Venice at 60: Article 5 and the acceptable limits of use

• Autorzy: Walter Nigel

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.35784/odk.6225

Warianty tytułu

60 lat Karty Weneckiej: Artykuł 5 i dopuszczalne limity użytkowania

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The Venice Charter is central to modern conservation, and foundational for ICOMOS specifically; yet its contemporary relevance is debatable. These and other issues were discussed by ICOMOS in Budapest 20 years ago, in a conference marking the Charter’s 40th anniversary. However, questions remain as to its ongoing significance. As Bogusław Szmygin asked in 2004, does the Charter remain the ‘Decalogue' of the conservation discipline, or has it itself become a ‘Historical Monument’?The Venice Charter as a product of high modernity, with its belief in a definitive break with the past and an overcoming of tradition. The paper assesses the Charter’s ongoing relevance in relation to one pressing issue in contemporary conservation, the limits to the acceptable use of – and change to – historic buildings (Art. 5), and using an example of recent change to an English parish church. The paper argues that the acknowledged need for the interpretation of the Charter requires a hermeneutically literate approach which acknowledges the limits of a scientific/technical reading of any historic monument – the Charter included – and the importance of a dynamic understanding of the living tradition that is conservation. It concludes that the Charter remains a central text for the conservation discipline, which itself is a tradition in good health, and for that very reason its status will continue to be fiercely debated.

Karta Wenecka jest centralnym punktem współczesnej konserwacji i fundamentem dla ICOMOS, ale jej współczesne znaczenie jest dyskusyjne. Te i inne kwestie zostały omówione przez ICOMOS w Budapeszcie 20 lat temu, na konferencji z okazji 40. rocznicy Karty. Pozostają jednak pytania dotyczące jej obecnego znaczenia. Bogusław Szmygin w 2004 r. pytał, czy Karta pozostaje „Dekalogiem” dyscypliny konserwatorskiej, czy też sama stała się „Pomnikiem Historii”? Karta Wenecka to produkt nowoczesności, z jej wiarą w ostateczne zerwanie z przeszłością i przezwyciężenie tradycji. W artykule oceniono obecne znaczenie Karty w odniesieniu do pilnego problemu współczesnej konserwacji, ograniczeń dopuszczalnego użytkowania – i zmian w zabytkowych budynkach (art. 5), na przykładzie niedawnej zmiany w angielskim kościele parafialnym. W artykule argumentuje się, że uznana potrzeba interpretacji Karty wymaga hermeneutycznie literackiego podejścia, które uznaje ograniczenia naukowej/technicznej lektury każdego zabytku – w tym Karty – oraz znaczenie dynamicznego rozumienia żywej tradycji, jaką jest konserwacja. W konkluzji stwierdza się, że Karta pozostaje centralnym tekstem dla dyscypliny konserwatorskiej, która sama w sobie jest żywą tradycją i z tego właśnie powodu jej status będzie nadal przedmiotem zaciekłych debat.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Venice Charter; English Parish Church; change; Nara Document; authenticity

PL

Karta Wenecka; angielski kościół parafialny; zmiana; Dokumenty Nara; autentyczność

• Wydawca: Polski Komitet Narodowy Międzynarodowej Rady Ochrony Zabytków ICOMOS ; Wydawnictwo Politechniki Lubelskiej
• Czasopismo: Ochrona Dziedzictwa Kulturowego
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: Nr 20
• Strony: 1--19
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 34 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Walter Nigel

• Department of Archaeology, University of York, The King's Manor

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1152-522X

Bibliografia

• 1. Araoz, G. F. (2011). Preserving heritage places under a new paradigm. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 55-60. https://doi.org/DOI 10.1108/20441261111129933.
• 2. Araoz, G. F. (2012). Protecting Heritage Places under the New Heritage Paradigm & Defining its Tolerance for Change. A Leadership Challenge for ICOMOS. In W. Lipp, J. Štulc, B. Szmygin, & S. Giometti (Eds.), Conservation turn - Return to conservation: Tolerance for change, limits of change (pp. 47-52). Edizioni Polistampa.
• 3. Brand, S. (1994). How buildings learn: What happens after they’re built. Viking.
• 4. Brandi, C. (2005). Theory of restoration. In G. Basile (Ed.), & C. Rockwell (Trans.), Theory of restoration (pp. 43-170). Nardini Editore. (Original work published 1963)
• 5. DCMS. (2010). The operation of the ecclesiastical exemption and related planning matters for places of worship in England. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/77372/OPSEEguidance.pdf.
• 6. Dobres, M.-A., & Robb, J. E. (2000). Editors’ introduction. In M.-A. Dobres & J. E. Robb (Eds.), Agency in archaeology (pp. 3-17). Routledge.
• 7. Erder, C. (1994). The Venice Charter under Review, Ankara, 1977. ICOMOS Scientific Journal, 4, 24–31. (Original work published 1977).
• 8. Falser, M. S. (2010). From Venice 1964 to Nara 1994 - Changing concepts of authenticity? In M. S. Falser, W. Lipp, & A. Tomaszewski (Eds.), Conservation and preservation: Interactions between theory and practice: In memoriam Alois Riegl (1858-1905) (pp. 115-132). Edizioni Polistampa.
• 9. Fejérdy, T. (2005). Who Wanted it? What is the Charter?...And Today? In ICOMOS, The Venice Charter 1964-2004-2044? The Fortieth Anniversary (Budapest-Pécs, Hungary, May 22-27, 2004) (pp. 46-51). Hungarian National Committee of ICOMOS. https://openarchive.icomos.org/id/eprint/2962/1/K649-Monuments_and_Sites-v11-2005.pdf.
• 10. Gadamer, H.-G. (1989). Truth and method (J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans.; 2nd, rev. ed.). Sheed and Ward. (Original work published 1960).
• 11. Gadamer, H.-G. (2022). The End of Art? From Hegel’s Doctrine of the Pastness of Art to the Anti-art of Today (1985). In A. Iyer & P. Vandevelde (Trans.), Ethics, aesthetics and the historical dimension of language: The Selected Writings of Hans-Georg Gadamer Volume II (pp. 65-76). Bloomsbury Academic. (Original work published 1985).
• 12. Glendinning, M. (2013). The conservation movement: A history of architectural preservation: Antiquity to modernity. Routledge.
• 13. Historic England. (2008). Conservation principles: Policies and guidance for the sustainable management of the historic environment. English Heritage. https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/conservation-principles-sustainable-management-historic-environment/.
• 14. ICOMOS. (2005). The Venice Charter 1964-2004-2044? The Fortieth Anniversary (Budapest-Pécs, Hungary, May 22-27, 2004). Hungarian National Committee of ICOMOS. https://openarchive.icomos.org/id/eprint/2962/1/K649-Monuments_and_Sites-v11-2005.pdf.
• 15. Jokilehto, J. (1999). A history of architectural conservation. Butterworth-Heinemann.
• 16. Jokilehto, J. (2005). The Doctrine of the Venice Charter: An ICCROM Perspective. In ICOMOS, The Venice Charter 1964-2004-2044? The Fortieth Anniversary (Budapest-Pécs, Hungary, May 22-27, 2004) (pp. 71-77). Hungarian National Committee of ICOMOS. https://openarchive.icomos.org/id/eprint/2962/1/K649-Monuments_and_Sites-v11-2005.pdf.
• 17. Jokilehto, J. (2023). Observations on Concepts in the Venice Charter. Conversaciones Con., 11, 353–363.
• 18. Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern (C. Porter, Trans.). Harvard University Press.
• 19. Lipp, W. (2005). The Charter of Venice as a Document of the Times. In ICOMOS, The Venice Charter 1964-2004-2044? The Fortieth Anniversary (Budapest-Pécs, Hungary, May 22-27, 2004) (pp. 107–110). Hungarian National Committee of ICOMOS. https://openarchive.icomos.org/id/eprint/2962/1/K649-Monuments_and_Sites-v11-2005.pdf.
• 20. Lipp, W. (2024). 60 years and not a bit quiet: Reflections on the history of time and ideas for an anniversary.
• 21. Locke, W. J. (1904). Recommendations of the Madrid Conference. The Architectural Journal, Being the Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects, XI, 343–346.
• 22. MacIntyre, A. C. (2007). After virtue: A study in moral theory (3rd ed.). Duckworth. (Original work published 1981)
• 23. Miller, D. (Ed.). (2005). Materiality. Duke University Press.
• 24. Muñoz Viñas, S. (2023). A theory of cultural heritage: Beyond the intangible. Routledge.
• 25. Petzet, M. (2005). The Venice Charter—40 Years Later. In ICOMOS, The Venice Charter 1964-2004-2044? The Fortieth Anniversary (Budapest-Pécs, Hungary, May 22-27, 2004) (pp. 138–142). Hungarian National Committee of ICOMOS. https://openarchive.icomos.org/id/eprint/2962/1/K649-Monuments_and_Sites-v11-2005.pdf.
• 26. Poulios, I. (2014). The past in the present: A living heritage approach—Meteora, Greece. Ubiquity Press. https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/33207
• 27. Stovel, H., Stanley-Price, N., & Killick, R. G. (Eds.). (2005). Conservation of living religious heritage: Papers from the ICCROM 2003 Forum on Living Religious Heritage: Conserving the sacred. ICCROM.
• 28. Szmygin, B. (2005). The Venice Charter: Decalogue of Conservation or Historical Monument? In ICOMOS, The Venice Charter 1964-2004-2044? The Fortieth Anniversary (Budapest-Pécs, Hungary, May 22-27, 2004) (p. 192). Hungarian National Committee of ICOMOS. https://openarchive.icomos.org/id/eprint/2962/1/K649-Monuments_and_Sites-v11-2005.pdf.
• 29. UNESCO. (1977). Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. https://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide77b.pdf
• 30. UNESCO. (1989). Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore. UNESCO. https://www.univeur.org/cuebc/downloads/PDF%20carte/80.%201989%20UNESCO%20Recommendation.PDF
• 31. UNESCO. (2003). Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention
• 32. Walter, N. (2020). Narrative theory in conservation: Change and living buildings. Routledge.
• 33. Walter, N. (2023). The Ecclesiastical Exemption in Practice. Historic Churches: The Conservation and Repair of Ecclesiastical Buildings, 30, 17-20.
• 34. Wijesuriya, G. (2015). Annexe 1: Living heritage: A summary. http://www.iccrom.org/wp-content/uploads/PCA_Annexe-1.pdf.