Current Approaches, Solutions and Practices in Conservation of Cultural Heritage

EnglishTürkçe

BÖLÜM


DOI :10.26650/B/AA9PS34.2024.006.001   IUP :10.26650/B/AA9PS34.2024.006.001    Tam Metin (PDF)

Updating Traditional Ethical Approaches for the Conservation of Contemporary Art

Ece Erman, Jane Henderson

From the past to the present, experts have developed opinions and suggestions on protecting works of art sometimes prompted by negative consequences of past conservation practice. In response, ethical advice and practice was developed by practitioners and, through consensus, some of these have become de-facto ethical standards. The sector continuously returns to the need to establish common ethical standards to guide conservation practice in the protection of the works and support their transfer to the next generation. This article notes traditional ethical standards of respected institutes and theorists in Europe which were designed based on the conservation of classical works of art. The applicability of minimum intervention and recognisable practices of conservation is a debatable issue for professionals. As contemporary artists draw on a vast range of available materials, there are many transient and non-permanent materials and various conceptual approaches available for the construction of their artworks. The approaches currently adopted by many for the conservation of classical artworks might be appropriate for contemporary art, but, equally, the changing material and concept of the artwork might cause a rethink of traditional solutions. The article examines how these approaches match the challenges of contemporary art, which has revolutionized materials, techniques and even conceptions of art itself. We ask: does the artist’s intent and the variety of materials and methods push the limits of current ethical approaches? In this context, we examine, with the use of case studies, whether conservators can apply ethical strategies such as minimum intervention and recognizability to the conservation of contemporary works of art.


Anahtar Kelimeler: Conservation of contemporary artworks, ethics, artist’s intent, minimum intervention, recognisable

Referanslar

  • American Institute for Conservation, [AIC], (1994). Code Documents: American Institute for Conservation of Historic and artistic works. Historical background: code of ethics and guidelines for practice; commentaries. google scholar
  • American Institute for Conservation, [AIC], (2015) Tratteggio. Available at: https://www.conservation- wiki. com/wiki/Tratteggio [Accessed:18 January 2023]. google scholar
  • Amgueddfa Cymru-Museum Wales, (2012). ‘Unlliw’ explained. Availableat: https://www.youtube.com/wat-ch?v=beqNOygxppk [Accessed: 9 January 2023]. google scholar
  • Ashley-Smith, J. (2009). The Basis of Conservation Ethics. In: Richmond, A., Bracker, A., & AL (Eds.), Con-servation: principles, dilemmas and uncomfortable truths (pp.6-21). Taylor & Francis Group. google scholar
  • Ashley-Smith, J. (2017). A role for bespoke codes of ethics. In ICOM-CC 18th Triennial Conference Copenha-genPreprints, (pp.1-8). Paris: ICOM. google scholar
  • Bauerova, Z. (2010). A Critical Reflection on Czechoslovak Conservation-Restoration: Its Theory and Met-hodological Approach. Conservation: Principles, Dilemmas and Uncomfortable Truths. In: Conservation (pp.113-124). Routledge. google scholar
  • Belishki, S., & Corr, S. (2019). Reflection on conservation-restoration practice today. A European perspective, Ochrona Dziedzictwa Kulturowego. google scholar
  • Bharti, S P. (2023) Conserving and Exhibition New roles and emerging issues for the conservation of con-temporary art News in Conservation (pp.12-18). Available at: https://www.iiconservation.org/system/files/ publications/journal/2023/b2023_2.pdf [Accessed 14 April 2023]. google scholar
  • Brandi, C. (2005). Theory of restoration. Instito centrale per il Restauro Nardi Editore. google scholar
  • Brown, M. T. (1990). Working ethics: strategies for decision making and organisational responsibility. San Francisco and Oxford: Jossey-Bass Published. google scholar
  • Canadian Association for Conservation of Cultural Property. [CAC], (2000). Code of ethics and guidance for practice. Ottawa: The Canadian Association for Conservator of Cultural Property. google scholar
  • Caple, C. (2000). Conservation Skills: Judgement. Method and Decision Making. London and New York: Rout-ledge. google scholar
  • Chiantora O., and Rava, A. (2013) Conserving Contemporary Art: Issues. Methods, Materials. google scholar
  • Chyrkova, N., and Yankovska, D. (2021). The Ethics of Conserving Modern Art. Baltic Journal of Art History, 21. google scholar
  • Clavir, M. (1998). The social and historic construction of Professional values in conservation. Studies in con-servation, 43:1, 1- 8. google scholar
  • Clavir, M. (2002). Preserving what is valued: Museums, conservation and First nations. (p. 73-75) Vancouver: UBC Press. google scholar
  • Conti, A., & Glanville, H. (2007). A History of the Restoration and Conservation of Works of Art. Routledge. google scholar
  • Cotte, S., Tse, N. & Inglis, A. (2016). Artists’ interviews and their use in conservation: reflections on issues and practices. AICCM Bulletin, 37(2), 107-118. google scholar
  • Davies, L., & Heuman, J. (2004). Meaning matters: collaborating with contemporary artists. Studies in Conser-vation. 49(sup2), 30-33. google scholar
  • Delagrange, J. (2021). Why is contemporary art important? Introduction: the importance of contemporary art explained. CAI Gallery. Available at: https://www.contemporaryartissue.com/why-is-contemporary-art-im-portant/.[Accessed: 14 April 2023]. google scholar
  • Dykstra, S. W. (1996). The artist’s intentions and the intentional fallacy in fine arts conservation. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, 35(3), 197-218. google scholar
  • E.C.C.O. (2002). Professional Guidelines. Published by: The European Confederation of Conservator-Restorers’ Organizations. google scholar
  • Edson, G. (1997). Museum Ethics. Theory and practice. London and New York: Routledge. google scholar
  • Ersen, A. (2010). Cesare Brandi 1906-1988 ve Restorasyon Teorisi. Restorasyon ve Konservasyon Çalışmaları Dergisi, (7), 3- 11. google scholar
  • Frasco, L. (2009). The contingency of conservation: changing methodology and theoretical issues in conserving ephemeral contemporary artworks with special reference to installation art. Undergraduate Humanities Forum 2008-09. 2009. google scholar
  • Garcia Celma, M. (2021). Supporting decision-making when conserving contemporary art: a model for iden-tification and categorisation of stakeholders. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, 60(2-3), 161-174. google scholar
  • GCI CIMCA [Conservation Issues of Modern and Contemporary Art] Meeting. (2008). Museum of Modern Art: New York. google scholar
  • Giebeler, J., Sartorius, A., Heydenreich, G., & Fischer, A. (2021). A Revised Model for Decision-Making in Contemporary Art Conservation and Presentation. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, 60(2-3), 225-235. google scholar
  • Giombini, L. (2019). Artworks and Their Conservation A (tentative) Philosophical Introduction. Aesthetica Edizioni. google scholar
  • Grenda, M. (2010). Tratteggio retouch and its derivatives as an image reintegration solution in the process of restoration. Case study: restoration of a 20th century lithograph film poster by Stefan Norblin. In CeROArt. Conservation, exposition, Restauration d’Objects d’Art (No. EGG1). Association CeROArt asbl. google scholar
  • Grevenstein, A., and Schraff, M. (2005) [1999]. Introductions Texts in Training Conservators of Modern Art. In Modern Art: Who Cares? edited by Hummelen, IJ. and Sille, D., 296-299. London: Archetype Publications. google scholar
  • Hartmann, N. (1977). Estetica. Universidad Naclional Autonoma de Mexico. google scholar
  • Henderson, J., & Nakamoto, T. (2016). Dialogue in conservation decision-making. Studies in Conservation. 61(sup2), 67-68. Hölling, H. B (2021). Object, Event, Performance: Art, Materiality, and Continuity Since The 1960s. Bard Graduate Center. google scholar
  • Hummelen, Y. and Scholte, T. (2021). Collecting and archiving information from living artists for the conserva-tion of contemporary art. In Conservation of Easel Paintings. (pp.38-46). Routledge. google scholar
  • ICOM-CC. (2008). International Council of Museum Committee for Conservation. Terminology to Characterise the Conservation of Tangible Cultural Heritage google scholar
  • ICOM (2004). Seoul and Museum Development in Korea: Retrospect with Global Perspectives. google scholar
  • ICOM (2017). Code of Ethics for museums. International Council of museums. google scholar
  • ICOMOS (1964). The Venice Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites: Venice ICOMOS. google scholar
  • ICOMOS, A. (1998). Code on the ethics of co-existence in conserving significant places. google scholar
  • ICOMOS. (2014). Review of the 2002 Ethical Commitment Statement Proposal for the Adoption of the ICOMOS Ethical Principles. Report by the Merged Working Group. google scholar
  • ICON (2020) Institute of Conservation. Ethical Guidance: Principles of Conservation. Available at: https://www. icon.org.uk/resource/icon-ethical-guidance.html [Accessed in: 04.05.2023]. google scholar
  • Kaptan, C. (2009). Tuval Resmi Restorasyonunda Yanlış Uygulamalar ve Önermeler (Doctoral dissertation, Marmara University (Turkey). google scholar
  • Lawson, L., Finbow, A., & Marçal, H. (2019). Developing a strategy for the conservation of performance-based artworks at Tate. Journal of the Institute of Conservation, 42(2), 114-134. google scholar
  • Lawson, L. & Potter, D. (2017). Contemporary art, contemporary issues-conservation at Tate. Journal of the Institute of Conservation, 40(2), 121-131. google scholar
  • Llamas-Pacheco, R. (2020). Some Theory for the Conservation of Contemporary Art. Studies in Conservation, 65(8), 487-498. google scholar
  • Lorusso, S., Natali, A. & Volpe, F. (2009). The traditional, the innovative, the ephemeral: conception, realisation, intervention in contemporary art. Conservation Science in Cultural Heritage, 9, 170-214. google scholar
  • Marçal, H. (2019). Contemporary art conservation. Reshaping the collectable: When Artworks Live in the Mu-seum. google scholar
  • Meraz, F., & Magar Meurs, V. (2019) Cesare Brandi (1906 to 1988): his concept of restoration and the dilemma of architecture Conversaciones, 7, 160-174. google scholar
  • Miller, Z. (2017). Low-level Conflict in Contemporary Art Conservation Research. NACCA [New Approaches in the Conservation of Contemporary Art]. google scholar
  • Munoz-Vinas, S. (2002). Contemporary theory of conservation. Studies in Conservation. 1-239. google scholar
  • Munoz-Vinas, S. (2005). Contemporary theory of conservation. Routledge. google scholar
  • Natali, A. (2008). Some considerations on conservation and restoration in contemporary art. Conservation Scien-ce in Cultural Heritage, 8(1), 187-197. google scholar
  • Niglio, O. (2013). John Ruskin: The Conservation of the Cultural Heritage. google scholar
  • O’Neil, L. (2019) One banana, what could it cost? $120,000- ifit’s art. Available at: https://www.theguardian. com/artanddesign/2019/dec/06/maurizio-cattelan-banana-duct-tape-comedian-art-basel- miami [Accessed: 23 March 2023]. google scholar
  • Opena, M., Singer, M. & Müller-Wüsten, D. (2021). Introduction to the Special Issue on Contemporary Art Conservation. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation. 60:2-3, 67-68. google scholar
  • Orbaşlı, A. (2017). Conservation Theory in the 21st century: slow evolution or a paradigm shift? Journal of Architectural Conservation, 23(3), 157-170. google scholar
  • Ostrovsca, I. (2020). Aesthetic integrations in the restoration process of mural painting. Journal of Architecture, Urbanism and Heritage, 3(2), 37-44. google scholar
  • Pease, M. (1964). The Murray Pease Report, Studies in Conservation, 9:3, 116-121 google scholar
  • Reeves, H. (2015). Zero to Now: The contemporary art conservation problem. MA Final Project Visual Arts Administration. New York University. google scholar
  • Schadler-Saub, U. (2019). Conservation ethics today: are our conservation-restoration theories and practice ready for the 21st century? Introductory notes to some central issues. Protection. Of Cultural Heritage, (8), 291-300. google scholar
  • Soulioti, A. M. & Chatzidaki, M. (2022) Double Trouble: Replicas in Contemporary Art and Their Impact in Conservation Decision-making, Studies in Conservation, 67:1-2, 21-29. google scholar
  • Sterrett, J. (2009). Contemporary museums of contemporary art. In: Alison Richmond, and Alison Bracket. Conservation: Principles, Dilemmas and Uncomfortable Truths (pp.223-228). Routledge. google scholar
  • Stigter, S. (2017). A behaviour index for complex artworks: A conceptual tool for contemporary art conservation. Paper presented at the ICOM-CC 18th Triennial Conference Preprints. Copenhagen: 4-8. google scholar
  • Sweetnam, E. & Henderson, J. (2021). Disruptive conservation: challenging conservation orthodoxy. Studies in Conservation. 67(1-2), 63-71. google scholar
  • Van Saaze, V. (2013). Key Concepts and Developments in Conservation Theory and Practice. In Installation Art and the Museum: Presentation and Conservation of Changing Artworks. (pp.35-60). Amsterdam, Holland: Amsterdam University Press. google scholar
  • Verbeeck, M. (2019). Brandi and the restoration of contemporary art. One side and the other the Teoria. Con-versaciones, (7). google scholar
  • Villers, C. (2004). Post Minimal Intervention, The Conservator, 28(1), 3-10. google scholar
  • Wain, A. & Sherring, A. (2021). Changeability, Variability, and Malleability: sharing perspectives on the role of Change in time-based art and utilitarian machinery conservation, Studies in Conservation, 66:8, 449462. google scholar
  • Wharton, G. (2005). The challenges of conserving contemporary art. B. Altshuler. Collecting the New: Mu-seums and Contemporary Art, 2005, 163-178. google scholar
  • Winckelmann, J. J. (2006). History of the Art of Antiquity. Getty Research Unit Publications. google scholar
  • Yazdani Mehr, S. (2019). Analysis of the 19th and 20th-century conservation key theories in relation to contem-porary adaptive reuse of heritage buildings. Heritage, 2(1). google scholar


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.