The Ministry of Culture has launched an ambitious campaign to breathe new life into one of Thailand’s most poetic and oldest performance traditions. Under the banner Community-based Revitalisation of Nang Yai Tradition in Thailand (CRNT), suspended Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra confirmed that nang yai — the grand, firelit shadow-puppet theatre that traces its roots to the 15th century — will be proposed for inscription on UNESCO’s Register of Good Safeguarding Practices by March 2026.
A blueprint for keeping heritage alive
“Nang yai is not just performance art—it is a living legacy of Thailand’s history, spirituality and creativity,” Paetongtarn said, framing the CRNT as more than a preservation project. It’s a blueprint for resilient cultural life that stitches together local communities, national identity and international recognition. The pitch to UNESCO, she explained, aims to show how community-led efforts can safeguard traditions in ways that are practical, sustainable and replicable.
Theatre of shadows: what makes nang yai special
Nang yai is theatre at its most elemental. Giant puppets, carved from calf or buffalo hide, are worked behind a white screen and illuminated by flames. The result is shadow imagery so dramatic it turns myth into a living, moving mural of light and dark. Stories are drawn from the Ramakien — Thailand’s epic retelling of the Ramayana — where gods, demons and heroic princes stride across the stage in dramatic silhouette.
Once a staple of palaces, temples and village squares, nang yai is now a fragile treasure. According to the ministry, the tradition survives in only three active locales: Wat Khanon in Ratchaburi, Wat Sawang Ar-rom in Sing Buri and Wat Baan Don in Rayong. These three strongholds are the heart of the CRNT’s revitalisation efforts — communities where puppet-making, music, and performance can be nurtured and passed to new generations.
Why UNESCO matters
UNESCO’s Register of Good Safeguarding Practices is selective: only 40 of 788 submissions have made the list so far. Being added would do more than grant prestige. It would set nang yai as an example of how cultural heritage can be actively supported through community involvement, education, and sustainable funding models. For Thailand, this recognition would position the country as an international leader in cultural sustainability.
“Getting nang yai recognised would place Thailand among nations setting the gold standard for cultural preservation,” Paetongtarn said.
Sweet accompaniment: khao mao and regional ties
The ministry isn’t stopping with puppets. Thailand plans a second nomination that reaches beyond theater and across borders: khao mao — flattened, toasted rice — is slated to be proposed as a joint cultural heritage item with ASEAN neighbours. The Philippines has already invited Thailand to collaborate on the submission, noting the close cultural parallels (khao mao is known as duman in Tagalog).
Khao mao is simple yet emblematic: rice that’s been toasted or parboiled, then pounded into delicate, flaky pieces prized for their fragrant, nutty flavour and role in regional festivities. The joint nomination reflects a strategic cultural diplomacy — a tasty reminder that food, like performance, can knit regional identities together and amplify the case for shared heritage preservation.
Tourism, culture and the future
If both nominations succeed, expect more than plaques and press releases. Recognition could turbocharge cultural tourism initiatives, create income streams for local artisans and performers, and inspire younger Thais to learn puppet carving, storytelling and traditional music. Importantly, the CRNT positions communities — not just governments — as custodians, making the traditions financially and socially viable.
There are practical challenges: finding funding, encouraging apprenticeships, and integrating these age-old forms into a rapidly modernising society. Yet the CRNT’s community-first approach aims to meet those challenges head-on, pairing practical safeguarding measures with public outreach and educational programmes designed to make nang yai and khao mao relevant, appealing, and economically sustainable.
A cultural moment
Whether the UNESCO committees will grant inscription remains to be seen. What’s clear is that Thailand is staging a careful, passionate argument for why these traditions deserve international attention. From the flicker of a flame behind a leather puppet to the delicate crunch of flattened rice at a festival, these practices are living links between past and present — fragile, beautiful and worth saving.
For now, the lights are being stoked, the puppets repaired and the rice toasted. March 2026 now has a new date circled in the cultural calendar — and a chance for two of Southeast Asia’s most evocative traditions to step back into the global spotlight.
Pictures courtesy of Bangkok Post.
This is exciting — nang yai feels like the soul of old Thailand and deserves protection, but UNESCO lists are political too. I worry that tourism might turn sacred rites into performances for strangers. Still, community-led revitalisation is the right model if it keeps control local.
I love this plan, but who decides which communities get funding? Often the most visible groups get everything and small villages are left out. The ministry should publish criteria openly.
Transparency in selection is crucial. UNESCO designation itself cannot substitute for equitable resource distribution; ethnographic documentation and participatory mapping must guide implementation. A peer-reviewed stewardship framework would help avoid elite capture.
Tourism = death for tradition. Once you monetize nang yai, it becomes a theme-park act and the rituals vanish. Better to support apprenticeships quietly and keep festivals local.
I get that fear, grower134, but without some income the craftspeople can’t survive. The challenge is designing tourism that funds culture without draining its meaning.
Is this just another PR stunt by politicians? Paetongtarn endorses it now but will funding survive a change in government? Heritage shouldn’t be a political football.
Skeptical too, but political attention can be harnessed for good if watchdogs stay vigilant. Civil society must have oversight of how funds are used. Otherwise, it becomes empty branding.
Maybe you don’t like her, Joe, but credit where it’s due: she’s raising the profile of something fragile. Actions matter more than cynicism sometimes.
I can appreciate the result, but I want guarantees. Public money needs public accountability and long-term plans, not just photo ops.
As an anthropologist, I welcome community-based safeguarding. Inscription on UNESCO’s Register, which focuses on good practice, could be genuinely useful if it codifies community governance and training programs. However, evaluation metrics should be culturally sensitive.
Agreed. We must avoid technocratic metrics that privilege quantifiable outputs over intangible meanings. Oral histories, apprenticeship lineages, and ritual contexts need qualitative indicators.
People in the villages care about teaching grandchildren more than scores. Listen to elders; they know what counts.
I’ve seen crafts die when tourists control the schedule. Nang yai should be for locals first. UNESCO listing may help funding but won’t stop commodification by itself.
As someone from Ratchaburi, I want visitors but not at the cost of disrespecting rituals. There’s a line between sharing and exploiting. Maybe set limits on performances.
Exactly, P’Anong. Limits and community rules are key. Don’t let market demand rewrite tradition.
But isn’t some tourism necessary for young people to earn a living and choose this as a career? Without audiences there may be no future performers.
Seeing nang yai live as a child changed me. These stories are part of our identity and should be taught in schools. If UNESCO helps that, I’m for it.
Khao mao sounds delicious and a great diplomacy tool. Food brings people together faster than lectures. Pairing performances with local food could fund artisans and chefs alike.
The intersection of food and performance in cultural diplomacy is notable. Joint ASEAN nominations for khao mao/duman highlight transnational practices that challenge nation-state centric heritage models. This could shift how we conceive regional identity and shared stewardship.
Transnational nominations can be powerful but also risk flattening local variations. We should document regional recipes and rituals in detail to respect diversity.
Good point, Professor. Sometimes regional items are homogenised in the rush for a label, losing local stories. The nomination should preserve plurality.
Plurality matters. Let each village keep its version and be credited. Heritage isn’t just a single recipe or story.
My grandmother made puppets; the smell of hide and smoke stayed with me. It’s not museum stuff for me, it’s memory and family. I’m glad someone is trying to save it.
Your nostalgia is sweet, but traditions evolve. That doesn’t mean they are being ‘destroyed’ by change.
Change is okay when the community leads it. My fear is outsiders dictating how we adapt, not the adaptation itself.
Exactly — adaptation must be respectful. Elders should decide what changes are acceptable.
Practical challenges mentioned in the article are huge: funding, apprenticeships, and relevance to youth. We need scholarships, school curricula, and fair pay for performers. Without economic drivers, intangible heritage becomes intangible history.
Scholarships sound good but who administers them? If ministries control everything, local people might be sidelined. Create community trusts.
Community trusts with transparent boards and auditors could work. Blend public seed funding with private philanthropy and local oversight.
The PM’s office should set up a watchdog committee of cultural experts and villagers. That would show seriousness and build trust.
I’m worried UNESCO status attracts tourists but not long-term support for artisans’ livelihoods. Short-term grants die out; we need sustainable business models aligned with tradition. Community cooperatives could be the answer.
I saw nang yai once and it was magical. If kids can learn puppet carving like trade skills, that’s a win.
As someone who runs culinary tours, a joint khao mao nomination would be brilliant. Regional food trails can support producers and celebrate differences without making everything the same.
UNESCO badges often mean more bureaucrats than artists. Will the puppeteers actually see the benefits or just more paperwork?
This could be cultural appropriation by the state if it commercialises folk practices for national pride. Which communities get to speak for nang yai matters a lot.
Calling it appropriation seems extreme when the proposal emphasizes community leadership. The state can be a facilitator without taking ownership.
Facilitator or gatekeeper — time will tell. I’m staying skeptical until communities show real governance power.
Adding a practical suggestion: include profit-sharing clauses if performances are commercialised, and require a percentage of ticket sales go directly to apprenticeships. That could balance income with tradition.
Let’s not forget how rare it is for political will to align with cultural needs. This could be a landmark if executed well, and Thailand should take pride in leading preservation strategies across ASEAN.
We also need to consider environmental impacts: sourcing hides, using flame lighting, and material sustainability. Safeguarding practices should be ecologically conscious as well as culturally respectful.
There must be an independent evaluation built into the UNESCO nomination to assess social and economic outcomes after inscription. Otherwise, it’s only symbolic.
Local schools teaching the Ramakien through nang yai would make the art form alive again. Kids love stories acted out, and puppetry teaches craft and storytelling.
Education is key, agreed. But integrate it carefully so it doesn’t feel like mandatory propaganda in classrooms.
If UNESCO money helps buy materials and pay teachers, I will dance. Just don’t let middlemen take the lion’s share.
Middlemen always appear. You need legal frameworks to protect artisans’ earnings, not just goodwill.
Exactly, set up legal protections and cooperative ownership so profits stay local.
One more thought: digital archiving could help but only if communities control access and benefits. Don’t let archives become extractive databases owned by outsiders.
Digital archiving with community IP rights and revenue-sharing could enable global access while protecting local control. Model agreements exist in other heritage projects.
If digital versions mean kids prefer screens over learning the craft, that’s a loss. Use tech to supplement, not replace, apprenticeship.
Finally, khao mao pairing is inspired. Food and performance together make culture tangible for visitors and policymakers alike, creating more compelling narratives for funding.