Conservation Theory and Practice: Materials, Values, and People in Heritage Conservation

Abstract

Conservation, as an emerging discipline, is mutually constituted with the heritage institutions in which it is practiced. Professional conservators have been amending the focus of their work, from attending to the material preservation of heritage spaces, places, and objects, toward the values that people have for their cultural heritage. This chapter describes an alternative conservation product, which is entangled within the multiple interactions between objects and people developed during the conservation event. This reflects a shift in focus from the materials from which conservation objects are composed, to the aspirations of the people who are affected by the conservation of their heritage. This challenges conventional heritage conservation practice, by privileging a community's cultural systems over universalized concepts of heritage. As a result, conservation practice requires principles, policies, and guidelines that help conservators to engage people in decision‐making about their heritage. New frameworks for understanding conservation practice enable creative and diverse solutions within heritage conservation. This is described in this chapter in terms of materials‐, values‐, and peoples‐based approach to conservation. This allows heritage conservation to address the social issues of the present and engage the future, rather than merely seeking to fix the past. In so doing, it validates conservation responses that seek to incorporate the multiple ways that people care for and use their own cultural heritage.

Living Heritage: The Conservator’s Role.

“…Modern critical analysis of the conservation profession mirrors that of post-processual public archaeological practices through 'privileging a community's cultural systems over universalized concepts of heritage' and promoting community-based participatory practices (D. Sully 2015). The heritage studies and conservation theory literature promotes a 'bottom up' based relationship framework essentially turning Western administrative heritage hierarchies up-side down to encourage 'grass-roots' communities to be given higher consideration (Harrison 2010;McCarthy 2015;Schofield 2008, 20-21;Dean Sully 2007;D. Sully 2015).…”

Conserving ourselves: Embedding significance into conservation decision-making in graduate education

“…How do conservators learn to assess significance? Despite the robust literature about the importance of values in conservation decision-making (de la Torre & Avrami, 2000;Arami, 2002;Martelli et al, 2005;Australia ICOMOS, 2013;Sully, 2013), students enter the UCLA/Getty graduate program unfamiliar with significance assessment as part of conservation practice, potentially suggesting that it was not a step taken during students' preprogram work. Conservators well educated in materials science, ethics, and craft must develop their abilities to explore significance before proposing conservation steps.…”

Utilizing X-ray computed tomography for heritage conservation: The case of Megalosaurus bucklandii

“…The process of conservation, the practice in which fragile or damaged specimens are restored to functional or stable condition, is an essential convention within modern cultural institutions. This key task remains an extremely high priority in ensuring that the precious objects housed within museum collections remain untarnished by poor storage conditions, chemical degradation and wear over time (2,3). Through a variety of different conservation approaches, including preventative, remedial and, in extreme cases, restorative the museum safeguards its collections from damage and preserves precious artefacts so that they retain an indispensable record of cultural heritage.…”