DRACULA TOURISM IN ROMANIA: FROM NATIONAL TO LOCAL TOURISM STRATEGIES Lecturer PhD. Oana Mihaela STOLERIU 1 PhD. Bogdan IBANESCU 2

Transcription

1 ECONOMICS & TOURISM DRACULA TOURISM IN ROMANIA: FROM NATIONAL TO LOCAL TOURISM STRATEGIES Lecturer PhD. Oana Mihaela STOLERIU 1 PhD. Bogdan IBANESCU 2 1,2 University Alexandru Ioan Cuza of Iaşi, Romania ABSTRACT Starting from the constant controversy regarding the capitalization of Dracula s myth, the paper analyses the place of Dracula tourism in the Romanian national policy and local destination management. The study focuses on two key Dracula destinations and highlights the main actors and strategies that have shaped their evolution as well as the main components of local heritage capitalized. Keywords: Dracula tourism, heritage, destination management, Bran Castle, Hotel Castle Dracula. INTRODUCTION Supported by a prolific literature and cinematography, the increasing media fascination for vampires and alternative worlds has constantly reinforced the association between Romania and Bram Stoker s character Count Dracula, transforming it into a perfect instrument to gain fame and increase tourist flows. But this country image shaped by literature and tourism industry contradicted internal national representations regarding the historical figure of prince Vlad the Impaler, who inspired Bram Stoker. Therefore, the tourism capitalization of Dracula s international notoriety has always been a controversial topic in the Romanian political and academic environments, reproduced by media and influencing internal perspectives. Since the first foreign visitors interested in finding a Dracula castle in Romania during the 1970 s, national opinions and strategies regarding Dracula tourism have been oscillating between defending the historical truth or enjoying the economic benefits derived from the capitalization of a foreign myth. National heritage and authenticity are two key issues constantly quoted in every discussion regarding Dracula tourism: the myth is often perceived as a threat to Romania s international image [5] [4] and to the authentic Romanian tradition [2]. But, in terms of tourist authenticity, the pseudotradition created by the mix of history and fiction regarding Vlad the Impaler [2] builds visitor expectations and authentic tourist experiences, thus explaining the increasing number of visitors coming to Romania every year, in search of Dracula. In this framework, the paper analyses multilevel approaches to the tourist capitalization of Dracula s myth in Romania, focusing on the main components of national heritage emphasized in various strategies: fiction (myth) and reality (history). Two key Dracula destinations were chosen as case studies: Bran Castle (BC) and Hotel Castle Dracula (HCD). They both have similar geographical locations (in the North-Eastern and Southern Carpathian Mountains, on two roads linking Transylvania to Southern or Eastern Romania) and a complex local heritage (natural, historical, cultural and mythical). Included in all the Dracula tours, these places have been progressively built into representative Dracula destinations by public and then by private managers (after 1990 for HCD and since 2009, for BC). But, under the impact of external and local decisions, following political and economic agendas, the two destinations have evolved

2 SGEM 2014 International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on Social Sciences and Arts differently in terms of popularity and tourist performance. Therefore, in both cases, we analysed and compared the main actors and strategic documents framing the evolution of these destinations and their approach to local heritage. LITTERATURE REVIEW It is known that the destination image has a major role in shaping tourist representations and behaviour. Or, the new romanticized version of vampires introduced by Bram Stoker s "Dracula" in 1897, has strongly influenced the literature and cinematography of the 20 th and 21th centuries, generating a major pop culture trend (started in the 1970 s) and a multimillion dollar vampire industry. Stoker s novel was translated in more than 25 languages [6] and the Dracula character appeared in more than 1000 books [4] and in more than 350 movie or TV productions and video games. Dracula also inspired more than 4500 worldwide associations and fan clubs [4] and about Google searches (in June 2014). Given the increasing media fascination with vampires, Dracula tourism has progressively evolved from literary and film tourism [5], to a form of media tourism [2] [9]. Motivated by complex information sources, visitors come to Romania to see places connected to the fictional character [9], thus reproducing and reinforcing a powerful place myth [6] built by Romania s association with Dracula. This fascination with the famous vampire has had echoes in academic and political environments, generating controversy. Sociological and anthropological researches have underlined the dual symbolism of Dracula s character as: famous vampire in the Eastern European folklore and iconic figure in Romania s Middle Age history [1]. The novel s storyline and geopolitical context emphasized a specific (Western) perception of Eastern Europe built by the travel literature of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries [1], as: a magical, backward and timeless place [6], [3], an in-between region [3] where the civilized and rational Western society meets the Eastern superstitions and emotions. The position of Romanian policy makers and cultural elites on the topic of Dracula tourism has always oscillated between defending the historical truth together with internal representations of nationhood or satisfying external expectations and benefiting from Dracula s international notoriety. The fear of a negative impact on Romania s country image generated dramatic changes in the official position of national authorities [4], depending on their evolving internal and external political agendas (e.g. European integration, internal power shifts). It all started with a dual attitude of the communist regime during the 1970 s: on one hand reinforcing internal representations of the historical figure of Vlad the Impaler, on the other hand, building a copy of Dracula s castle (HCD) from Stoker s novel and cater for foreign visitors. After a period of rejection (during the late 1980 s and in the 1990 s), the myth was reappropriated in 2001, when the Ministry of Tourism launched the famous Dracula Park project, and again abandoned in 2005 (after the presidential elections). In 2012, the Employers Federation of Tourism and Services launched a Discover Dracula Tour, underlining both history and legends linked to Dracula. All the international tourism promotion campaigns developed by the Ministry of Tourism after 1990 included indirect but constant references to Dracula s myth [10]. Beyond this, each campaign reproduced the same symbolic construction of Romania s key destination features (and national heritage), only differently weighted: Nature (represented by the Carpathian Mountains, the Danube Delta and the Black Sea), History and Culture (associated with castles/fortresses, churches and urban heritage) and Traditions (associated with Rural

3 ECONOMICS & TOURISM life and presented as symbols of national authenticity) [10]. These heritage components were used in our analysis of the two Dracula destinations. The issue of authenticity, mentioned in all the media reviews following the tourism promotion campaigns, is one of the main motives used against Dracula tourism. But, both sides of the heritage capitalized by Dracula tourism (history and myth) can be as real and authentic in terms of tourist authenticity [2], [8], shaping specific tourist representations and behaviour: most of the Dracula tourists are motivated by the same desire to compare and connect reality and imagination, usually by re-enactment of events [9], [6]. METHODS A sociological and cultural geographical approach was used to analyse the way Dracula tourism and key national heritage components [10] were approached by multiple tourism actors and strategies. Press releases and multilevel strategic documents were reviewed in this aim: the Romanian Tourism Masterplan [11], four regional development plans (for , ), a regional tourism plan and four local sustainable development plans. BC and HCD are located in the communes of Bran and Tiha Bargaului, in two different regions: Centre and North-West. Other perspectives of local stakeholders were underlined using data (text and image) from specialized web sites promoting the two destinations: the owners and the local administration s websites, online inventories of local firms and events or major international travel websites (TripAdvisor.com, Lonelyplannet.com and Booking.com, all consulted in June 2014) etc. This was completed with field observations and discussions with local stakeholders in 2012 and RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Despite the recognition of Dracula brand as one of Romania s tourism strengths, the National Tourism Masterplan for explicitly rejects the idea of a Dracula themed park because of its negative impact on superior categories of tourists [11] and proposes the alternative of a park capitalizing Romanian Traditions. Apart the business and spa tourism, the Masterplan underlines the necessity to develop tourist products emphasizing Romania s Rural (Traditions), Natural (the Black Sea, the Danube and the Carpathians) and Cultural (urban and historical) heritage. HCD is not mentioned at all in the document, while BC is mentioned 3 times: once as Dracula s castle and twice as a destination fitted for a complex (Cultural and Natural) Transylvanian tourist route. At regional level, the two Development Plans for Centre Region ( and [12]) re-confirm Dracula s role in the international notoriety of BC but they both focus on the capitalization of the Cultural and Historical local heritage (Rural Traditions included and ranked first after 2013), followed by Nature (the Carpathians). Both plans underline the incorrect association between Dracula and BC and describe Bran village as a representative cultural (Historical) and agritourist destination, with an old pastoral tradition. A similar perspective is revealed by the two Regional Development Plans for North-West Region [13]: the same heritage components (Culture and History, including Rural Traditions, followed by Nature the Carpathians) were emphasized in their development priorities and similarly ranked. There were only two vague recommendations for the creation of a Dracula Land Park near HCD in the plan (not implemented), and for a better capitalization of the myth, in Local development plans largely reproduce the regional approaches to local tourism assets: for Bran, the strategy focuses on a better capitalization of

4 SGEM 2014 International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on Social Sciences and Arts Natural attractions (through leisure and sports activities) and local Traditions (through agritourism), while for Tiha Birgaului it underlines the Culture and History themes (capitalized through rural tourism and cultural tourist routes), followed by Nature (mountains) and Rural Traditions. In 2013, the private actors behind the new plan for Tiha Bargaului proposed a more integrated (trans-regional) approach to tourism development, including the Dracula tradition (foreign and local myths), even if ranked after Nature (capitalized through leisure and mountain sports), History and Culture (e.g. a Roman route) and Rural Traditions (ethnographic museum and tours). During the last 3 years, the local public investments framed by these plans were mainly oriented towards the improvement of tourist infrastructure (mainly transports). A major project aimed to promote local traditions as an alternative to BC has been implemented by the local council of Bran in partnership with other stakeholders. The project materialized into an increasing number of traditional festivals (up to 10, in 2013) and 3 public websites promoting local traditions. Rural tourism and the promotion of local traditions are also priorities of other future projects envisaged in another development plan implemented by a Local Action Group and including the territory of Bran commune [7]. Overall, despite the common acknowledgement of its major role in the international fame of both destinations, Dracula s myth is carefully avoided in public strategies: it appears only 11 times in the Masterplan and about twice in regional or local plans. These strategies reproduce the same perception of national (tourist) authenticity: associated with original (historically accurate, well preserved) objects or places, hence the focus on rural life, rural traditions, historical heritage and natural landscapes. As for the online destination image communicated by local administrations, this reproduces the same perception of local heritage, indicating also their involvement in the tourism development. Thus, 4 public websites present the local heritage of Bran in Romanian and English: they all mention Bran Castle (for old Myths), together with local Traditions (ethnographic museum and local festivals), History (linked to the royal family), Culture (churches) and Natural (mountains) heritage. At the opposite, the website of Tiha Birgaului commune does not mention tourism or Dracula s myth at all. The place management has had a major role in shaping the evolution of both Dracula attractions and the way they ve been perceived and consumed by various categories of users. In both cases, the association with Dracula s myth was the result of centralized decisions made during the 1970 s and endorsed by economic and political agendas. Inaugurated in 1983, HCD represents the first initiative of the communist regime to cater for Dracula fans by building a hotel exclusively based on Stoker s novel (respecting the location and architecture described in the book). With no real link to either the novel or the historical character that inspired it, BC s association with Dracula was also decided by the communist regime, based on pragmatic reasons such as: the proximity to Bucharest and major tourist facilities (compared to a more isolated Poienari fortress, the real castle of Vlad the Impaler) and the historical heritage able to build stronger tourist perceptions of authenticity (compared to HCD) [4]. After 1990, the private management enhanced the differences in the tourist discourse and experience provided by the two attractions. The new managers of HCD continued the capitalization of Dracula s myth by targeting a specialized clientele of Dracula fans. The visitor expectations shaped by the hotel website and logo as well as the in place experiences are built on references to the literary myth, reproduced and reinforced by: the themed decoration (e.g. Mina Harker s room), Stoker s statue in front of HCD, visitor

5 ECONOMICS & TOURISM entertainment (the dungeons tour, the Transylvanian passport), themed souvenirs, meals and events (the Halloween night) as well as future projects (a Dracula spa). Local traditions and natural heritage are partly capitalized in the restaurant meals and their beautiful mountain views and in secondary attractions recently diversifying the hotel offer (a tourist sheepfold and a nearby ski slide). In the case of BC, its private owners (the royal family heirs) reopened the castle in 2009 with a strategy focused on emphasizing the place history. Afterwards, their strategy was diversified and adjusted to the visitors interest in Dracula s myth. This generated dual tourist discourses and experiences, backed up by a confusing mix of contradictory fictional and historical references communicated through: the castle decoration, the tour guides speeches, local souvenirs and events. These are all emphasizing first historical characters and events, while the references to Dracula are scarce and usually presented in opposition to their historical counterpart. Apart the annual Halloween party, the myth is reproduced only within a small room (with a few posters) and in the tour guides speeches, both underlining the incorrect association between Dracula, Vlad the Impaler and BC. Future development projects continue to focus on history: e.g. reopening the royal Tea House. Before the in place experience, the visitor motivations and behaviour are shaped by the place image built and sold through various promotion strategies. The official websites of HCD and BC have a major role in building a destination image according to the owners perspective on local heritage and their targeted customers. Thus, the text on BC s website [14] emphasizes the Historical heritage (royal and medieval), including clarifications on the historical inaccuracies of Dracula s myth, while the images posted underline first the mountain landscapes (Nature), then the historical and mythical attractions. As expected, the references to Dracula s myth dominate both text and photos (and animation) on HCD website, landscapes (Nature) descriptions included. The place logos reproduce the same destination features communicated by their websites: Dracula s myth for HCD (a dragon and a D ) or the historical and architectural value for BC (a castle tower). On the other hand, international media played a major role in the increasing popularity of BC (compared to HCD) and reinforcing its association with Dracula s myth. Included in various international tops, BC was ranked: first in the World s Spookiest Spots (by Forbes Magazine, in October 2007); 10 th, in the World's 10 Scariest Haunted Castles (by Dailymail, in June 2012), 9 th in the World s Scariest Halloween Destinations (by Dailymail, in October 2012) and the second most expensive real estate in the world or the first in Europe (by Forbes Magazine, in June 2012). At national level, the castle remains the most visited Romanian museum, with about half million visitors per year. Meant to lure and entertain tourists, local events are another tool used by multiple stakeholders to build destination image. In this regard, about 70 % of the events organized by BC since 2009 have targeted cultural tourists with: music concerts (about 40 % and mostly jazz), open museum nights or books launches. The castle is also involved in other local events, such as the traditional festivals initiated by the local council and various associations. It also caters for corporate and private customers, hosting workshops and private events. The local offer is completed with the events organized by other local and external actors and emphasizing the place history (e.g. medieval festivals, cultural performances), the natural heritage (various competitions) or Dracula s fame (e.g. Halloween parties, Dracula Business Camp). Excepting a horror exhibit and a couple of books launches, Dracula s association with BC is mostly

6 SGEM 2014 International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on Social Sciences and Arts capitalized through the annual Halloween party, both a BC as well as in local clubs, cafes or guest houses. At BC, the event was not diversified much since 2009: the masquerade party, a Vlad the Impaler impersonation offering a night tour of the castle and dungeon, themed beverages (wine and black vodka), a dance of the Forest Fairies (since 2010), a bonfire (since 2010) and occasional guests (e.g. Nicolas Cage in 2010). On the contrary, apart the New Year s Eve party, Halloween is the main event organized by HCD, catering for both Romanian and foreign tourists (initially with two separated events) and diversified every year: e.g. the Witches Ball (in 2010) and Trial (2012), bus transport from Bistrita city (2011), night rides in Dracula s carriage (2013), live concerts (2013), various competitions, themed meals and beverages. The only other local event capitalizing Dracula s myth as well as local traditions was the Garlic Festival, organized by a tourist association and public stakeholders in September The residents internalization level of Dracula s myth and their perspective on the key local assets is indicated by the evolution of local economy and private investments. In Bran, the number of private firms developed faster after 1990, with several peaks depending on the economic and political context: in the early 1990 s (15 %, mainly small commerce), after the Dracula park project launch (about 21.5 %, mostly accommodation and transport services), prior the economic crisis (supported also by infrastructure projects developed with European funds) and, recently, with new touristoriented services (e.g. event planning, tourist management, financial consultancy). There is a similar evolution pattern for Tiha Bargaului, only with smaller numbers and a different profile: most of local businesses were initiated in the early 1990 s (19.5 %, with wood exploitation and commerce dominating until 2005) and after 2004 (75 %, mainly transport and construction activities). Thus, the economic profile in 2013 was very different: in Tiha Bargaului it was mostly based on the exploitation of natural resources (wood exploitation % of local firms, industry %) and infrastructure development (constructions and transport 27%), while the weight of visitor-catering services was low: 2.8% restaurants and bars, 2.8% accommodation and % commerce. This poor palette of tourist services mostly capitalizes the mountain location (a sky slope) and local traditions (a tourist sheepfold). In Bran there was a more tourist-oriented economy with: 21.5 % accommodation firms, 5 % restaurants and bars and 16.5 % commerce. Tourist services and facilities in Bran are mostly capitalizing local traditions (restaurants, an ethnographical museum) and history (Bran Customs Museum), together with Dracula s myth (e.g. a horror house, small shops and cafes), mainly around Halloween. In both locations, there are small markets selling traditional and Dracula themed souvenirs, more developed in the case of BC: 3 commercial nuclei with more than 60 stalls, compared to about 10 stalls at HCD. The evolution of tourist accommodation services reveals other significant differences: in Tiha Birgaului the number of accommodation units remained the same (with HCD and an agritourist guest house that replaced a chalet in 2010) but their size reduction decreased the accommodation capacity with 13 % between 1991 and 2013 (up to153 places). At the opposite, the accommodation capacity in Bran increased more than 15 times between 1991 and 2013 (up to 2450 places and 116 accommodation units), with two peaks following the launch of Dracula Park Project and Romania s inclusion in the European Union. New private facilities with smaller size (63.40 % were rural and agritourist guest houses, in 2013) replaced the larger public facilities (e.g. school camps). The evolution of tourist arrivals enhances the differences between the two

7 ECONOMICS & TOURISM communes: from 8486 arrivals, in 2001, Tiha Bargaului lost its upper rank, registering a 40 % decrease until In the same period, tourist arrivals in Bran increased from only 6130 in 2001, to in 2013 (with a few peaks after 2003, 2007 and after the management change in 2009). The names of the accommodation units indicate a poor capitalization of Dracula s myth: only a few units in Bran ( Vampire camp and Count Vladimir ), compared to those with names evoking the mountain landscape (about 12 %), the place history (7.74 %) or traditions (1.5%). Apart HCD, in Tiha Bargaului there is one guest house with historical references ( Romans route ). These different approaches to destination management are reflected by the image and popularity of HCD and BC on major international travel websites with a strong impact on building tourist expectations. In June 2014, Romania s presentation on LonelyPlanet.com mentioned BC and Dracula s myth as landmarks for two main country features: BC for History and Dracula for Folkore and Superstitions. The Lonely Planet review of BC emphasized again the historical heritage, reinforced by the castle s inclusion in 5 recommended tours (one cultural and historical, 2 Halloween related and 2 mixing natural and cultural attractions) and its association with another historical attraction (Bran Customs museum). At the opposite, HCD is registered only as an accommodation unit, with an owners description focused on natural heritage (mountain location) and hotel amenities. On Tripadvisor.com, BC (also named Dracula s castle and rated with 4 of 5 stars) is the subject of 838 reviews and 831 photos. On the same site, there are only 26 photos and 32 reviews rating HCD with 3 of 5 stars and appreciating the location as the best quality. HCD is more popular and higher rated on Booking.com, with 7.9 from 10 points from 78 reviews. The location remains the best quality (8.6 points), followed by staff (8.3) and cleanliness (8.1). CONCLUSIONS The two Dracula destinations are the result of complex political and economic decisions capitalizing a similar local heritage, only with different priorities and local impact. In both cases, the public administration reproduced at different levels the same perception of the key features representing Romania s national heritage and authenticity: all the strategies focus on the promotion of reality (and historically accurate heritage as well as rural traditions) over myth, of BC over HCD. Even if they all benefit from Dracula s fame, local managers have very different tourism strategies: HCD keeps capitalizing the Dracula tradition, catering mostly for a specialized clientele, while BC s managers have diversified their approach and customers, with cultural tourists clearly exceeding the Dracula fans. Despite the resulting dual messages and place image, BC keeps benefiting from: a higher international popularity on international media and major travel websites; a better tourist status and offer (as a complex tourist attraction, compared to HCD, mainly known only as a hotel), a higher accessibility and concentration of tourist attractions and facilities as well as a stronger support from other public or private stakeholders initiatives. This explains the faster and more powerful impact on the local economy (more visitor-oriented) and tourist flows. Overall, the permanent oscillations of national policy-makers on the topic of Dracula tourism, national heritage and authenticity is reproduced at local level through: the mixed and confusing tourist promotion and interpretation provided by Bran Castle or the parallel strategies and discourses of local stakeholders (public administration, hotel managers, residents), in the case of HCD. The impact of these management and

8 SGEM 2014 International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on Social Sciences and Arts communication strategies on the visitors expectations and in place experiences will be the topic of future studies. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was supported by the strategic grant POSDRU/159/1.5/S/133391, Project Doctoral and Post-doctoral programs of excellence for highly qualified human resources training for research in the field of Life sciences, Environment and Earth Science cofinanced by the European Social Fund within the Sectorial Operational Program Human Resources Development REFERENCES [1] Coundouriotis, E. Dracula and the Idea of Europe. Connotations 9.2, pp , ; [2] Hovi, T. Dracula tourism, folklore and cultural heritage, The real and virtual spaces of folklore studies / realni in virtualni prostori folkloristike, Traditiones, 40/3, 2011; [3] Dittmer, J. Dracula and the Cultural Construction of Europe, Connotations , pp , 2002/2003; [4] Gruia, C. Ce facem cu Dracula dilema schizofrenica a Romaniei, National Geographic Romania, pp.24-45, November 2006; [5] Light, D. Dracula tourism in Romania: Cultural Identity and the State, Annals of Tourism Research 34 (3), pp , 2007; [6] Light, D. Performing Transylvania: Tourism, fantasy and play in a liminal place, Tourist Studies 9(3), pp , 2009; [7] Local Development plan for Bran-Moieciu-Fundata LAG Transcarpatica (in Romanian: Plan de dezvoltare locala pentru zona Bran-Moieciu-Fundata GAL Transcarpatica ), Dezvoltare-Locala-TRANSCARPATICA.pdf, accessed June 2014; [8] Olsen, K. Authenticity as a concept in tourism research. The social organization of the experience of authenticity. Tourist Studies, Sage publications, vol 2(2) pp , 2002; [9] Reijnders, S. Stalking the Count. Dracula, Fandom & Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 38(1), pp , 2011; [10] Stoleriu O.M. Building a New Tourist Destination Image for Romania after 1989, Conference Proceedings: The Inaugural European Conference on the Social Sciences 2013, pp , 2013; [11] Romanian Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism. Romanian Masterplan for the National Tourism (2007), online at accessed in August 2013; [12] accessed June 2014, section: regional development plans for , ; [13] accessed June 2014, section: regional development plans for , ; [14] Hotel Castle Dracula website, accessed June [15] Bran Castle - official website, accessed June 2014.