Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp.

779–800, 2004
# 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Printed in Great Britain
www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures 0160-7383/$30.00
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2004.02.004

TOURISM’S UNEVEN IMPACT

History on Cannery Row
Paul M. Fotsch
California State University-Monterey Bay, USA

Abstract: Many writers have criticized the influence of tourism on urban neighborhoods,
believing it homogenizes formerly distinct places. Others argue that it creates the atmos-
phere of an upscale shopping mall and, in doing so, displaces diverse populations. Yet other
claim that in places of historical significance, history tends to be simplified or completely
erased. All these criticisms can be applied to Cannery Row in Monterey, California. How-
ever, a close examination of the Row also reveals the inconsistencies and gaps in tourism’s
impact. The city shows a resilience to the standardizing influence of global tourism, but it
also shows some of the challenges to balancing the needs of hosts and guests. Keywords:
standardization, commodification, gentrification, historic districts. # 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All
rights reserved.

Résumé: Beaucoup d’auteurs ont critiqué l’influence du tourisme sur les quartiers
urbains, croyant que le tourisme homogénéise des endroits qui auparavant étaient dis-
tinctifs. D’autres soutiennent que le tourisme produit l’ambiance d’un centre commercial
haut de gamme et, ce faisant, qu’il déplace des populations diverses. D’autres encore pré-
tendent que, dans des lieux d’importance historique, on a tendance à simplifier l’histoire
ou à l’effacer complètement. On peut appliquer toutes ces critiques à Cannery Row, à Mon-
terey (Californie). Pourtant, un examen détaillé révèle aussi les contractions et les inters-
tices dans l’impact du tourisme. La ville montre une faculté de récupération vis-à-vis
l’influence standardisante du tourisme mondial, mais elle montre aussi quelques-uns
des défis à la mise en équilibre des besoins des habitants et des visiteurs. Mots-clés: standar-
disation, commodification, embourgeoisement, quartiers historiques. # 2004 Elsevier Ltd.
All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION
The sardines have come back to Monterey too late. Declared use-
less and unwelcome, they are ignored while strategies are developed
to lure the swarming tourists. . . The canneries have been primped
and corseted into mini-shopping places, and there are small hotels,
neat and luxurious and numerous, where (one imagines) Lee
Chong’s grocery, Doc’s Western Biological Laboratory, the Palace
Flophouse and Dora’s Bear Flag ‘‘Restaurant’’ once stood in all their
scruffy glory (Dwan 1986:100).

Paul Fotsch teaches in the Division of Humanities and Communication at California State
University-Monterey Bay (Monterey Bay, Seaside, CA 93955-8001, USA. Email
<paul_fotsch@csumb.edu>). He received his PhD in Communication from the University of
California, San Diego. His past publications have examined the representation of urban
space in US popular culture, and he is currently researching the Internet’s influence on
urban tourism and public demonstrations.

779
780 TOURISM IMPACT

This paper explores the impact of tourism on the historic neigh-

borhood of Cannery Row in Monterey, California. This impact can
be understood in the context of tourism’s growing importance for
urban economies. Meethan (1996) summarizes two key develop-
ments linked to this importance: first, the decline of manufacturing
in central cities and the growth of the service sector, second, the
increased mobility of capital causing cities to compete for business.
City officials view tourism as both making the city attractive to new
businesses and contributing to the economy. As Meethan writes, ‘‘the
urban environment itself becomes a commodity to be bought and
sold not only to corporate interests but also to individual con-
sumers’’ (1996:323). Consequently, cities use redevelopment pro-
jects—including convention centers and sports stadiums—and
marketing campaigns that include advertisements in newspapers,
magazines, brochures, and web sites that provide all the services of a
travel agent (Holcomb 1999:69). These promotions involve signifi-
cant investment on the part of cities, and not all analysts believe
they are worthwhile. According to Law, the economic impact of tour-
ism is difficult to measure; at minimum, there is reason to question
many of the studies arguing that it improves local employment and
city revenues (2002:177).
However, tourism has consequences beyond its economic costs and
benefits. Gilbert and Clark (1997) categorize the impacts as econ-
omic, social, cultural, ecological, physical, and psychological. Yet none
of these quite capture the concern expressed by Los Angeles Times wri-
ter Lois Dwan in the epigraph. Once a center of sardine processing,
Cannery Row evolved from a place originally visited by a few ‘‘literary
pilgrims’’ familiar with the John Steinbeck (1992) novel, to a major
attraction. This evolution confirms Herbert’s (2001) observations in
the United Kingdom, where sites associated with literary figures have
become popular to audiences beyond those with special knowledge of
an author.
Cannery Row also embodies a trend in many cities where neighbor-
hoods or streets are rebuilt using the historic character as a back-
ground for restaurants and giftshops. The quote from Dwan indicates
disappointment with this transformation, but it also reflects a roman-
tic vision of the neighborhood before the arrival of tourism. The ele-
ments that Dwan misses, ‘‘Lee Chong’s grocery, Doc’s Western
Biological Laboratory, the Palace Flophouse’’, are not from the ‘‘real’’
location but rather from the fictional location described in Stein-
beck’s book. Steinbeck based the places in his novel on an actual
grocery, biological supply lab, and brothel, but these represent a
small part of the street’s history. Ironically, the desire to see this
fictional past was central to the creation of the district Dwan now
scorns. The scorn seems primarily directed at the impact of tourism
on urban space. This type of influence, which will be the focus here,
is more specific to cities than the impacts enumerated by Gilbert and
Clark.
Cannery Row will be used as a case study to evaluate critiques of
four tendencies in historic neighborhoods: the standardization of
 PAUL FOTSCH 781

urban space, the commodification of urban space, the distortion of

local history, and neighborhood gentrification. Evidence reveals that
many elements here are similar to those found in other districts.
However, the complexity of these elements also reveals problems with
generalizing about tourism’s impact.

Standardization
One impact often criticized is the tendency of cities to become
increasingly similar. Shops with a neighborhood character are often
replaced conventional businesses. This is partly due to the strength of
large corporate restaurant and hotel chains. ‘‘The multinational firms
that supply the convention hotels, chain restaurants, and retail estab-
lishments follow a corporate model, resulting in the seemingly end-
less proliferation of atrium lobbies, formulaic restaurants, and
chrome-and-glass boutiques selling identical merchandise’’ (Fainstein
and Judd 1999:13). Cities welcome these businesses because they are
familiar and have the ability to market themselves nationally.
Ritzer calls the increasing standardization, found in all aspects of
society, McDonaldization. While admitting that the efficiency and pre-
dictability of corporate chains have made them economically success-
ful, Ritzer argues something is lost when local shops and restaurants
are replaced by ones you find in every other city. ‘‘The human desire
for new and diverse experiences is limited if not progressively
destroyed. It is being supplanted by the desire for uniformity and pre-
dictability’’ (2000:136).
At the same time, the similarity created by corporate chains makes
difficult a city’s goal of distinguishing itself from other places. One
way to overcome this problem is to build themed environments. Fol-
lowing a strategy developed by Disney for amusement parks, a wide
range of retail, entertainment, and restaurant venues, such as Hard
Rock Cafe and Planet Hollywood, now create themes. According to
Gottdeiner, themed environments emerged out of the growing need
for 20th century capitalism to market the symbolic value of their
goods rather than the use value. ‘‘The key economic relation of the
consumer society is not the exchange of money for goods, as it was in
the 19th century, but the link between the promotion of desire in the
mass media and advertising, and the commercial venues where they
can be purchased’’ (2001:68). In this sense, theming is just an exten-
sion of advertising.
The recent growth of themed environments can also be linked to
changes described by Harvey in his theory of flexible accumulation.
He argues that a crisis of capital accumulation emerged in the 70s,
and the solution was not just improved marketing but flexibility ‘‘with
respect to labor processes, labor markets, products, and patterns of
consumption’’. For example, according to Harvey, with the aid of
computer design technologies and better communication systems,
corporations can now adapt their products to changing market trends
or regional demands. They can also more easily subcontract out small
batches of a product without concern for long-term commitment to
782 TOURISM IMPACT

the maintenance of a factory or its employees. This flexibility of pro-

duction enables a new flexibility in marketing and consumption.
‘‘The relatively stable aesthetic of Fordist modernism has given way to
all the ferment, instability, and fleeting qualities of a postmodernist
aesthetic that celebrates difference, ephemerality, spectacle, fashion,
and the commodification of cultural forms’’. Themed environments,
Harvey argues, are a perfect example of the improved synergy
between marketing and production. Not only is it easy to produce a
Hard Rock Cafe T-Shirt for every city in the chain but also to change
the style of that shirt every few months as fashion changes. Efficient
production no longer requires the standardization of McDonald’s and
now permits greater differentiation. In short, ‘‘economies of scope
have beaten out economies of scale’’ (1989:147, 155–156).
The best examples of this are found in Las Vegas where every major
hotel constructs an elaborate themed environment to distinguish
itself from others. The Mirage hotel has a tropical theme, in the
Luxor, it is ancient Egypt, and Caesar’s Palace has ancient Rome. Sev-
eral hotels take as their theme other cities, most notably New York-
New York, Paris Las Vegas, and The Venetian. The interiors of these
hotels replicate the cobblestone streets and little store fronts of an idyl-
lic urban past. Thus, the unique characters of other cities are appropri-
ated to make the desert environment of Las Vegas more varied.
For MacCannell, these urban reconstructions are a poor imitation
of the distinct elements found in a real city. In fact, he argues these
interiors hide the underlying similarity of the hotels to all other
themed environments: they have become signs of corporate capital
rather than signs of a particular place. ‘‘The corporate effort to re-
manufacture and re-distribute ‘Planet Hollywood’ type symbols of
locality and distinction seeks to replace the local and make a product
or procedure of corporate capitalism the ‘other’ in every interaction’’
(1999:199).
A related strategy cities use to distinguish themselves and compete
on a global scale is the construction of large projects such as stadiums
and science museums. Dahles (1998) provides the example of Amster-
dam, which, after declining in popularity, invested in a major redevel-
opment project that included shopping, housing, and entertainment
facilities. Elements of the project have failed, Dahles argues, because
they are too similar to attractions built in other cities competing for
tourists. Instead, Amsterdam may be better off marketing the heritage
that makes it unique, another strategy many cities are now using to
distinguish themselves.

Commodification
Cities that market their heritage appear to counter the trend
toward the standardization and corporate domination of urban space,
but when places are redeveloped to match a marketing scheme the
characteristics that made a place unique may be lost. Teo and Yeoh
(1997) note how transforming Singapore’s Haw Par Village into a
theme park harmed its reputation by detracting from its image of
 PAUL FOTSCH 783

authenticity. Commodification made it too similar to amusement

parks in other cities with more spectacular rides and attractions.
Commodification can also be found in cities that have transformed
neighborhoods into successful shopping districts. Many of these malls
were developed by James Rouse whose first success was the 1976 resto-
ration of Faneuil Hall in Boston. This led to similar developments,
including South Street Seaport in New York, Harborplace in Baltimore,
and Union Station in St. Louis. Rouse has been praised for bringing
shopping from the suburbs back to the city, preserving notable
buildings and creating vital attractions, but others argue these new
developments are disconnected from the city because the chain stores
vary little from one place to the next (Satterthwaite 2001:93). More-
over, Satterthwaite argues, the shops owned by corporate chains have
less connection to the community than locally owned businesses.
‘‘The new mass retailer may contribute to the United Way and pro-
vide support for some local works, but that participation is part of a
prescribed public relations effort dictated by the home office many
states away’’ (2001:95).
Like other themed environments, the primary goal of these urban
malls is to encourage consumption. Gottdeiner argues that this focus
on consumption harms the vital role that public space plays in society
by restricting the diversity of people’s expression. ‘‘Primed at home by
mass media for self-realization through consumption, people enter
the pseudo-public space of the themed environment without either
the political or the social desires that their counterparts in earlier
epochs may have had. They pursue self-fulfillment in these places in
the only way allowed, through the realization of the consumer role’’
(2001:162). Sorkin sees the focus on consumption degrading civic life
by discouraging casual encounters between neighbors: ‘‘Obsessed
with the point of production and the point of sale, the new city is lit-
tle more than a swarm of urban bits jettisoning a physical view of the
whole, sacrificing the idea of the city as the site of community and
human connection’’ (1992:xiii). Both Gottdeiner and Sorkin believe
public space is vital to building connections with other members of
an urban community. The regulated environment and commercialism
of shopping malls make them poor substitutes for public parks and
city streets. To the extent that tourist districts follow the designs of
private malls, they fail as civic forums.

Distorting Local History

Making historic locations into themes for shopping can also be cri-
ticized for simplifying the past. Palmer (1999) notes that heritage
tourism is often constructed to affirm the tourist’s national identity by
presenting a romantic image of their past. People will be unlikely to
visit places that emphasize a negative image of their heritage. Boyer
comments on the products with maritime themes to be found at
South Street Seaport in New York: ‘‘Even in stylized and generic form,
the further these commodities lie from everyday reality-the more they
accessorize the fantasy narrative of exploration/discovery/coloniza-
784 TOURISM IMPACT

tion-the greater their allure and the more they seem to address some
need for authentic and novel experience’’ (1992:203). A similar criti-
cism is made of The Rocks in Sydney Coves, which depicts the origins
of Australian settlement (Waitt 2000). These reconstructed seaports
hide the slavery and genocide that were part of their past, just as the
Las Vegas hotels do not acknowledge the violent class conflict central
to the history of New York or Paris. Hiding these aspects of history
creates a more pleasant atmosphere for consumers and allows them
to purchase a connection to a romanticized past.
A similar strategy is used for tourists not connected to the place
they are visiting. Pitchford (1995) notes how Wales must strike a bal-
ance between presenting an authentic depiction of its past exploi-
tation and not offending the English, whose country exploited the
Welsh. At the extreme, history marketed by a place can be a pure
contrivance as in the case of countries claiming to be the home of
Santa Claus. For example, the Lapland region of Finland declared
itself ‘‘Santa Claus Land’’ to promote itself as the ‘‘real’’ home of
Santa Claus, a fictional figure whose origin in its contemporary form
was the United States (Pretes 1995). Hidden from view in this case is
a presentation of the decline of foresting, which might lead people to
consider the problems of environmental exploitation and the reason
for Laplander’s increased dependence on tourism.

Gentrification
Just as regions attempt to hide disturbing elements of history, what
Judd calls ‘‘tourist bubbles’’ attempt to hide disturbing elements of
the present. ‘‘Where crime, poverty, and urban decay make parts of a
city inhospitable to visitors, specialized areas are established as virtual
tourist reservations. These become the public parts of town, leaving
visitors shielded from and unaware of the private spaces where people
live and work’’. Judd argues that one consequence of these bubbles
might be to ‘‘contribute to racial, ethnic, and class tensions’’
(1999:36, 53) by segregating the affluent from those in surrounding
communities.
A more concrete impact comes when these bubbles are linked to
residential displacement. Philp and Mercer (1999) describe an
extreme example of this in Burma where thousands of people were
forced to relocate from Rangoon and Pagan, so buildings could be
used for tourist lodging. Displacement can also be sparked by a major
event coming to a city, as ‘‘in the case of the 1986 Vancouver Expo,
600 tenants were evicted including long-term, low-income residents
from hotels near the Expo site’’ (Hall 1994:162). When residents are
not forcibly removed, the more subtle power of gentrification works
to displace them. As Hall points out, ‘‘The creation of a ‘desirable’
middle-class environment invariably leads to increased rents, and is
accompanied by a corresponding breakdown in community structure,
including ethnicity, as families and individuals are forced to relocate’’
(1994:162). Even without a major event, tourism promotion can facili-
tate gentrification. Designating buildings in a neighborhood ‘‘historic
 PAUL FOTSCH 785

landmarks’’ makes the neighborhood an attraction and also signifi-

cantly raises the rents in the neighborhood (Zukin 1995).
Gentrification does not involve just residential transformation; it
also involves the transformation of commercial activity. In many
instances, street vendors are displaced because they detract from the
image of a regulated space (Marks 1996; Middleton 2003; Zukin
1995). Likewise, small businesses that do not sell expensive merchan-
dise or are not connected to a corporate chain often cannot afford to
locate in these newly gentrified regions. ‘‘The watchmaker, Hungarian
restaurant, invisible weaver, and the five-and-ten cannot afford the
increased rents; besides, they do not fit the image of the new down-
town with its entertainment retailing’’ (Satterthwaite 2001:91–92).
Redeveloped regions also exclude local residents who cannot afford
or are simply uninterested in shops and attractions catering to tour-
ists (Meethan 1997; Marks 1996). At minimum, these types of upscale
boutiques and restaurants are most appealing to the upper middle
class who can afford to live in redeveloped neighborhoods. On the
other hand, these shopping areas may also be problematic for upper
class residents because they lack grocery stores and pharmacies that
carry everyday necessities (Judd 1999:49).

ANALYZING CANNERY ROW

Cannery Row first became an attraction in 1945 when John Stein-
beck’s novel was published, and fans occasionally came to see the
bustling backdrop for the novel. In 1953, the owners of the Wing
Chong market, described as ‘‘Lee Chong’s’’ in the novel, reported
large numbers looking for various landmarks such as ‘‘Doc’s Lab’’ and
the brothel of ‘‘Dora Flood’’ (Rink 1953). When the book was pub-
lished, sardine processing was at its peak, but by the 50s, there were
few sardines left in the bay to be caught. Therefore, as many of the
canneries fell into disrepair or burned to the ground, businesses
slowly appeared in their place to take advantage of the Steinbeck fans
coming to visit the street. In 1958, the street was renamed Cannery
Row, and in 1962, a plan was developed to both preserve the little
industry that remained and encourage new commercial development
(Monterey Peninsula Herald 1962).
Over time the attraction of the street became both its association
with the popular novel and the industrial landscape of empty can-
neries. The value of this heritage was first utilized in 1972, when two
former warehouses were renovated into shopping centers. The reno-
vation was described by the developer as an enterprise ‘‘that can both
preserve the flavor of Cannery Row and give it new life’’ (Monterey Pen-
insula Herald 1972:15). In 1973, the Monterey City Council recognized
the attraction of the landscape when it approved a new plan that
called for both opening up sections of the street to provide beach
access and preserving its architectural appearance (Howe 1972). The
value of the landscape was made especially clear in 1979 when the
786 TOURISM IMPACT

replica of a cannery that had burned down two years before was
rebuilt as a shopping mall (Monterey Peninsula Herald 1979).
In addition to Steinbeck’s writing and the former industry, a third
major theme emerged in 1984 when the Monterey Bay Aquarium
opened. Significantly, it built on the previous two themes, first by car-
rying on the legacy of ocean research conducted by Ed Ricketts,
Steinbeck’s friend and the inspiration for Doc in Cannery Row, and
second by rebuilding the facade of the Hovden Cannery whose place
it occupies. At the same time, the aquarium overtook these two
themes and became the largest attraction in the area. It is now part of
a larger theme, which could be labeled ‘‘the ocean environment’’. In
addition to the aquarium, access to ocean views and beaches allows
people to explore the tide pools, go kayaking or scuba diving.
The following analysis of Cannery Row is based on fieldwork con-
ducted primarily in the summer and fall of 2002. During time spent
on the streets and in the buildings of the district, the author observed
tourists’ behaviors and interactions with their surroundings. In
addition, for several hours each week the author hosted a small gal-
lery of historic photos on the second floor of a former cannery ware-
house. Here, people frequently asked questions, about such things as
Cannery Row history and what to do in the area. This enabled the
author to carry out approximately 100 unstructured interviews of vary-
ing lengths.

Standardization
The variety of shops on Cannery Row is similar to that in other
cities. In a former can manufacturing building, there is an indoor mall
with outlet stores for name brands (such as Reebok, Izod, Woolrich,
and Samsonite). Other buildings contain candy stores, jewelry bou-
tiques, and shops with souvenirs and T-shirts where the sea otter is the
emblem for Monterey just as the Space Needle is for Seattle or the
Arch for St. Louis. One toy store occasionally hosts a ‘‘Hello Kitty’’ mas-
cot much like one would find at a large shopping mall. Most of the
products in these shops have little to connect them to the area except
the Monterey logo, they are frequently made in China, Mexico, or the
Philippines.
There are a few art galleries, including one for Thomas Kinkade
prints and another for Ansel Adams photographs. Both artists are
very popular and their works can be found in many shopping malls.
At the same time, Adams is connected to the area by having lived and
worked in nearby Carmel Valley for the last 20 years of his life, and
the Adams gallery contains photos of local scenes by contemporary
photographers. A few other shops contain locally produced items:
one claims all its jewelry is made by local artists, and another contains
hand-crafted soaps. There are at least three shops dedicated to locally
produced wines. Halewood and Hannam (2001) show how shopping
can be a place where authenticity is negotiated, in their case at a mar-
ket where ‘‘authentic replicas’’ of Viking artifacts are sold. But few of
the items sold have any connection to the location. For example, the
 PAUL FOTSCH 787

jewelry and soap, although handmade, appear similar to items found

in other destinations, and many other regions of the country now
have local wineries and tasting rooms.
The restaurants are also similar to those in other cities. Perhaps sur-
prisingly, there are only three eating establishments that are members
of a chain: Starbucks, El Torito, and Bubba Gumps. Bubba Gumps
might be the most popular of the restaurants. Diners often wait two
hours or more for a table. It claims to be the first restaurant to be
inspired by a movie, and is much like the Hard Rock Cafe or Planet
Hollywood found in cities throughout the United States. There is a
Thai restaurant and an English Pub, but, not surprisingly, the most
common theme is seafood. This might link the cuisine to the area,
especially when the seafood is caught locally, but it is hardly distinc-
tive since fresh seafood is common to restaurants in many coastal
cities.
There are at least two restaurants that promote their connections to
the area. The Sardine Factory advertises its 32-year connection to
Monterey as well as its role in the 1971 Clint Eastwood movie ‘‘Play
Misty for Me’’. Kalisa’s, the restaurant that has been on the street the
longest, opened in 1958 using the building that had been the
location of ‘‘La Ida’s Cafe’’, one of the brothels Steinbeck described
(Hemp 2001:12, 48). It stands across from what is now the Aquarium.
The walls are covered with Steinbeck memorabilia, and the dis-
organized appearance and well-worn furniture are a dramatic contrast
to the refined themes of the other restaurants.
While most of the shops and restaurants are similar to those in
many other places, Cannery Row does have characteristics that make
it unique. Most of all, there are the facades of former canneries.
Although only one sardine packing building still exists, many of the
original warehouses have been converted to shops and restaurants,
while other buildings have been built to look like the canneries they
replaced. The most recognizable features are the bridges, called cross-
overs, which were used to move the sardines from cannery to ware-
house. Two original ones remain and three others have been
constructed to recreate the image of an earlier time. These features
give the standard shops an unusual backdrop. This is especially the
case in the older buildings such as the Monterey Canning Company
warehouse where Starbucks is located. The exposed wooden beams
and air ducts give an industrial interior to the coffeeshop.
Within several of the buildings, there are also old photos from the
area. Starbucks has a small collection of photos from the late 50s.
Across the street, the rebuilt Monterey Canning building contains
photos by noted journalist Tom Weber. The interior of the Tin Can-
nery Outlets also reflects its status as a former factory and contains a
display of photos dating back to the 19th century. Next to the photo
display there are two glass cases containing ship models and sardine
cans.
At several places along the street, there are markers identifying the
buildings and activities that existed previously at their locations.
Between Bubba Gumps and Ed Ricketts’ former lab a mural depicting
788 TOURISM IMPACT

various scenes from the past covers a wooden barricade. Bruce Ariss, a
local artist and Steinbeck friend, designed the mural. A different local
artist painted each panel. Across the street from Ricketts’ lab is a
large wood panel with another Ariss painting. Next to this painting
are three relocated worker shacks that form a small exhibit. In sum,
all these elements help distinguish Cannery Row from neighborhoods
in other cities.

Commodification
Of course, some might regard these characteristic elements as serv-
ing purely commercial purposes. The industrial style of the buildings
and the crossovers evoke an intriguing theme much like the canal
inside Las Vegas’s Venetian Hotel, and, like the interior of the Vene-
tian, these elements could be viewed as merely the backdrop for a
shopping mall. For one thing, the photos, placards and even the
worker shacks could easily be missed considering their small presence
in comparison to the number of shops that line the street. This domi-
nance of shopping might inhibit the informal socializing Gottdeiner
and Sorkin believe is vital to urban life.
On the other hand, research on shopping malls has shown that
they contain many activities not directed simply at consumption.
Malls have become a center of social activity for people with diverse
backgrounds where one does not need to actually purchase anything
to participate. As Shields points out, these spaces are designed to
make simply strolling along and looking at the products displayed
enjoyable. ‘‘Everyday shopping activities are foregrounded as if on a
theatre stage, to be observed by passers-by who may vicariously partici-
pate in the bustle and lively activity of consumption without necessar-
ily spending money’’ (1992:6).
There are many activities linked with various stores that do not
require a purchase to be enjoyed. Although the ‘‘Hello Kitty’’ mascot
may promote buying items with her image on them, the author
observed many people greeting her or having their picture taken with
her without walking into the store sponsoring her appearance. Like-
wise, many people sit on the bench outside Bubba Gumps and put
their feet in the plaster cast of Forrest Gump’s running shoes without
entering the giftshop.
Perhaps the best example of a store that encourages looking with-
out buying is the American Revival Company, which stocks movie pos-
ters, toy cars, Coca-Cola trays, and other memorabilia. By displaying
replicas of collectibles and antiques, this store reflects what Urry
(2002) sees as a growing trend where museums and shopping over-
lap. There is also a display case in the store containing items that
have a local connection, including signed photos of Clint Eastwood, a
personal letter from him thanking a contributor to his campaign for
mayor of Carmel, and an old paperback copy of Cannery Row. By the
items are signs saying ‘‘not for sale’’, indicating they are here simply
for the enjoyment of seeing them.
 PAUL FOTSCH 789

Another example of this is found in the Ansel Adams gallery. Obvi-

ously, this has similarities to an art museum with pictures hanging on
the walls, but there is also a display case with artifacts, such as a Time
magazine with Ansel Adams on the cover, some photography books
and a camera. There is no sign explaining what the items are. One
does not know, for example, if this camera was actually owned by
Adams, but because the items are placed under glass and look old,
they might be appreciated like items in a museum.
Outside the shops, there are many other things that can be enjoyed
without purchase. Perhaps the dominant activity is simply watching
other people, something that is common to many places that attract
large crowds. If one prefers to watch wildlife, several spots provide
access to the ocean where birds, sea otters, and other creatures can
be observed. At Steinbeck Plaza on the weekends there is often live
music, and just below, on McAbee Beach, children can be found get-
ting their feet wet and looking for animals in the tide pools.

Historical Distortions
Several attractions do not require purchase, including the photos,
buildings, murals, and placards depicting local history; but here the
question becomes whether these attractions erase the complexities of
the past. Norkunas clearly found this to be the case in her 1993 study
of Monterey tourism. She argues that representations on Cannery
Row hide the working class culture that once existed there. In part,
this is done by transforming former sardine factories into stores,
where ‘‘Steinbeck’s people could never have afforded to shop’’
(1993:58).
For Norkunas, history is distorted primarily by an overemphasis on
Steinbeck. Many of the stores use him or his characters to promote
themselves; promotional literature refers to Steinbeck making the
street famous, and his bust is in front of what is now Steinbeck Plaza.
(The Plaza had not been completed when Norkunas wrote her analy-
sis.) The mixing of facts with the fiction from Steinbeck’s novels
especially concerns Norkunas. A good example of this mixing can be
found in the mural designed by Ariss. The panels include scenes of
the fishing and canning operations as well as fictional scenes from
Steinbeck’s novels. Another example of this blending can be found in
the Spirit of Monterey Wax Museum located in the basement of the
rebuilt Monterey Canning Company building. Narrated by the ‘‘voice
of John Steinbeck’’, it begins by depicting actual persons and events,
such as the arrival in Monterey of Father Junipero Serra, and con-
cludes with scenes of the fictional characters of Mack and others from
Steinbeck’s novel.
Norkunas argues that these representations lead people to focus on
the fiction created by Steinbeck rather than the real history of those
who lived and worked along the street. ‘‘The past on which Steinbeck
based his fiction, the difficult social history of the working classes pro-
duced by the canning industry, has been replaced by the nostalgia of
the fiction itself’’ (1993:63). Writing eight years later, Walton agrees
790 TOURISM IMPACT

with Norkunas that fact and fiction are conflated, but he goes further
and argues that Steinbeck’s novel had little to do with history in the
first place. ‘‘Cannery Row is a tender and sometimes profound imagin-
ative work but not true to life on Ocean View Avenue, as the street
was called at the time’’ (2001:234). As Walton shows, life during its
industrial period included ethnic and class conflict, important tech-
nological innovation, and ecological crises.
In pointing to these gaps in representation, it should be empha-
sized that any depiction of the past is necessarily incomplete. Accord-
ing to Ashworth and Tunbridge, ‘‘[The historic city] is a
contemporarily created phenomenon which, like the study of history
itself, can be re-created anew by each generation according to the
prevailing attitudes towards the past’’ (1994:26). These re-creations
are often chosen to serve political interests. For Walton, ‘‘Public his-
tory is constructed, not, in the main, for the purposes of posterity or
objectivity, but for aims of present action (conquest, social reform,
political reorganization, economic transformation)’’ (2001:294).
However, these public presentations are not always interpreted as
they are intended to be. ‘‘Elements of many different ideologies can
be traced in most historic cities, and it is difficult to link a particular
ideology with any particular city; not least because individual con-
sumers may react quite differently to the same historic stimulus’’
(Ashworth and Tunbridge 1994:29). Thus, the key question is not
whether representations of the past are accurate or not, but which of
its elements are highlighted or ignored; whose stories are being told
and whose are not? Norkunas acknowledges the multiple messages
conveyed, but stresses that the stories of workers and street people are
absent.
One problem with Norkunas’s analysis is that much has changed
since her observations were done over ten years ago. There are now
several exhibits that depict workers and industry. As noted, the Amer-
ican Tin Cannery Premium Outlets contains 22 photos depicting the
history of sardine canning in Monterey. The exhibit begins with late
19th century photos of the Chinese settlement on China Point,
including a picture of an outdoor shrine, ‘‘a focal point of the settle-
ment’’. Several images with text emphasize the early Chinese contri-
bution to the fishing industry. Other photos show the evolution of
fishing and canning techniques and focus on the contributions of
Chinese, Japanese, Spanish, and Italian laborers. Furthermore, there
are several photos of women working in the packing plants, one with
the caption ‘‘Women were employed almost exclusively—except dur-
ing the war years—for the cold wet tedious job of filling the variety of
cans into which Monterey’s sardines were packed’’.
The diversity of workers is highlighted further in the exhibit of
three worker shacks. According to markers in front of the shacks,
each is furnished with artifacts that reflect the lives of the cannery
workers who occupied them. The sign in front of the first describes
‘‘Billy’’, a Filipino worker who likely was attracted to California ‘‘after
the 1924 Immigration Act excluded Japanese, who had been a main-
stay of the state’s agricultural labor force’’. The second shack repre-
 PAUL FOTSCH 791

sents the lives of ‘‘Tanaka & Okamoto’’ a Japanese couple who ‘‘as
aliens ineligible for American citizenship, encountered increasing
social and regulatory discrimination’’. The final shack is intended to
reveal the life of a Spaniard, ‘‘Manolon’’. The signs are notable in
describing not only the inhabitants’ work—‘‘seamers’’, ‘‘box makers’’,
‘‘can catchers’’—but also their leisure activities. For the Spaniards, it
notes ‘‘The single men smoked hand-rolled cigarettes of Tobacco de
la Libre, read the Spanish paper La Prensa, conversed with their
countrymen, and played the songs of their homeland’’. The sign
introducing the three shacks includes a group photo of cannery work-
ers—women and men from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds,
and the text notes ‘‘at least a half-dozen languages could be heard
over the din of the canning machinery’’.
There are several other signs that describe historic landmarks. One
in front of the empty lot where the California Packing Corporation
plant existed describes the operation of the first packing company to
open. A subtitle on the sign reads ‘‘The Row’s First Canning Oper-
ation was Japanese’’, after which the text describes how cans were
originally sealed by hand. It also describes how, as mechanization
grew, ‘‘the grueling work of the packing lines was almost exclusively
done by women’’.
Although elements of the Row blend fact with the fiction of Stein-
beck, a sign located across from Ed Ricketts’ lab makes a point of
separating these two. Titled ‘‘One Man, Two Worlds’’, the sign notes
that ‘‘Doc Ricketts, The Myth’’ was a character in Steinbeck’s novels
Cannery Row and Sweet Thursday. ‘‘Doc was the source of scientific and
intellectual curiosity, knowledge and compassion—on a fictional
street that has become the world-famous Cannery Row’’. At the same
time, it makes clear, ‘‘the real Ed Ricketts was a serious and dedicated
scientist’’, who conducted valuable research on the ocean.
This small collection of signs, photos, and exhibits ignores many of
the ethnic and class conflicts that were part of the Row’s history. For
one thing, there is no mention of how Chinese and Japanese fisher-
men were put out of business by government regulation and compet-
ing Italians, who often attacked their boats. Also ignored are the
violent labor struggles that began when Japanese fish cutters went on
strike in 1920, and culminated in a 1936 strike that gained recog-
nition for the Cannery Workers Union (Walton 2001). The failure to
depict conflict to some extent shows how the past is sanitized.
At the same time, the district cannot be characterized as simply a
romanticized representation of Steinbeck’s novels. The grueling work
in the canneries, especially the work of women, is described in several
places. The signs in front of the shacks make clear the diversity of
laborers and the discrimination faced by Japanese. Nor is conflict
completely absent. First, the sign introducing the worker shacks
indirectly refers to labor struggles: ‘‘Until the formation of the Can-
nery Workers Union in 1936, wages averaged twenty-five cents an
hour’’. Second, in the Tin Cannery building, one caption at the
photo exhibit refers to ‘‘the fire that devastated the settlement and
ended Chinese primacy in the fishing industry’’. Moreover, the adjac-
792 TOURISM IMPACT

ent display case contains a model of a Chinese fishing boat and a

newspaper article detailing the discrimination Chinese fishermen
faced. Even the Wax Museum makes a point of highlighting the
brutal treatment of the Indians under the Spaniards and contains the
figure of an Indian in the stockades.
An idealized construction of the environmental past is challenged
by frequent references to the sardine industry’s decline. Several pla-
cards describe the large numbers of sardines processed in the 30s and
their dramatic decrease during the 40s. The story seems to warn
against the danger of industries blindly exploiting natural resources.
An exhibit on the sardine industry outside the aquarium makes this
especially clear, where it says ‘‘The disappearance of the sardines
taught us a lesson: the ocean’s bounty is limited and should be used
with care’’.
Given how small these exhibits are, it is fair to ask how much
impact they have. The author’s observations indicate that while a
majority of people simply walk by the restored shacks and the photos
in the outlet mall, a large number of them do stop to look and read
the signs. Yet, even if they ignore the exhibits and see only a softened
version of Steinbeck’s fiction, Cannery Row should not be dismissed
as merely dulling an understanding of the past. Lowenthal defends
popular heritage against critics of its simplifications and distortions by
emphasizing its ability to inspire an interest in history. ‘‘To contend
that heritage precludes good history is to see the public singularly
blinkered, as if infection by Disney destroyed historical curiosity. . . As
the Civil War television series spurred academic book sales, so might
Disney’s Historyland generate interest in actual historic places and
themes’’ (1996:170). Heritage sites that attract large crowds can build
support for research as well as motivate people to read more about a
place and learn the more complex history that might be hidden by
reconstructions.
At the same time, acknowledging the value of popular heritage
should not prohibit criticizing it and revising it with more infor-
mation. Struggles over how places are preserved are important. Sig-
nificantly, these struggles often become entangled with conflicts over
other issues, especially concerning development. For example, oppo-
nents to the construction of a shopping and condominium complex,
called the Cannery Row Marketplace, claimed it would destroy the
area’s historic character by relocating a former sardine reduction
plant building and reconstructing a former warehouse. The city dis-
agreed and along with the developer claimed the new complex would
provide a museum emphasizing the history of canneries and laborers
rather than the fictional world of Steinbeck. Significantly, each side
drew support from members of the Steinbeck family to help establish
the legitimacy of their position (Walton 2001).

Gentrification
The plan for this new development raises more than just concern
for the preservation of heritage: it will also have an impact on the
 PAUL FOTSCH 793

diversity of people, further creating the feeling that only the wealthy
are welcome. Evidence that Cannery Row is primarily a place for the
affluent can be found in a 1999 study showing that Monterey’s tour-
ists were wealthier than the national average (Wirthlin Worldwide
1999). Furthermore, despite the large numbers of homeless who live
in Monterey, they are nearly absent from this street, except for an
occasional person sleeping in San Carlos Park. This contrasts dramati-
cally with many other tourism districts, including Pacific Avenue in
Santa Cruz, which is just 30 miles to the north.
Norkunas saw two major developments at opposite ends of the Row
signaling the shift toward an upscale district. ‘‘The movement today is
toward recreating the elegant era of the Del Monte Hotel through
such structures as the Monterey Plaza Hotel and the Monterey Bay
Aquarium’’ (1993:71). Today, the Monterey Bay Aquarium costs nearly
US$ 20 for adults, making it expensive for low-income families. Since
Norkunas did her analysis the appearance of the street has become
even more refined with the construction of Steinbeck Plaza at its cen-
ter. This mall, made to appear like a cannery building on one side
and a Spanish Colonial building on the other, contains among its
upscale stores one selling cigars and wine and another with Pebble
Beach golf attire.
As noted earlier, the disappearance of the sardine industry in the
50s led the city to design a redevelopment plan. Initially, as the can-
neries stopped operating, a diverse group of antique shops, art gal-
leries, and service businesses emerged. In 1958, the street contained
art galleries, a dance studio, an upholstery cleaner, and a butterfly
shop (Towe 1958). In the 60s, more restaurants appeared catering to
tourists, but a 1972 survey of building usage in the revised plan still
reflected a diversity of businesses. It listed several art galleries, antique
shops, clothing stores, hair stylists, a bookstore, light manufacturers,
as well as restaurants and a movie theater (Monterey California Plan-
ning Department 1972). Although some of these businesses might
have been visited by both tourists and residents, they reflect a greater
diversity than found in most tourism districts.
The same year the survey was taken, the Sculpture Center, which
had been at its location for 10 years, received notice that its lease
would not be renewed. The center contained artist studios and an
exhibition space. While the property manager acknowledged the cen-
ter’s contribution to the community, he emphasized, ‘‘this is a high-
priced piece of property which we’ve got to develop on an economic
basis’’ (Woolfenden 1972:27). The space eventually became the
location for an expensive restaurant. Many of the other small galleries
and shops likely also faced replacement by businesses that could take
advantage of the growing number of tourists and thus pay higher
rents.
Shops that are similar to those found 30 years ago can still be
found, including restaurants and art galleries. As noted, there are
even shops with locally made crafts. However, overall, the goods prim-
arily cater to tourists, not residents. For example, there are no more
small service providers, such as hair stylists or furniture repair shops.
794 TOURISM IMPACT

There are no longer antique shops directly on the Row, but there is
an ‘‘Antique Mall’’ in a former cannery warehouse one street above.
One small shop located in the back of the former Wing Chong Mar-
ket provided inexpensive second hand clothing, as well as literature
on the dangers of genetically altered food. Its closure in the summer
of 2002 perhaps signaled the end of shops that do not conform to the
desires of tourists.
The lack of stores that cater to local residents makes sense given
the absence of residential dwellings in the vicinity. At the height of
sardine processing, the nearby streets contained a significant amount
of housing, and in 1978, many of these units were still rented by mod-
erate and low-income households. That year a redevelopment plan
indicated that 117 houses would be lost. In their place, parking lots
and hotels were being constructed. City officials acknowledged there
was little they could do to assure the lost housing units would be
replaced with new housing units in other neighborhoods, despite a
study showing that finding affordable housing was a major problem
for city residents (Monterey Peninsula Herald 1978).
The replacement of the Ocean View Hotel by a boutique inn epito-
mized the changed character of housing in the area. The hotel was
constructed on McAbee beach in 1927 (Hemp 2003). As the canning
industry declined, it remained an important source of low cost hous-
ing. One article referred to the tenants as ‘‘renters and transients’’
(Towe 1958). In 1966, the hotel was closed down due to its poor con-
dition. That year the manager described the residents he had over
the years as ‘‘doctors, lawyers, ministers, fishermen, cab drivers, beat-
niks, laborers and plain damn bums’’ (Sorri 1966). In 1983, the
empty hotel was torn down and in its place The Spindrift Inn was
built, which has rates of $ 400 a night in peak season (Monterey Penin-
sula Herald 1983).
The replacement of low cost housing with hotels was part of a lar-
ger redevelopment trend that took place in Monterey beginning in
the 60s when 100s were displaced by the construction of a large
downtown convention center and hotel (Walton 2001). When plans
for renewal near Cannery Row were revealed in 1981, residents
expressed concern that they would be displaced as well, but city offi-
cials assured them that any private land taken for public improve-
ments would be already vacant (Monterey Peninsula Herald 1981). At
the same time, the city could not prevent private owners from choos-
ing to redevelop their land by replacing rental units with new hotels.
This became clear in 1984 when a woman was surprised to find
bulldozers prepared to demolish her small bungalow in order to clear
the land for the construction of the Otter Inn, a hotel that now has
rooms starting at $ 80 a night (Monterey Peninsula Herald 1984).
The reasons behind rising housing costs are complex, but the dis-
placement caused by redevelopment at minimum signaled affordable
housing might become a problem. Indeed, as early as 1974, a study
found that more than 50% of Monterey County residents could not
afford to buy a home (Monterey Peninsula Herald 1974). Since the 80s,
Monterey has frequently been recognized as containing some of the
 PAUL FOTSCH 795

least affordable housing in the nation. A 2002 study found only San
Francisco had a smaller percentage of homes affordable to someone
earning the city’s median annual income (Ritter 2002). Renters also
find it costly; nearly one third spend at least 35% of their income on
housing (Monterey County Herald 2002). What makes the situation
even harder is that the wages paid in many hospitality jobs are rela-
tively low. Because many cannot afford to live in Monterey, they are
forced to commute from Salinas, an hour-long trip by bus (Livernois
2002).
Despite the dominance of upscale shopping and lack of affordable
housing, Cannery Row is far from a playground for the wealthy.
There are many events with diverse appeal. During the summer, the
weekend of a Harley Davidson rally in Hollister, 50 miles to the north-
east, bikers drive down to park and walk along the street. Two weeks
later, the street is blocked off for the owners of several hundred
motorcycles who come to see the superbike races at nearby Laguna
Seca. Perhaps the most unusual entertainment is the occasional per-
formance by a local belly dancing class in a dark and dingy room
above Kalisa’s. Here, a diverse crowd of mostly local residents, many
of them friends of the belly dancers, comes to watch and sometimes
participate. Further, every year since 1983, a reunion of former can-
nery workers is held where friends share their memories of life dur-
ing the peak season.
While these events assure that wealthy people are not the only tour-
ists, elements of the environment challenge a purely elegant image.
First, the wall that contains the mural was originally built to block the
view of an unfinished construction site on both sides of the street
between Ricketts’ lab and Bubba Gumps. There is no sign indicating
what is being built, but it is fairly clear the site has been abandoned.
In fact, construction for the hotel began in 1985. However, due to
financing problems, it was stopped in 1986, after only the foundation
had been laid (Monterey Peninsula Herald 1986). A new hotel proposal
was approved in the winter of 2001 yet construction remains stalled,
and the site looks like an archeological ruin (Manley 2001).
The other major gap is found between the Monterey Plaza Hotel
and El Torito’s. Here, there is a long stretch of land with only the
concrete foundation of a former cannery. Next to this is a former
reduction plant, which had been used as a gift gallery, that is now
empty. The space across the street is occupied partially by a parking
lot, but next to the parking lot appears to be the ruins of a building.
Piles of dirt, broken concrete, barrels, and other garbage stand in
front of large rusty cylinders, perhaps former storage containers. This
large empty space stands in dramatic contrast to the image of com-
mercialization.
Over the past seven years, proposals to develop the site, such as the
Cannery Row Marketplace mentioned earlier, have failed to gain
approval. Some of the debate has concerned the project’s impact on
the area’s historic character, but the proposals were rejected primarily
because their size was considered out of proportion to nearby struc-
tures. After many revisions, a downsized version of the plan was
796 TOURISM IMPACT

approved by the Monterey Planning Commission and passed on to

the City Council in the summer of 2002 (Medina and Manley 2002).
For now the space remains deserted and, along with the stalled hotel
project, indicates that the transition to a post-industrial landscape has
been less than smooth.
Finally, one element that will be hard to eliminate even if all the
projects are completed is the smell. As Urry notes, ‘‘Olfaction seems
to provide a more direct and less premeditated encounter with the
environment than do other senses—and one that cannot be turned
off’’ (1999:82). Consequently, tourism districts are usually located at a
distance from offensive smells. But this is not possible for Cannery
Row, because a major part of its attraction—the ocean—can also be
the source of offending smells. The degree of the smell and its offens-
iveness varies. Usually there is just a mild smell of fish, but more than
once the author has overheard tourists commenting ‘‘it really stinks’’,
thus receiving a tiny reminder of the rotten stench that hung over
large parts of Monterey when the processing of fertilizer from sar-
dines was at its peak.

CONCLUSION
Chang, Milne, Fallon and Pohlmann (1996) argue for the impor-
tance of considering both local and global forces in examining urban
tourism. This study has started from the premise that the global com-
petition for tourism has led to common impacts on urban space,
including standardization, commodification, historical distortions,
and gentrification. These impacts can be found on the historic dis-
trict of Cannery Row, but a close examination reveals how local forces
shape their impact. First, while elements such as shops with T-shirts
and coffee mugs, seafood restaurants, and even a Starbucks are stan-
dard to many tourism districts, unique local elements remain, includ-
ing the former cannery buildings and crossovers and the landmarks
reminding tourists of Steinbeck’s novel. Second, shopping and con-
sumption dominate the activities along the Row revealing the commo-
dification of the landscape. However, the ocean life and historical
placards are free to view and even shopping does not require a pur-
chase. Third, although references to Steinbeck tend to romanticize
the industrial past, other historical references emphasize the diversity
of the cannery workers and even discuss ethnic conflict. Finally,
the displacement of diverse businesses and low cost housing signal
gentrification. At the same time, the undeveloped gaps along the row
prevent the image of a purely upscale district.
When the gaps along Cannery Row are filled, will the few remain-
ing signs of historical complexity and cultural diversity be covered
over as well? This is an important question to ask as the city works to
shape the impact of its largest industry. Chabra, Healy and Sills
(2003) show how perceived authenticity on the part of tourists is
important to their experience and is thus linked to the success of
tourism venues. The construction of new hotels and shopping plazas
 PAUL FOTSCH 797

has the potential of degrading the heritage that makes the street
unique. If the street is seen as primarily a shopping mall, tourists may
find malls in other cities more spectacular and more convenient.
From a different perspective, if new tourism developments increase
the number of low-wage workers, the city must take seriously the need
to increase its woefully inadequate stock of affordable housing. As
Fainstein and Gladstone (1999) argue, focusing on the commodifica-
tion of space fails to get at the more important question of tourism’s
impact on social equity. If, for example, a city preserves historic build-
ings, limits the number of chain stores, and provides a complex
depiction of its heritage, but tourist workers live in crowded,
inadequate housing, has tourism’s impact on space been positive?
This is not to dismiss the other aspects of urban space. However, the
case of Cannery Row makes clear that efforts to preserve a historic
district have the potential of privileging the needs of tourists over
residents._A

Acknowledgements—The author would like to thank Michael Hemp whose assistance helped
make the research possible and Jeffrey Bass for his advice on methodology.

REFERENCES
Ashworth, G., and J. Tunbridge
1994 The Tourist-Historic City. Chichester: Wiley.
Boyer, C.
1992 Cities for Sale: Merchandising History at South Street Seaport. In Varia-
tions on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public
Space, M. Sorkin, ed., pp. 181–204. New York: The Noonday Press.
Chabra, D., R. Healy, and E. Sills
2003 Staged Authenticity and Heritage Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research
30:702–719.
Chang, T., S. Milne, D. Fallon, and C. Pohlmann
1996 Urban Heritage Tourism: The Global–Local Nexus. Annals of Tourism
Research 23:284–305.
Dahles, H.
1998 Redefining Amsterdam as a Tourist Destination. Annals of Tourism
Research 25:55–69.
Dwan, L.
1986 Past is Present on Cannery Row. Los Angeles Times 29 June:100.
Fainstein, S., and D. Gladstone
1999 Evaluating Urban Tourism. In The Tourist City, D. Judd, and S. Fain-
stein, eds., pp. 21–34. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Fainstein, S., and D. Judd
1999 Global Forces, Local Strategies, and Urban Tourism. In The Tourist City,
D. Judd, and S. Fainstein, eds., pp. 1–17. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Gilbert, D., and M. Clark
1997 An Exploratory Examination of Urban Tourism Impact, with Reference
to Residents, Attitudes, in the Cities of Canterbury and Guildford. Cities
14:343–352.
Gottdeiner, M.
2001 The Theming of America: Dreams, Media Fantasies, and Themed Envir-
onments (2nd ed.). Boulder: Westview Press.
798 TOURISM IMPACT

Halewood, C., and K. Hannam

2001 Viking Heritage Tourism: Authenticity and Commodification. Annals of
Tourism Research 28:565–580.
Hall, C.
1994 Tourism and Politics: Policy, Power and Place. New York: Wiley.
Harvey, D.
1989 The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cul-
tural Change. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.
Hemp, M.
2001 The Official Cannery Row Visitors Guide. Volume 4. Monterey: Cannery
Row Company.
2003 Cannery Row: The History of John Steinbeck’s Old Ocean View Avenue.
Carmel: The History Company.
Herbert, D.
2001 Literary Places, Tourism and the Heritage Experience. Annals of Tour-
ism Research 28:312–333.
Holcomb, B.
1999 Marketing Cities for Tourism. In The Tourist City, D. Judd, and S. Fain-
stein, eds., pp. 54–70. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Howe, K.
1972 Cannery Row Plan Updated, Approved. Monterey Peninsula Herald 27
November:13.
Judd, D.
1999 Constructing the Tourist Bubble. In The Tourist City, D. Judd, and S.
Fainstein, eds., pp. 35–53. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Law, C.
2002 Urban Tourism: The Visitor Economy and the Growth of Large Cities
(2nd ed.). New York: Continuum.
Livernois, J.
2002 County General Plan Raises Questions about Development, Housing in
Salinas, Calif. Monterey County Herald 27 May:A1.
Lowenthal, D.
1996 Possessed by the Past: The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History.
New York: The Free Press.
MacCannell, D.
1999 The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Manley, V.
2001 Court OKs Cannery Row hotel: Environmental Review Challenged by
Community Group. Monterey County Herald 30 December:B1.
Marks, R.
1996 Conservation and Community: The Contradictions and Ambiguities of
Tourism in the Stone Town of Zanzibar. Habitat International 20:265–278.
Medina, M., and V. Manley
2002 Ocean View Plaza Advances: Planning Commission Passes Revised,
Scaled-Down Plan. Monterey County Herald 14 July:B1–2.
Meethan, K.
1996 Consuming (In) The Civilized City. Annals of Tourism Research 23:
322–340.
Meethan, K.
1997 York: Managing the Tourist City. Cities 14:333–342.
Middleton, A.
2003 Informal Traders and Planners in the Regeneration of Historic City
Centres: The Case of Quito, Ecuador. Progress in Panning 59:71–123.
Monterey County Herald
2002 Renters in Monterey Bay, Calif. See Big Budget Bite. Monterey County
Herald 15 May:A10.
 PAUL FOTSCH 799

1962 Council Adopts Cannery Row Plan. Monterey Peninsula Herald 5 Septem-
ber:9.
1972 Cannery Row Square Now Officially Open. Monterey Peninsula Herald 5
August:15.
1974 Housing Units Called Too Costly for Half of County’s Residents. Mon-
terey Peninsula Herald 16 February:2.
1978 Housing Crunch Likely to Worsen in Monterey. Monterey Peninsula Her-
ald 27 October:21.
1979 Past, Present Notables Show at Opening of Row Complex. Monterey Pen-
insula Herald 5 October:20.
1981 Foam Area Owners Reassured. Monterey Peninsula Herald 17 March:4.
1983 Old Hotel Gone. Monterey Peninsula Herald 19 October:21.
1984 Work at Cannery Row Hotel Hits Snag. Monterey Peninsula Herald 23
August:9.
1986 Rohr Hotel Construction Halted. Monterey Peninsula Herald 22
January:15.
Monterey California Planning Department
1972 Cannery Row Plan Revision: Existing Physical Conditions. Working Paper.
Monterey: Monterey Planning Commission.
Norkunas, M.
1993 The Politics of Public Memory: Tourism History and Ethnicity in Mon-
terey. California Albany: State University of New York Press.
Palmer, C.
1999 Tourism and the Symbols of Identity. Tourism Management 20:313–321.
Philp, J., and D. Mercer
1999 Commodification of Buddhism in Contemporary Burma. Annals of
Tourism Research 26:21–54.
Pitchford, S.
1995 Ethnic Tourism and Nationalism in Wales. Annals of Tourism Research
22:35–52.
Pretes, M.
1995 Postmodern Tourism: The Santa Claus Industry. Annals of Tourism
Research 22:1–15.
Rink, P.
1953 Wing Chong’s. What’s Doing on the Monterey Peninsula 6(7):11,32–33.
Ritter, J.
2002 Housing Debates hold up the Fort: Closed Military Facility in Calif. is
Focus of Class over ‘‘Affordable’’ Living Space. USA Today 3 June:A3.
Ritzer, G.
2000 The McDonaldization of Society Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.
Satterthwaite, A.
2001 Going Shopping: Consumer Choices and Community Consequences.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
Shields, R.
1992 Spaces for the Subject of Consumption. In Lifestyle Shopping: The Sub-
ject of Consumption, R. Shields, ed., pp. 1–20. London: Routledge.
Sorkin, M.
1992 Introduction: Variations on a Theme Park. In Variations on a Theme
Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space, M. Sorkin, ed.,
pp. xi–xv. New York: The Noonday Press.
Sorri, F.
1966 Locking Doors on Not-so-famous Ocean View Hotel: Era of Sorts Ends
on Monday with Closing on Cannery Row. Monterey Peninsula Herald 26
February:23.
Steinbeck, J.
1992 Cannery Row. New York: Penguin.
Teo, P., and B. Yeoh
1997 Remaking Local Heritage for Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research
24:192–213.
800 TOURISM IMPACT

Towe, D. 1958 This is Cannery Row. . . Game and Gossip 9(6):2–5,14–15.

Urry, J.
1999 Sensing the City. In The Tourist City, D. Judd, and S. Fainstein, eds.,
pp. 71–86. New Haven: Yale University Press.
2002 The Tourist Gaze (2nd ed.). London: SAGE.
Waitt, G.
2000 Consuming Heritage: Perceived Historical Authenticity. Annals of Tour-
ism Research 27:835–862.
Walton, J.
2001 Storied Land: Community and Memory in Monterey. Berkeley: Univer-
sity of California Press.
Wirthlin Worldwide
1999 Monterey County Guest Study Salt Lake City: Wirthlin Worldwide.
Woolfenden, J.
1972 Sculpture Center Faces Eviction From Cannery Row Studios. Monterey
Peninsula Herald 17 February:27.
Zukin, S.
1995 The Culture of Cities. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.

Submitted 22 May 2003. Resubmitted 3 November 2003. Accepted 14 February 2004.

Final version 27 February 2004. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Kit L.
Jenkins