기업 사회공헌에서의 헤리티지 복제와 아우라 관계 고찰 －국가유산지킴이 협약기관 활동 사례를 중심으로－

This study aims to examine the characteristics of heritage reproduction and the operational mechanisms of aura as manifested in corporate social contributions related to national heritage. ​First, corporations generate brand aura by associating their products with the artistry of heritage through social contributions involving heritage reproduction. Specifically, they establish a collaborative framework with bearers of intangible heritage and experts, integrating the corporation’s “artisan spirit” with the Korean “artisan spirit.” The aura generated from this integration is then linked to the company's products. This allows the product to enter the heritage domain, appealing to the public with an “aura as art” and securing a competitive advantage in brand value. Second, an audience-centric aura of reproduced heritage can be identified. The perceived attributes and aspects of the aura can differ depending on the perspectives of the agents who produce and interpret the heritage, such as its bearers (transmitters), practitioners, and the audience (visitors). For instance, it might be perceived by a bearer as a "future industry," by a chef as a field of “exploratory cuisine,” and by a visitor as an “indirect experience” of traveling in Europe. As the commercialization of reproduced heritage accelerates and its exhibition and experiential values proliferate throughout society, the content of the aura perceived by producers and audiences at the forefront of this reproduction has also become a significant category of analysis. ​Third, the aura of reproduced heritage operates less through its materiality and more through the vividness of its accompanying narratives—the various episodes, stories of challenges faced, and processes of overcoming them that led to the final result. In the process of creating this reproduced heritage, the corporate brand utilizes the heritage’s background, while the heritage receives support from the brand. This process establishes a duality of art and commodity, creating “heritage as a ‘brand’” and “the ‘brand’ as heritage.” ​In the manifestation of the aura of reproduced heritage, a critical awareness of why and for whom it is being preserved in the current context precedes the scrutiny of fidelity to its original form. Here, the series of attempts at convergence, which seek to connect the “traces” and “non-traces” of the original, become a mechanism that allows the aura to manifest flexibly. Furthermore, the operation of reproduced heritage functions within a cognitive range acceptable to both producers and consumers—that is, within the bounds of public value and perception. Therefore, even if the heritage in question is one of many mass-produced goods, when the potential for the audience to discover and interpret the value of its “trace” is recognized, it can be reborn—separate from the issue of materiality—as a heritage aura possessing scarcity.