so accustomed to
tourists visiting that place that they become part of the daily routine
for them and are unbothered by the existence of tourists. The tourists
witness the ordinary life in such places, but most pay no attention to
it. In fact, it is not known and open to question who is actually
observing whom in a tourist environment, and who trying to respond
to whom (MacCannell, 1973: 601). The aim of the host community is
not only to present their culture, traditions, crafts and arts, but also to
preserve and hand down these values to the next generations. The
hosting community is usually aware of the fact that tourists have
unrealistic expectations or are interested in only one part of the local
culture and are incapable of comprehending the true value of the local
culture. As a result of this, they deem some of their rituals too sacred
to share with foreigners who cannot appreciate them. Thus, staged
authenticity is comprised of the expectations of both the host
community and the tourists (Hashimito, 2014: 227).
Cohen (1979b: 26) criticizes MacCannell (1973) for ignoring the
tourists’ impressions on the stage and labeling them all as individuals
in search of authenticity. To solve this, Cohen reduced the six steps
 7

mapped out by MacCannell to two and comprised a table with four

cells that resembles Goffman’s front and back areas.
Table 2: Types of Tourist Experiences
The Scene Impression of the Tourist

Nature of Scene Reality Wh

Reality A) Authentic C) Suspecte

authenticity qu

What is staged B) Staged authentic D) Devised to

(secret tourist area) (open tour

Reference: Cohen (1979b: 26).

According to Table 2, cell A is the situation that is considered
authentic both objectively and by the tourists. Cell B is the staged
authenticity as mentioned by MacCannell where tourism
establishment creates the stage. The tourist is not aware of the staged
authenticity and considers her experiences to be actual. Cell C is the
opposite of cell B. The scene is objectively real. Yet, drawing from
previous experiences, the tourist suspects being tricked. In cell D, in
contrast with cell B, an openly exhibited staged authenticity is created.
In other words, the tourist is aware that the performance is artificially
generated. Cohen’s criticism of MacCannell is regarding cells C and
D. In C and D, as opposed to what MacCannell suggests, tourists are
partly or fully aware that the events are manipulated. Thus, it would
be untrue to argue that all tourists are searching for authenticity
(Cohen, 1979b: 27). Cohen’s (1988) criticism of pseudo-events and
staged authenticity also extends to the fact that the concept of
authenticity in this context does not mean historically accurate, and
traditional is not the same as true. Gottlieb, on the other hand, rejects
MacCannell (1976) and Cohen’s (1979) idea of touristic experience
as depending on meaningless, superficial, or worse, as false
cognizance. Instead, he argues that tourists’ experiences are real,
valuable, and satisfactory. Gottlieb offers a typology based tourists’
 8

own views instead of Cohen’s (1979) typology of degree of

authenticity (Gottlieb, 1982: 167).
A Motivational Factor in Tourism and Search for
Authenticity: Alienation
Defined as being a thinking consciousness, “spirit-Geist” is a
cause of alienation in Hegel’s “Phenomenology of Spirit.” According
to Hegel, the being who is searching for its own self-consciousness
constantly contemplates and scrutinizes itself. The process is complete
when Spirit is liberated through self-discovery. The individual
distinguishes itself from what is familiar, isolating and alienating itself
(Hegel, 2004: 316). Heavily influenced by Hegel’s ideas on the Spirit,
yet suggesting that this concept cannot be considered as a
phenomenon pertaining only to consciousness, Marx also explains this
concept from social and philosophical perspectives, and defines
alienation as a factor contributing to the commodification of the self
in capitalist societies with relation to the workers’ production of
surplus value that adds to the accumulation of capital. According to
Marx’s concept of “alienated labor,” the more value a worker creates
the poorer she becomes, and the more commodities she produces, the
more she is commodified. Commodity as an element of labor becomes
alienated to the worker. As the amount of goods worker creates
increases, the worker loses her own value and esteem, becomes
misshapen, loses control, and even turns barbaric. According to Marx,
slavery to commodities results in alienation and destitute (Marx, 2003:
62-64). In modern societies, the crisis caused by alienation and social
disorder is one of the motivating factors for being involved in touristic
activities. The tourists who wish to escape this distressful and
repressive existence by means of travel and tourism are considered to
be in search of meaning and authenticity (Sharpley, 2006: 35).
According to MacCannell (1999: 154), tourism is a phenomenon
which refers to the experiences the modern individual has to live
through as a result of post-industrial alienation. MacCannell (1976,
1999) expands upon the concept of differentiation in tourism theory
with the use of a Marxist alienation concept. Differentiation is the
sense of liberty in a modern society, and the root of the alternative;
and at the same time, it is the main point of basis for some of the most
apparent characteristics of modern life such as contradictions, strife,
 9

violence, disintegration, and discontinuity. Differentiation results in

alienation which is the search and longing for authenticity. In this
sense, tourism becomes one of the rituals to overcome the
contradicting powers (discontinuity etc.) in a modern society
(MacCannell, 1999: 11-13). At the point of alienation which is
apparent in the meaning of daily life, the longing and nostalgia for lost
traditions drives individuals to search for the authentic experience in
the “other” (Jamal & Hill, 2002: 94). Therefore, the alienated modern
tourist seeking authenticity looks for authentic places that have yet to
be tainted or corrupted by modernity, that are primitive and natural,
and/or, for instance, turns to authentic ways of traveling where he can
travel by land. The tourist hopes to find what he cannot find in his own
world in other times and places (Cohen, 1988: 374; Sharpley, 2006:
129). As such, Westerners’ fascination with the primitive and the
exotic does not stem from a desire to live such a life. The interest in
the exotic or the primitive depends on the reference framework that
allows for the “living fossil of authenticity” of such experiences
(Wang, 2000: 89). The experience of authenticity can also be thought
of as participating in a collective ritual where foreigners come together
to share a sense of cultural intimacy or solidarity. This cultural
manufacturing does not mean a complete recreation of the past
(Chhabra, Healy & Sills, 2003: 705).
The search for authenticity for Cohen (1988: 376) varies in relation
with the degree of alienation in a society, and those with high levels
of alienation look for an another authentic center of culture. Alienation
and the search for authenticity appear to be positively related.
Intellectuals and other alienated individuals are more likely to search
for authenticity than the average citizens. In fact, as the concern of
authenticity increases, the criteria of authenticity for the tourist
becomes stricter. The tourists who are less alienated, more common,
and more disinterested will have lower standards. Tourism as a search
of authenticity or a moment of liberty calls to mind an idea of an
outside world in contrast with the ordinary one (Picard, 2002: 125).
Today, the touristic experience is considered to be an important search
of the authentic and an effort to be free from an alienated existence
(Cohen, 1979a: 179). However, the authenticity sought by tourists
cannot go beyond the stereotypical and commonly accepted images
conceived by the tourists.
 10

Bruner (1991: 240) argues with empirical evidence that most

tourists are content in their own worlds, that they experience no
alienation, and that not all of them expect to experience a real and/or
foreign sense of authenticity as alleged by MacCannell. Urry (2002:
12, 31) is of the opinion that the search for authenticity is not rooted
in tourism. He suggests that tourists are searching for a change in the
routine of their daily lives. Eco’s (1986: 16) views on the question of
touristic authenticity is as such: “Authenticity is not historical, but
visual. If something appears to be real, then it is real.” Eco stated that
some tourists perceive replicated objects as more real than the
originals. If the tourist perceives the replica, he no longer wants to see
the original.
The Relation Between Tourism and Authenticity
The notion of authenticity in tourist experiences began to be
discussed from the middle of 1800s with the emergence of mass
tourism movements. In this era, the concept of a tourist was not only
analyzed from the perspective of mass travel, but also from travel
experience. Travelers were conceived to be representative of high
culture, and tourist as the representative of low culture. Thus, while
traveling was understood to be authentic, tourism was considered
inauthentic (Sharpley & Stone, 2009: 115). The distinction between
travel and tourism was brought up once again by Boorstin (1964) who
argues that modern American society is unreal and imaginary. Modern
mass tourists make reasonable requests and demand that they are met.
They want the whole world to be a stage to “pseudo events” and satisfy
themselves with these fabricated, meaningless scenes (Boorstin, 1964:
80).
The first most detailed study of authenticity in tourism is made by
MacCannell (1973). MacCannell argues that this concept can help
better understand and distinguish tourists’ experiences and the
structural differences between modern and primitive, holy and
superficial, insider and outsider, reality and show, tourists and
intellectuals (Kolar & Zabkar, 2010: 653). Wang (2000: 18), on the
other hand, states that tourism is an emotional activity where the most
resented parts of modernity such as alienation and inauthenticity, or
the dark sides of modernity, can be indirectly criticized. Social sphere
is just as actively involved as personal needs in motivating the touristic
 11

activities of consumers. Thus, social and cultural elements in decision

making process must also be scrutinized. Therefore, authenticity is an
important subject in tourism sociology (Sharpley, 2006: 33).
Gottlieb (1982) suggests that the world created by tourism
represents a contrast to the ordinary world. He argues that in contrast
with their daily roles, tourists can be kings/queens for one day, or that
middle class people can temporarily experience being poor by
backpacking, whereas Dann (1996) argues that tourists can go back to
their childhood. In this sense, tourism shapes social life and spaces,
and transforms social realities (Gottlieb, 1982: 1973; Picard, 2002:
126). In other words, tourism is a fantasy-heavy motivational factor.
The rewards to be obtained as a result of tourism then become a
dreamlike existence where one can temporarily escape the real world.
However, MacCannell (1989) argues the opposite by saying that the
state of the modern society is a motivating factor for the tourist, and
that instead of a fantasy, he is seeking factuality or authenticity
(pilgrimage) in his experiences. Tourists are motivated by the
potentially spiritual experiences of a trip (or a pilgrimage) by
witnessing certain tourism destinations or areas, and by being
involved in dialogue with a community or congregation that are not
normally encountered in tourism (Sharpley, 2014b: 368).
Authenticity is an important concept in the marketing of cultural
heritage sites (Kolar & Zabkar, 2010: 652). As a marketing device,
authenticity ought to be considered as a method of perception
management. In her mind, the tourism consumer has an image of a
scenery and a desire to purchase it. In this framework, authenticity
must be a push that motivates the tourism consumer to act (Wight,
2009: 134). The consumers make the decision to purchase with
reference to the degree of factuality of a product/service. Thus, the
presentation of authenticity appears as a criterion of choice for future
tourists. As consumer economy develops, consumers seek unique
experiences instead of fictitious ones, which explains the shift from
theme parks to a search for more authentic locations (Yeoman, Brass
& McMahon, 2007: 1128). The marketing strategies of the Western
world depict the “Other” of the “West” in the way that they wish to
see them. Advertisements and brochures tend to depict local residents
as primitive peoples with static traditions. This is because the “Other”
in the imagination of the Western world is coded as such. Western
 12

tourists travel to attain what they have already conceived in their mind
(Silver, 1993: 304). For tourists, such destinations can be referred to
as the oldest worlds that are “original” or as being “there since the
beginning.” These locations turn into places that are prehistorical (or
historical) times that are beyond space, metaphors of a lost expression
of existence. Traveling to underdeveloped countries mean going a
century backwards in a Western one. Historian Délumeau (1992)
states that such lost worlds historically appear as a nostalgic reaction
to the epistemological and cognitive disconnections caused by
geographic or industrial revolutions (Picard, 2002: 126). As Silver
(1993: 310) underlines: “as long as local communities remain
undeveloped, thus perpetuating what is primitive, they will continue
to be attractive to tourists. As they begin to see themselves as equals
of Western societies, in other words as they develop, they lose the
interest of the West.”
Scholars like Boorstin (1962) and MacCannell (1976) presuppose
that folk dancing, staged religious rituals and local culture are
intentionally made to cultivate the touristic illusion (Goldberg, 1983:
480). MacCannell (1976) states that an effort needs to be made to
sustain the attention and gaze of the tourists, and that it cannot be left
to luck. Accordingly, people need to learn when and where to look.
Thus, clear and explicit pointers must be provided for them.
Sometimes, these pointers can be a mark of an experience that took
place at that point (Urry, 2002: 10). Markers such as religion, dance,
and architecture are frequently used. Local funeral rituals can be one
of the ways to depict a tradition as static and timeless. Westerners have
greatly warped the ethno-histories of other societies. Despite social
theoreticians and historians insisting that traditions of these societies
are not static and are constantly changing and developing, Europeans
invented new traditions for these societies with a colonialist mindset
to prove themselves right. In turn, tour operators utilized this invented
idea of static and timeless culture that the tourists are asking for in
order to compete in the market. As a result of this, the idea that
indigenous peoples are for the consumption of Westerners gained
prominence. Cultures were shaped into marketable commodities to fit
the desire of the type of tourists that are to be attracted. In reality, these
strategies are what prevent tourists from learning the historical
processes of society and location they are visiting, and from the social
 13

realities in the field of tourism (Silver, 1993: 304-305). Whereas social

scientists investigating the local dimension of tourism are
unanimously of the idea that local communities in tourism regions
almost always structure their social worlds in opposition to the outside
world; a world that is opposed to the ordinary world of the tourists
with a traditional, authentic, and genuine identity against modernity
and superficiality (Picard, 2002: 124).
The distinction between the authentic and the inauthentic, be it in
the natural or touristic sense, is a strong semiotic operator. The idea of
a real Spain or Jamaica, of something untainted, the real stories of the
natives, are motifs necessary for the manufacturing of tourism and for
commercial tours to achieve their aims. The semiotic process creates
curiosity. The proliferation of pointers or reproductions first results in
the attribution of authenticity to those that are not initially explicitly
authentic, and then the creation of originals where these markers are
the determinants of these indications (Culler, 1981: 5; MacCannell,
1999: 44). Even the tourist who has purchased the most well-equipped
vacation package that is totally isolated from the outside world within
his travel experience will want to leave his hotel with a leap of faith
to discover the “otherness” of the foreign culture. The reason
underlying this tendency is the desire to obtain memories that can be
considered authentic which can be later reported to others. Thus,
authenticity is an indicator of this use, and tourism is mostly a search
for such indications. The reason for buying souvenirs from
destinations is also this search (Culler, 1981: 5).
MacCannell (1973, 1976) argues that tourism destinations play a
crucial and catalyzing role in the modern man’s search for the
untainted, or the authentic, because these places have an attested
authenticity and an objective reality that gives meaning to modern
existence for a new class of entertainment. In order to satisfy the
demand for new authentic experiences, tourism transforms everything
into tourist attractions, thus proliferating sceneries in the world. A
scene is first marked, making it authentic for the tourist. As a result of
this, the search for authenticity ends up with the destruction of a scene
(Ivanovic, 2011: 26). Something must be marked in order to be
authentically experienced, but this indication that helps it show itself
harms the untouched nature of what had been culturally preserved.
This is the paradox of authenticity (Culler, 1981: 8). MacCannell
 14

(1999: xxi) calls this the “dialectic of authenticity.” This paradox is

considered to be the main issue for both modernism and
postmodernism. As an inauthentic attraction is incapable of creating
genuine experiences, the modern tourist is incentivized to incessantly
pursue a more authentic experience. All the evidence tourist
encounters point to a manufactured authenticity. This leads to
pessimism for the tourist. With the constant alteration of touristic
areas, this process goes on, and as a result, the tourist experiences add
to a total nothingness (Ivanovic, 2011: 26). The reason for the
disappointment of tourist as MacCannell (1973) predicates at the end
of his search is not due to the quality of the search. This
disappointment is brought on by the way in which tourists are affected
by tourism operators, tour guides, staff, advertisements, and
marketing. The tourists are virtually trapped within touristic areas that
are designed for them (Hillman, 2007: 2). They get caught in the role
of the tourist that is reinforced by activities and social environment
that are imposed upon them, and that they find themselves in due to
their trust in tourism businesses and personnel. Cohen (1979b: 20), on
the other hand, argues that tourists are rarely searching for the
authentic, but that they also almost never take interest in entertainment
opportunities other than what is already offered to them. According to
Cohen, tourists involved in mass tourism do not have any expectations
of authenticity. Therefore, they cannot even be the subject of touristic
deception. Yet their search for a more intense mode of entertainment
allows the activity to become a staged authentic experience where they
are convinced that there is more to it than entertainment (Goldberg,
1983: 493; Cohen, 1988: 379). While MacCannell (1973) is
pessimistic about the fact that tourists can never satisfy their longing
for authenticity and penetrate the authenticity of the other, Cohen
rejects this idea and believes that especially exploring tourists can
cross over the touristic area and observe the ways of living of the
others. As tourism institutions observe that tourists have the capacity
for such comprehension, they respond to such demand for sincerity
(Cohen, 1979a: 195).
The Price of The Search for Authenticity:
Commodification
 15

The demand for authenticity which is an important concept in the

dynamics of Western world has been prevalent for centuries. In this
context, the involvement with the authentic religious relics from 9th to
11 th centuries in Europe helped creating the concept of tourism
income. In addition, the authenticity of China in 15 th and 16 th centuries
helped expanding to new markets. This demand is still ongoing today
in the form of souvenirs, ethnic dishes, reconstruction of history, and
original art pieces (Grayson & Martinec, 2004: 296). Authentic
souvenirs help the tourist make a connection with a travel objective
that evokes a life that is rich in meaning (Littrell, Anderson & Brown,
1993: 199). Souvenirs etc. and other such tourism products are
produced and consumed as authentic experiences. However, as the
production of such objects could be profitable for the host community,
the mass production of them can also lead to a distinction between an
authentically hand crafted and inauthentically produced goods
(Halewood & Hannam, 2001: 567). The advancement of tourism can
also improve some aspects of the authentic local culture. After all,
while authenticity becomes a concept of dispute, commodification
turns into a positive mechanism in the search for authenticity (Xie,
2003: 7). Now and then manufacturers and marketers utilize the image
of authenticity to increase sales (Reisinger & Steiner, 2006: 73). The
commercialization of traditional cultural aspects can make a tourism
destination more attractive, as well as creating a new pseudo-culture
for the local community that has an intrinsic cultural value (Revilla &
Dodd, 2003: 95).
According to Boorstin (1964: 103), cultural objects can be affected
by the process of commodification. As rituals, traditions etc. become
more oriented towards being staged for others, these performances can
be shortened, embellished, or transformed in other ways. Cohen
(1988: 373), on the other hand, assert that as much as commodification
brought by tourism leads to a loss of meaning in the cultural products
of the local community, it also paradoxically leads to a loss of meaning
for the tourist as well. According to MacCannell (1973: 601),
commodification destroys the local cultural items and the sincerity of
human relations, and sincerity leaves its place for staged authenticity.
Cohen (1988) disagrees with MacCannell’s (1973) idea of
commodification of local culture leading to a total destruction of
culture resulting in tremendous deception. Instead, he suggests that the
 16

emergent authenticity in this process can create new meanings for both
the local community and the tourists, resulting in a new authenticity.
Therefore, the commodification of culture does not entail the loss of
the unique culture’s real meaning (Cohen, 1988: 382-383; Ivanovic,
2008: 324). When tourists demand authenticity, their demand has
consequences that they are unaware of. Some areas are preserved in
order to provide the authenticity that is demanded. As one of the costs
of commodification, this phenomenon may lead to the stunting and
underdevelopment of host communities in tourism destinations.
Tourism sector asks for the images of an exotic, untouched, backward
and underdeveloped society to offer authenticity. This kind of
identification can force the host community to maintain an old-
fashioned lifestyle to attract tourists. Thus, the right to modernize and
socially develop are stripped from the host community (Hashimito,
2014: 233).
Approaches of Authenticity
The objective and standardized approaches of MacCannell (1973)
and Boorstin (1964) do not seem to encapsulate the complete diversity
of tourist experiences. Additionally, there are some gaps in their
account regarding the differences between the motivations of social
groups and individuals when they travel. MacCannell’s (1973, 1976)
tourist is in search of an experience that is like the holy pursuit of the
pilgrims, while Cohen (1979) tries to rework this undifferentiated and
unary motivation (Jamal & Hill, 2002: 87). Wang (1999: 351), on the
other hand, argues that authenticity can be distinguished into three
parts as objective, constructivist, and existential, and from a broad
perspective, authenticity can be thought as “tourist experiences” and
“visited object experiences.”
Objective authenticity has a number of connotations such as
genuine, original, real, durability, unchanged, originated where it is
found, made by locals etc. (Chhabra, 2012: 499). This kind of
authenticity typically refers to an objective property or event. Thus, it
is with reference to the real and the actualities in physical/natural
world (Jamal & Hill, 2002: 84). Objective authenticity is the
authenticity perceived by tourists when they visit a phenomenon.
Authentic experience occurs when the tourist becomes familiar with
the object of visitation. (Wang 1999: 351). Therefore, an object that is
 17

not authentic leads to an inauthentic experience, and no replicas can

take the place of the original. (Rickly-Boyd, 2012b: 87). Objective
authenticity is based on the original, pure, and immutable that was
made by the real actors in local community and heritage (Chhabra
2012: 499). Both Boorstin (1961, 1964) and MacCannell (1973) insist
on an understanding of objective authenticity that depends on
museums when they talk about pseudo-events or staged authenticity.
For both authors, objective authenticity can be determined with certain
evaluations and analyses. In tourism, artworks, hand crafted items,
cuisines, or rituals are generally defined as authentic or inauthentic by
determining whether they were made in line with the traditions of the
local community (Reisinger & Steiner, 2006: 68).
Constructivist authenticity is the view that is opposed to the
modernist/realist/objective approach. For them, authenticity cannot be
empirically distinguished (Reisinger & Steiner, 2006: 69). While
authors such as Boorstin (1964) and MacCannell (1973) discuss the
role of authenticity in tourism as an analytic notion, in the
constructivist tradition authenticity is perceived as a result of a socio-
discursive discussion and is thus without any analytic value (Daugstad
& Kirchengast, 2013: 173). Therefore, constructivists approach this
notion as a social construct as the ontological presumption of
constructivism is that “there is no reality outside of human cognition
and symbolic language that is independent, unique, and real.” The
reality is conceived as the outcome of our best interpretations.
Constructivists have a pluralist and relativistic epistemology and
methodology. They maintain that knowledge and truth are generated,
and not discovered by the mind. The constructivist view allows for
multiple and plural interpretations of a single phenomenon that can be
constructed collectively with different perspectives, and people can
assume different constructed opinions with relation to their
circumstances. The process of construction involves an authority and
a social procedure (Wang 1999: 354). Constructivists argue that
authenticity is projected into an object with the effect of social
discourses (Belhassen, Caton & Stewart, 2008: 670). Constructivist
approach perceives authenticity as a “sociocultural projection” and
can attribute different authenticities to one object (Wang, 1999: 352).
The reflection of this idea in tourism refers to the idea that tourists can
have different ways of perceiving and defining authenticity. As a
 18

result, authenticity is not the manifestation of a visited object’s

intrinsic property, but the manifestation of the tourist’s home culture
(Belhassen, Caton & Stewart, 2008: 670). According to Cohen (1988:
374), authenticity is a socially constructed notion that can have
different meanings, that is non-philosophical, individual, contextual,
and mutable. The tourists in this sense are not passive consumers, but
active meaning makers in touristic experiences (Littrell, Anderson &
Brown, 1993: 199). The authenticity of an object is not the guarantor
of an authentic experience, because each tourist individually
deliberates on her own experience (Ivanovic, 2011: 48-50).
Authenticity is not a rigid concept, but it is open to discussion. As it
is a debatable notion, the host culture ought to allow their visitors to
gradually distinguish what is authentic. In time, an aspect or object of
a culture that was not regarded as authentic can come to be known as
authentic even by scholars. A fitting example to this is the soapstone
carvings of Eskimos. Fantasies that were once mere tourist traps can
become an authentic element in the local culture in time and with right
circumstances. “American Disneyland” which was considered to be
peak popular entertainment has become an important aspect of
American culture (Cohen, 1988: 379-380). This fluidity is also
applicable to mass produced objects such as souvenirs etc. The tourists
want to perceive some objects they encounter in their trip as authentic,
and purchase such objects, not because they are real or original, but
because they have become a symbol of authenticity for them
(Reisinger & Steiner, 2006: 70).
Existentialist theory, on the other hand, presumes that individually
conceived meanings can result in an authentic experience. Knowing
yourself, self-actualization, and the excitement experienced in
touristic locations are elements of existential paradigm. This approach
aims to optimize the experience and the enthusiasm (Chhabra, 2010:
795). In short, existential thought emphasizes the subjectivity of
authenticity (Chhabra 2012: 499). The existential constituent of
authenticity about the perceptions, feelings, and emotions of a visitor
in a cultural site such as the uniqueness of the spiritual experience and
the sense of being connected to the history of humankind and
civilization (Kolar & Zabkar, 2010: 656). Existential authenticity
refers to a state of being where an individual believes herself to be
true, and in Western societies, to an act of rebellion against the loss of
 19

a true self in public roles and spheres. According to Heidegger (1962),

to question existence is to search for the meaning of authenticity
(Wang, 1999: 358). Being authentic is to be in touch with one’s inner
being, knowing one’s identity, experiencing the identity, and being in
harmony with one’s emotions (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006: 300).
According to Steiner and Reisinger (2006), in line with the
Heideggerian approach which refers to the state of existence, the
experience of tourism is another human activity which creates
opportunities to discover what it means to be human, and experiencing
being human (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006: 300-302). According to this
view, what is authentic takes place when one is at the time and place
of the threshold of consciousness where social restrictions are
suspended instead of the self. The ritualistic aspect of tourism paves
the way for such times and places (Rickly-Boyd, 2012a: 273). Steiner
and Reisinger (2006: 303) indicate that existential authenticity does
not fit a certain type as it is experience-oriented and transient.
Existential authenticity does not arise in isolation but comes to be in
instances of cultural and physical encounters (Rickly-Boyd, 2013:
684). As it is an existential phenomenon where the individual
suddenly clings to the real self, the subject is more important than the
object in this view (Belhassen, Caton & Stewart, 2008: 671). One of
the most important scholars of existential authenticity in tourism is
Ning Wang. Like MacCannell, Wang’s notion of authenticity is based
on the sense of alienation in modern societies. However, Wang
focuses on the spiritual and physical alienation (Wang, 1999: 362).
According to Wang (1999), the tourist is in search of her own
authentic roots. Wang maintains that nature tourism which is missing
from MacCannell’s (1973, 1976) idea of authenticity is one of the
most important ways to experience a true sense of self. Instead of the
authenticity of objects, nature tourism offers an existential
authenticity (Wang 1999: 350-351).
Conclusion
As one of important contemporary sociological concepts,
authenticity and the consumers’ level up understanding authenticity
became a popular subject of research, particularly in consumer
behavior in tourism. Scholars such as Sönmez and Sırakaya (2002);
Chhabra, Healy and Sills (2003); Naoi (2004); Frost (2006); Chen and
 20

Chen (2010); Lin and Wang (2012); Lu, Ghi and Liu (2015); Lu,
Gursoy and Lu (2015) in tourism literature conduct their research on
authenticity and its relation to concepts such as heritage tourism,
destination image, perceived value, satisfaction, behavioral intentions.
The outcome of their studies shows that the notion of authenticity has
positive effects on the development and growth of tourism
destinations, increasing quality, and creating added value.
In addition, in Atasoy’s (2020) research, it was determined that
destination image has a positive mediating effect in the relation
between perceived authenticity and behavioral intentions. At the same
time, in the relation between perceived authenticity and behavioral
intentions, perceived value has also a positive mediating effect.
Another outcome of this study was that when variables are
simultaneously in a serial multiple model, it was found that in the
relation between perceived authenticity and perceived value,
destination image has a mediating effect, and in the relationship
between destination image and behavioral intentions, perceived value
has a mediating effect. It was determined that these effects are
positively related. It is believed that both tourism business managers
and local governments can make use of these findings to come up with
new strategies where the notion of authenticity is involved in
sustainable tourism practices, and the protection of authentic values in
tourism regions are ensured.
References
Atasoy, F. (2020). Determining The Relationship Between Perceived
Authenticity, Destination Image, Perceived Value and Behavioral
Intentions: The Case of Beypazarı as A Place of Cultural Heritage. Ph.
Doctoral Dissertation. Turkey: Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University
Bendix, R. (1997). In Search Of Authenticity: The Formation Of
Folklore Studies. Winconsin,UK.: The University Of Wisconsin
Press.
Belhassen, Y., Caton, K. & Stewart, W.P. (2008). The Search For
Authenticity In The Pilgrim Experience, Annals Of Tourism Research,
35(3): 668-689. Doi:10.1016/j.annals.2008.03.007
Boorstin, D. J. (1964). The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events In
America. New York: Random House.
 21

Bruner, E. M. (1991). Transformation Of Self In Tourism, Annals of

Tourism Research,18: 238-250.
Chen, C-F. & Chen, F-S. (2010). Experience Quality, Perceived
Value, Satisfaction And Behavioral Intentions For Heritage Tourists,
Tourism Management, 31(1): 29-35.
Chhabra, D. (2012). Authenticity Of The Objectively Authentic:
Research Notes And Reports, Annals Of Tourism Research, 39(1):
480–502. Doi: 10.1016/j .annals.2011.09.005
Chhabra, D. (2010). Back To The Past: A Sub-Segment Of Generation
Y's Perceptions Of Authenticity, Journal Of Sustainable Tourism,
18(6):793-809. Doi:10.1080/09669582.2010.483280
Chhabra, D., Healy, R. & Sills, E. (2003). Staged Authenticity And
Heritage Tourism, Annals Of Tourism Research, 30(3): 702-719.
Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity And Commoditization In Tourism,
Annals Of Tourism Research, 15: 371-386.
Cohen, E. (1979a). A Phenomenology of Tourist Experiences,
Sociology, 13(2): 179-201.
Cohen, E. (1979b). Rethinking The Sociology Of Tourism, Annals Of
Tourism Research, 6:18-35.
Cole, S. (2007). Beyond Authenticity And Commodification, Annals
Of Tourism Research, 34(4): 943-960.
Crawshaw, C. & Urry, J. (1997). Tourism And The Photographic Eye,
In:Chris Rojek And John Urry (Editors), Touring Cultures (pp.176-
195), London: Routledge.
Culler, J. (1981). The Semiotics Of Tourism, American Journal Of
Semiotics, 1(12): 127-41.
Daugstad, K. & Kirchengast, C. (2013). Authenticity And The
Pseudo-backstage Of Agri-Tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, 43:
170-191. https://Doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2013.04.004
Eco, U. (1986). Travels in Hyperreality. San Diego: Harcourt Inc.
Frost, W. (2006). Braveheart-Ed Ned Kelly: Historic Films, Heritage
Tourism And Destination Image, Tourism Management, 27: 247-254.
 22

Goldberg, A. (1983). Identity And Experience In Haitian Voodoo

Shows. Annals of Tourism Research, 10(4): 479-495.
Gottlieb, A. (1982). Americans’ Vacations, Annals Of Tourism
Research, 9: 165-187.
Grayson, K. & Martinec, R. (2004). Consumer Perceptions Of
Iconicity And Indexicality And Their Influence On Assessments Of
Authentic Market Offerings, Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2):
296-312. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/422109
Halewood, C. & Hannam, K. (2001). Viking Heritage Tourism:
Authenticity And Commodification, Annals of Tourism Research,
28(3): 565-580. Doi: 10.1016/S0160-7383(00)00076-1
Hashimoto, A. (2014). Tourism And Socio-Cultural Development
Issues, In: Richard Sharpley And David J.Telfer (Editors), Tourism
And Development: Concepts And Issues, 2 nd Edition (pp. 205 -237),
Bristol-Buffalo-Toronto: Channel View Publications.
Hegel, G.W. F. (2004). The Phenomenology of Spirit, translation
from German to Turkish by Yardımlı, A. , 2 nd Edition. İstanbul: İdea
Yayınevi.
Hillman, W. (2007). Revisiting The Concept Of (Objective)
Authenticity. Public Sociologies, New Zealand: Auckland.
Ivanovic, M. (2011). Exploring The Authenticity Of The Tourist
Experience In Culture Heritage Tourism In South Africa. Mba
Dissertation. South Africa: North West University.
Jamal, T. & Hill, S. (2002). The Home And The World: (Post)touristic
Spaces Of (In)authenticity, In. Graham M.S. Dann (Editor), The
Tourist A Metaphor Of The Social World (pp.77-108), UK: Cabi
Publishing.
Kolar, T. & Zabkar, V. (2010). A Consumer-based Model Of
Authenticity: An Oxymoron Or The Foundation Of Cultural Haritage
Marketing? ,Tourism Management, 31(5): 652-654.
Leigh, T. W., Peters, C. & Shelton, J. (2006). The Consumer Quest
For Authenticity: The Multiplicity Of Meanings Within The MG
Subculture Of Consumption, Journal Of The Academy Of Marketing
Science, 34(4): 481-493. Doi: 10.1177/0092070306288403
 23

Lin, C-H. & Wang, W-C. (2012). Effects Of Authenticity Perception,

Hedonics, And Perceived Value On Ceramic Souvenir-Repurchasing
Intention, Journal Of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29(8): 779-795.
Littrell, M. A., Anderson, L. F. & Brown, P. J. (1993). What Makes A
Craft Souvenir Authenic?,Annals Of Tourism Research, 20: 197-215.
Lu, A. C., Gursoy, D. & Lu, C. Y. (2015). Authenticity Perceptions,
Brand Equity And Brand Choice Intention: The Case Of Ethnic
Restaurants, International Journal Of Hospitality Management, 50:
36-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.07.008
Lu, L., Chi, C. G. & Liu, Y. (2015). Authenticity, Involvement, And
Image: Evaluating Tourist Experiences At Historic Districts, Tourism
Management, 50: 85-96.
MacCannell, D. (1999). The Tourist: A New Theory Of The Leisure
Class. Berkeley-Los Angeles-London: University Of California Press.
MacCannell (1973). Staged Authenticity: Arrangements Of Social
Place In Tourist Setting, American Journal Of Sociology, 79(3): 589-
603.
Marks, K. (2003). The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of
1844, translation from French to Turkish by Somer, K.. 1 st Edition.
Eriş Yayınları.
McKercher, B. & du Cros, H. (2002). Cultural Tourism. New York:
The Hawort Hospitality Press.
Naoi, T. (2004).Visitors' Evaluation Of A Historical District: The
Roles Of Authenticity And Manipulation, Tourism And Hospitality
Research, 5(1): 45-63. Doi/abs/10.1057/palgrave.thr.6040004
Okuyucu, A. & Somuncu, M. (2012). Determination of Local People’s
Perceptions and Attitudes Protection of Cultural Heritage and Use of
Tourism Purpose: Case of Centre of Osmaneli District, Ankara
University Journal of Environmental Sciences, 4(1): 37-51.
Özdemir, Ü. (2011). Safranbolu’s Cultural Heritage Resources and
Their Protection. Eastern Geographical Review,16(26): 129-142.
 24

Picard, D. (2002). The Tourist As A Social Fact, In. Graham M.S.

Dann (Editor), The Tourist A Metaphor Of The Social World (pp.121-
134), UK: Cabi Publishing.
Pearce, P. L. & Moscardo, G. M. (1986). The Concept of Authenticity
In Tourist Experiences, Journal Of Sociology, 22(1): 121-132.
Pretes, M. (1995). Postmodern Tourism: The Santa Claus Industry,
Annals Of Tourism Research, 22(1): 1-15.
Reisinger, Y. & Steiner, C. J. (2006). Reconceptualizing Object
Authenticity, Annals of Tourism Research, 33(1): 65-86.
Revilla, G. & Dodd, T. H. (2003). Authenticity Perceptions Of
Talavera Pottery, Journal of Travel Research, 42(1): 94-99.
Rickly-Boyd, J. M. (2013). Existential Authenticity: Place Matters,
Tourism Geographies, 15(4): 680-686.
Rickly-Boyd, J. M. (2012a). Authenticity And Aura: A Benjaminian
Approach to Tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1): 269-289.
Rickly-Boyd, J.M. (2012b). Lifestyle Climbing: Toward Existential
Authenticity, Journal Of Sport & Tourism, 17(2): 85-104.
Rojek, C. (1995). Decentring Leisure: Rethinking Leisure Theory.
London: Sage Publications.
Urry, J. (2002). The Tourist Gaze, 2 nd Edition. London: Sage
Publications.
Sharpley, R. (2014a). Tourism: A Vehicle For Development, In:
Richard Sharpley And David J.Telfer (Editors), Tourism And
Development: Concepts And Issues, 2 nd Edition (pp.3-30), Bristol-
Buffalo-Toronto: Channel View Publications.
Sharpley, R. (2014b). The Consumption Of Tourism, In: Richard
Sharpley And David J.Telfer (Editors), Tourism And Development:
Concepts And Issues, 2 nd Edition (pp.358-377), Bristol-Buffalo-
Toronto: Channel View Publications.
Sharpley, R. (2006 ). Travel And Tourism. London- Thousand Oaks-
New Delhi: Sage Publications.
 25

Sharpley, R. & Stone, P. R. (2009). (Re)presenting The Macabre :

Interpretation, Kitschification And Authenticity, In: Richard Sharpley
And Philip R.Stone (Editors), The Darker Side Of Travel: The Theory
And Practice Of Dark Tourism (pp.109- 128), Bristol-Buffalo-
Toronto: Channel View Publications.
Silver, I. (1993). Marketing Authenticity In Third World Countries,
Annals Of Tourism Research, 20(2):302-318.
Sönmez, S. & Sırakaya, E. (2002). A Distorted Destination Image?
The Case Of Turkey, Journal Of Travel Research, 41(2): 185-196.
Steiner, C.J. & Reisinger, Y. (2006). Understanding Existential
Authenticity, Annals of Tourism Research, 33(2): 299-318.
Trilling, L. (1972). Sincerity And Authenticity. The Charles Eliot
Norton Lectures. London: Harvard University Press. ISBN: 0-674-
80861-4.
Wang, N. (2000). Tourism And Modernity: A Sociological Analysis.
Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Wang, N. (1999). Rethinking Authenticity In Tourism Experience,
Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2): 349-370.
Wight, C. (2009). Contested National Tragedies: An Ethical
Dimension, In: Richard Sharpley And Philip R.Stone (Editors), The
Darker Side Of Travel: The Theory And Practice Of Dark Tourism
(pp.129-144), Bristol-Buffalo-Toronto: Channel View Publications.
Xie, P. F. (2003). The Bamboo-beating Dance in Hainan,China:
Authenticity And Commodification, Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
11(1): 5-16, Doi:10.1080/09669580308667190
Yale, P. (1991). From Tourist Attractions To Heritage Tourism,
Huntingdon: ELM Publications.
Yeoman, I., Brass, D. & McMahon-Beattie,U. (2007). Current Issue
In Tourism: The Authentic Tourist, Tourism Management, 28(4):
1128-1138. Doi10.1016/j.tourman.2006.09.012
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authentic 25.01.2019
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inauthentic#other-
words 25.01.2019
 26

View publication stats