Beyond lifetimes: who do we exclude when we keep things for the future?

Abstract

This article challenges a dominant narrative of conservation: that keeping things for longer is better. Approaches common in the heritage sector, such as risk management, support cautious patterns of behaviour that generate unintended consequences that can create further barriers to already excluded groups. Museums control and shape how present-day users engage with each other through their collections, but conservators can become disconnected from this process because of our concern about protecting value for future unspecified users. Conservators cannot opt out of taking sides when faced with cultural inequality, and must either accept or challenge it. Predicating actions for unknown future beneficiaries is neither always necessary nor positive and unless we change our practices and acknowledge past inequalities, users of the future will look a lot like users of today, with the current exclusions as described by the 'decolonise the museum movement' remaining endorsed. Creating a positive goal for conservation by creating connections with and via collections enables conservation to contribute to current participatory museum practices. If conservators re-position their perspective from a commitment to extending the lifetimes of objects to extending the life-experiences generated by them, they can offer a focus in which past inequality rather than future beneficiaries becomes a determining criterion of how long we keep things. By way of a brief overview of relevant theory, the article is intended as a call-to-action for conservators to join debates about cultural rights, oppression and privilege raging in and around the heritage sector.

The Problem of Compromise in Conservation and Exhibit Decision Making

“…A “for-ever” perspective has significant limitations. The first limitation is that restitution may necessitate the current accelerated consumption of resources in recognition of past exclusion (Henderson 2020). This approach may require conservators to reconfigure the urge to keep items off exhibit by considering wider benefits of social equity.…”

La conservación y restauración del patrimonio negativo

“…Esto implica que evaluar el deterioro dependerá del concepto de valor, por lo que, si una alteración incrementa el valor del objeto, no se considerará deterioro o, por lo menos, no en el sentido de que sea necesaria una intervención. La percepción del deterioro depende también del contexto en el que se encuentra el objeto (Henderson 2020). La conservación (entendida en un sentido amplio) del patrimonio responde a las "necesidades y dinámicas" sociales (Avrami, Mason y de la Torre 2000: 3), por lo que no puede basarse en criterios exclusivamente objetivos.…”

“…Hay una relación entre las condiciones materiales de un objeto y su biografía (Henderson 2020). Los acontecimientos que marcan la evolución de un objeto dejan su huella en forma de añadidos o de pérdidas.…”

Heritage futures: A conversation

“…Sometimes I hear the view expressed that heritage management should not be concerned with the future and focus on present needs instead (e.g. Henderson, 2020). A concern with the future may even be dismissed as a distraction from important contemporary causes and thus effectively support conservative and possibly right-wing agendas.…”