"‘Cultures’ defined as homogeneous ensembles are the most dangerous of all social illusions, the sources of all discriminations and pretexts for violence and the permanence of poverty."

So I've been sitting on this for a long time now, but with my final draft in to my professor, I feel like I can share without jinxing anything (which has happened to me once before).

I'm about to be published! In a book!

This is the greatest achievement of my life!!

(!!!)

Last autumn, I wrote an essay for my cultural heritage management class about a new heritage Convention, called the Faro Convention, and its possible impact on the LGBT community. Faro is notable for its insistance that heritage be defined by local communities and people, not by heritage professionals. With individuals making the decisions about what places, objects, skills or traditions are important to them, we as professionals can do a better job of preserving it. Simultaneously pretty cool and sadly revolutionary.

But! Where does this leave invisible communities? Ones that don't often have a voice in public discourse? When I set out to write this essay, I was thinking of the Romani community, who aren't tied to a physical place, which is a large part of traditional heritage definitions. But then I started thinking about the LGBT community and how many people often 'pass' in the wider community, as a safety measure. This notion of passing isn't limited to people--it effects buildings and meeting places as well. That means that, 50 years down the line, a pub that was very culturally significant to the gay community might be knocked down, because it was never seen as significant by the wider community. Which I think we can all agree is a bit of a problem.

So. I wrote an essay. And received a pretty rockin' mark for it, though I had strayed from the prompt quite a bit.

My professor suggested we send it off to some people who work with the Council of Europe, which wrote the Faro Convention. And then a few months ago, my professor invited me to revise it and submit it for a book on the convention he was putting together.

How could I say no?

So I am about to be published. I am so chuffed. This is a subject that's really important to me, and I'm really hoping that this can continue the conversation about how we think about disputed heritage, which is usually the province of war-torn countries, not unremarkable street corners. And it's just an honour to even be asked. I really respect this professor, and he's quite respected by the heritage community both here and abroad. In the midst of dissertation madness, I've also been scrambling to do this--going to Manchester for research, agonising over quotes, and just thinking long and hard. I can't deny that I'm also a little nervous--what if people don't like it? What if some one writes in and tells me I'm totally wrong and there's a whole body of research I overlooked?

But then I have to trust in myself. It will be good experience, even if I do get criticism. And I get to put it on my CV!

(So chuffed.)