Restauration, rennovation and reconstruction in a touristic place are always referring to special moments in the past. While researching on time, history and tourism I came to the conclusion that the past is out of reach, is just gone. What remains is the narration of the past: history. I was investigating which part of the past is narrated in Italy´s buildings, squares and institutions and which time chapters on the other hand are made invisible. Which narration of the past, which time-myths do I find in the urban space, which in the countryside? Which buildings or places are given a high hierarchy (touristically important, important as identification narration) and where do I find the time relicts that are missing in Italy´s official narration of it´s past, of it´s identity-construct?
Photography is one of the instruments to keep a moment of time fixed in a picture, a photograph. In our times, everyone has a camera in their phones and everyone can be a photographer. On Google and Instagram there are existing an uncountable amount of pictures of touristic sights in Italy. Those sights have become so called “markers” (Marco D´Eramo) of the city. Cities becomes identified by these sights. Pictures of them are multiplicated and shared in the internet and social media. Referring to Walter Benjamin´s theory of the technical reproduction (e.g. photo or film), reproducing the original destroys it´s “Aura”. I want to propose a reversion of Benjamin´s thesis in the case of touristic sights: the reproduction of the attraction, of the original, creates it´s “Aura”, because it makes the sight popular, a “marker”. I was exploring Italy whith the eye of a photographer but did not use photography as a first medium to avoid reproducing the hierarchies of specific sights. Instead I used the tactic of the imprint.