‘Was Henry VIII a Vampire?’ Challenging perceptions or ‘hamming it up’ through live interpretation at Hampton Court Palace.

Paper to be given at Packaging the Past: The Commodification of Heritage, Cambridge, 19th April 2008.
Click here for more information on this event

Abstract:
The supposed tension between commodification and the ‘authenticity’ of heritage sites is a popular discussion topic, not only within academic circles but also with those working in the sphere and the visiting public. Increasingly both the concept of ‘authenticity’ and the idea that marketing and selling heritage is a modern phenomenon has been challenged, while the lines between what is seen as ‘selling out’ and education have been blurred by pressure to be accessible to all. One interpretive medium which inhabits this murky area is live – costumed – interpretation. Held in great esteem by some – Historic Royal Palaces have just renewed the largest contract for live interpretation in Europe – others hold the medium in less favour. In 2007 Time Out suggested that the interpreters at Hampton Court Palace amounted to little more than out-of-work-actors dressed in monkey suits. If the oft-quoted mantra that people relate to people is believed, live interpretation should be a key means through which to communicate not only facts about a given site, but to inspire, inform and entertain. But is it also a way to cut back on well-researched, planned interpretation in favour of a ‘wow’ factor that requires little concentration but will generate good feedback and more revenue?

This paper will consider the uses of live interpretation in the context of Hampton Court Palace. Hampton Court has used live interpretation as a core part of its interpretive offering for over 7 years. Predominantly marketed as a Tudor palace, it attracts a relatively broad visitor base, including a large number of schools. The Tudor period is, in 2008, a fashionable one. Not only is it on the National Curriculum, but the recent mini-series, ‘The Tudors’ (Showtime/BBC) showcased it for 3.2 million post-watershed viewers. Meanwhile the bestselling novel The Other Boleyn Girl is due out as a high-profile film in March. Each of these gives different and conflicting versions of the events and characters of the period, which is reflected in the existing knowledge of Hampton Court visitors. In order to fulfil the client brief, Tudor interpreters at the Palace must embrace the variety – including the slightly shaky or indeed entirely fictional – of interpretations, while guiding visitors towards an understanding of the past based upon yet another viewpoint – that of the Palace itself. This paper draws upon visitor feedback and the experience of working in costume at Hampton Court and elsewhere to argue that high quality live interpretation is not only capable of achieving this, but also of making the period directly relevant and accessible to the multiplicity of visitors to the site – including to those who want nothing more than a photograph with ‘Ann Boleyn’. It will explore the value placed upon professional interpreters by both the public and heritage professionals employing them. It will argue that entertainment and education are directly linked, and that commodifying the past can in some cases render it more comprehensible.