Fobrbes Price Lecure_2007deguichen

8/12/2019 Fobrbes Price Lecure_2007deguichen

1/5

STUDIES IN CONSERVATION 52 ( 200 7 ) PAGES 6973

69

Forbes Prize Lecture

The Forbes Prize was established in 1958 to honour Edward Waldo Forbes, director emeritus of the Fogg Art Museum, Harvard

University, and the first honorary fellow of IIC. It is awarded by the Council for conspicuous services to conservation and the

recipient customarily delivers a lecture during the Institutes international congress. The recipient of the Forbes Prize 2006 was

Gal de Guichen.

Gal de Guichen began his career as

the engineer in charge of the prehistoric

cave at Lascaux. In 1969 he joined

ICCROM, where he remained for his

entire career, launching three major

programmes: in preventive conservation,

on the development of Afr ican museums

and for greater public involvement in

conservation. He continues to be active

in the field of conservation, lecturing

and participating in many training pro-

grammes.

A COMMON DEFINITION

OF CONSERVATION AND

RESTORATION: AGREE OR

DISAGREE, BUT WE ARE

LIVING IN THE TOWER OF

BABEL

At the beginning of a long and exciting

week, you are very courageous to attend

this lecture as, by tradition, the title of the

Forbes Prize lecture is not announced. It

will not be a simple slide lecture, but an

interactive lecture and for this reason you

have a green card and a red card which

you will be requested to use in order tocast votes and register your opinions.

The story begins in March 2006 when

I returned to Rome to find a message

on my answering machine from David

Leigh, secretary general of IIC, who, in

mysterious tones, asked me to call him

back. My first thought was, I have not

paid my annual subscription to IIC, and

as you know, no subscription means no

Studies in Conservation a disaster. So

to help me understand, use your red

and green cards to indicate your answerto this question: Who here receives

Studies in Conservation? I see the

answer is around 90%, which means that

10% have not paid their subscriptions.

Now, may I ask a second question:

Who reads Studies in Conservation?

I see the room is turning gently from

green to red and that we have identified

the intellectuals. In order to identify

possible future Nobel Prize winners, I am

tempted to ask a third question: Who

understands Studies in Conservation?

but perhaps not.

Eventually, I called David Leigh who

told me that the Council had decided to

ask me to give this Forbes Prize lecture.

I felt very honoured, as the first Prize

was conferred on Dr Plenderleith, my

first boss. But then I recalled the curse

on the Forbes Prize lecturer, rather

like the curse on the discoverers of

Tutankhamens tomb (Carter died, LordCarnarvon died, as did many others). In

the case of the Forbes Prize lecture, may

I bring to your attention that Mr Forbes

himself is dead, and if we look at the first

recipients: Dr Plenderleith from the UK

died, Mr Coremans from Belgium died,

Mr Gettens from the USA died, Mr Van

Schendel from the Netherlands died and

Mr Ruhemann from Germany died. So

personally, I dont feel very well; in front

of such a global curse, I asked myself,

To be or not to be . . . a Forbes Pr ize

lecturer? But I quickly realized that ifI refused this honour, the Forbes Prize

lecture (including the curse) would have

passed to one of you; you who all have

dear families. So I took courage and, in a

sense of altruism, I accepted.

The de ci si on to acce pt has al so

forced me to find a topic for this lecture.

Haydar Koyupinar, Bayerische Staatsgemlde-

sammlungen Mnchen.


2/5

70 NOTES AND REVIEWS

STUDIES I N CONSERVATION 52 ( 2007 ) PAGES 6973

I decided to speak about Conservation

and Restor ati on. Simply conservation

and restoration: not conservation and

restoration in context and to cross

boundaries, in case I pre-empt the

discussions we wil l have during the

remainder of this week. The significance

of these two words, conservation

and restoration, has evolved during

past centuries, and even in the past

35 years. As we use those two words

every day in our profession, it is essential

to understand whether we ag re e or

disagree about their significance in

2006. The two words exist in nearly

all languages, but to reduce the risk

of confusion let us confine ourselves

to English. The first time I faced this

problem was as an intern in the British

Museum Research Laboratory in October

1970, when Tony Werner was its director.

During a lunch I told him my surprise that

practitioners at the British Museum were

called conservators while those at the

National Gallery were called restorers.

He responded that it was because at

the National Gallery they were doing

restoration and at the British Museum

they were doing conservation.

Th e co nf us io n in cr ea se d wh en I

realized that in 1950 a group of peoplecreated IIC, the International Institute

for Conservationof Historic and Artistic

Works. Then, in 1956 the same group

of people created another international

organization (ICCROM) the full name

of which is the International Centre for

the Study of Preservation and Restora-

tion. Why conservation here and pre-

servation and restoration there? Are

those two organizations not dealing

in the same field? In an attempt to

clarify this confusion, I have asked my

students over the years to write downtheir personal definitions of conservation

and restoration. I have collected over

1500 definitions from 1500 colleagues

from all over the world different coun-

tries, different cultures, different fields,

different functions and different ages.

They have, of course, provided me with

1500 different written definitions that I

have safeguarded.

For this lecture I went to the ICCROM

l ibrary and took out three books

published in the last three years by

Butterworths, a serious publisher in our

field. One book is called Conservation of

Leather, the second is called Restoration

of Moving Picture Filmsand the third The

Conservation and Restoration of Glass.

Why such a difference, if you feel, as

I do, that all three books deal with the

same field? If you search the ICCROM

library database today you will find 6240

books or articles with conservation in

their titles, 1613 with restoration in their

titles and 415 with conservation and

restoration in their titles.

If you look at 10 professional English-

speaking organizations1 and you study

the words that they have defined pre-

cisely, nine have defined conservation,

eight restoration, seven preventive

conservation, and six preservation.

Active conservation, remedial conserva-

tion, preventive care and restoration/

conservation have each been defined

by only one organization. So, I have theimpression that we are living in the Tower

of Babel. I would like to ask if you at

least agree that the final objective of our

profession is:

Through conservation and restora-

tion, to provide works of art in the

best condition with the richest

message transmitted to the public

and the specialists of today and

tomorrow.

Could you vote on this? I see that 97%

of the room agrees, which is quite

encouraging, but now let us see if

you agree on how the two concepts

of conservation and restoration are

related using the diagram in Figure 1. Are

conservation and restoration completely

separate (Figure 1A), touching (Figure

1B) , i n te rconnec ted (F igu re 1C) ,

synonymous (F igure 1D), or is one

included in the other restoration within

conservation (Figure 1E) or conservation

within restoration (Figure 1F)?

I will give you 15 seconds to choose

and then ask you to vote using your

green cards for the situation that best

meets your understanding of the terms.

The resul ts from the lecture attendees

are:

A 1%; B 5%; C 56%; D 1%; E 35%;

F 2%.

This is very close to the results I have

obtained in eight conferences and lec-

tures I have given in the past year

and which have included over 800

participants:

Figure 1 Relationships between the two concepts of conservation and restoration.

1AIC, APE L, ECCO, ICOM-CC, IC Australia, IIC,

IIC-CG, IFLA, UK-IC, and VE-RES.


3/5

FORBES PRIZE LECTURE 71


A 4%; B 8%; C 47%; D 10%; E 27%;

F 4%.

From these two results we observe that

the profession is divided, with roughly

50% feel ing that conservation and

restoration are interconnected while 30%

feel that the concept of conservation

includes the concept of restoration. How

can we work and move forward if we

disagree on those basic concepts?

Now that I have shown you through

various examples how members of the

profession interpret conservation and

restoration differently you deserve a

10-minute holiday. Together we will now

experience an exceptional moment; in

an IIC conference, the lecturer will notspeak the words conservation and

restoration, the interpreters are not

allowed to use the words conservation

and restoration and the audience are

not allowed to think conservation and

restoration.

So let us look at various activities in

our everyday professional lives the end

activities of our work. Some of us retouch

a canvas painting, others reshape a

dented metallic vase, others de-acidify

a drawing, others reorganize a storage

area, others reintegrate a mural painting,

others involve the public (and receive

the Keck Award for this), others disinfest

wooden furniture, others consolidate

a mosaic left in situ, others instal l

ultraviolet filters to protect collections of

textiles, others desalinate ceramics from

a shipwreck, others repaint the intonaco

of a Baroque church. Some ventilate (or

not) a showcase, some glue the arm

on a broken statue, some control the

humidifier in an exhibition space, some

disinfect the books in a library attacked

by micro-organisms. These are just 15

sample activities in which one or all of us

are involved.

I am sure that in reading this list of

actions, Mr Forbes would have sensed

disorder rather than order, so let me

propose an order by grouping the actions

in three columns (Table 1). What criteria

have I chosen to establish this order?

The first is the reason behind the action

(Table 2). The second criterion is the

objective of our action (Table 3).

At th is po int, could you use your

green card to vote if you agree with

my classification; I feel reassured that

93% of you agree. I should point out

that some actions could, of course, fall

either in the first or second column: for

instance, when we reline a canvas, when

we remove dust, when we reverse an

old intervention, or when we rebind a

book.

Now let us look at six other criteria.

Is the action direct or indirect? What is

the state of the artefact? Is the action

applied to a single work or a group of

works? Is the result visible? What priority

should the action be given? Who should

carry out the action? With these criteria

we could construct Table 4.

It is a combination of these three

types of actions that allows the cultural

heritage to be in the soundest state

possible, with the richest message for

the specialists and public of today and

tomorrow. The important question now

is how to name those three actions

which are obviously different, are carried

out for different reasons, have different

objectives and priorities, and are realized

by different specialists. An obvious

conclusion is that those three actions

should have three different names.

It is now the end of the 10-minute

conservation holiday and time to decide

the names we will give these actions.

You will agree with me that the estab-

lishment of a common definition of those

actions accepted by the profession is

today necessary, possible and urgent.

It is necessary because we have to

understand each other. We know we are

in a terrible state of confusion, but we

refuse to face it. It is necessary to under-

stand each other better when within

the same association we do not speak

the same professional language, let

alone when various associations meet.

Table 1 Grouping of actions

A B C

Act ion Ret ouchReshape

Glue

Reintegrate

Repaint

DisinfestDe-acidify

Desalinate

Disinfect

Consolidate

HumidifyVent il ate

Install

Organize storage

Involve public

Table 2 Reasons behind the actions

A B C

Reason The work no longer

transmits its richest

message

The wor k i s acti vel y

deteriorating at the

moment

Without action, the work

may be damaged

Table 3 Objectives of the actions

A B C

Objective Recover readabi li ty,

aesthetic aspect, historic

state, or technical use lost

due to apast aggression

Stop thepresent

aggression and bring the

work back to a stable

state

Avoid, block, reduce or

control possible future

aggression


4/5

72 NOTES AND REVIEWS

STUDIES I N CONSERVATION 52 ( 2007 ) PAGES 6973

Those who created IIC realized it to be

necessary to act in common, following

basic common principles. It was rather

easier to understand each other 50

years ago when we were a l imited

group. I remember a period when the

Council at ICCROM was composed of

12 people elected by representatives

from 40 countries, all of them friends.

Now the ICCROM Council is made up

of 26 members elected by representatives

from 117 countries. In the case of IIC,

the same situation is faced; through the

years, various national IIC committees

have been created that further develop

the Babel Tower Syndrome. An element

of this confusion can be seen by reading

the preprints of th is conference; Ipicked out the following terms: active

conservation, collection care, curative

conservation, interventive conservation,

non-interventive conservation, passive

conservation, preventive conservation,

preventive care, remedial conservation,

scientific conservation, house clean-

ing, conservation-restoration, pre-

ventative conservation, restoration

and preservation. Certainly those 15

words and expressions can be grouped

within the three categories listed above.

If so, the situation is a l i tt le morecomplex as we started with two words

(conservation and restoration), which

were supposed to define our profession,

and have ended up with three.

It isnecessarybecause, for example,

when you conduct l ibrary research,

do you type preventive conservation,

non-active conservation, passive con-

servation, preventative conservation or

preventive care? Are all these phrases

not synonymous?

It is necessary because if we want

to cross boundaries we will meet the

public and we have to be understood by

the public for whom we are working. We

all laugh when we read in a newspaper

that a monument or a painting has been

restored to its original splendour. We all

know that it is not true, but what are we

doing to clarify our work to the public?

Finally, it is necessa ry at a time of

financial constraint to deal with the

essential and we need, therefore, to ex-

plain clearly what is essential. I will give

an example. Last year, the fresco in a 60metre-high dome of a church in Rome

was damaged by rain infiltration. Scaf-

folding was erected so the frescos could

be retouched, but nothing was done to

repair the roof. Did they identify the es-

sential and spend their money well?

It ispossibleto write common defini-

tions. When I was trying to find a topic

for this lecture I said to some colleagues

that I might chose the theme A common

definition of conservation and restora-

tion; their comments were either once

again?, why? or are you crazy?. Buthaving worked on the theme, I think that

it is possible to find a common definition

if we have a minimum of flexibility, if we

accept that change can be good and

if we apply a certain methodology. We

have all probably read that last week the

2500 delegates at a worldwide congress

Table 4 Six other criteria

A B C

Type of act ion Dir ect Di rec t/i ndi rec t Ind irect

S ta te o f a rt ef ac t Dam ag ed , b ut s tabl e Uns tabl e and i n p ro cess o f d et er io ra ti on O ld o r n ew, i n g oo d o r b ad s ta teType of wor k Sin gle wor k Sin gle wor k o r g roup o f w orks Sur roundi ngs of a g roup o f w orks

Result Always visible Rarely visible Almost never visible

Priority Desirable Top priority Essential

Act or Con ser vat or/ res torer a Con se rvat or /r es to re r o r t echn ic ian Va ri ou s p ro fess io na ls and p ub li c

Name of action ? ? ?

aI use the term conservator/restorer as it was the term accepted by the conference in Pavia in October 1997 at which most European countries were

represented .

on astronomy declassified Pluto as a

planet. They accepted that change for

clarification was good; are we not in the

same situation?

It is possibleas long as the clarifica-

tion is made separately in each country

by a group of professionals in their

national language (UK English, US Eng-

lish, Italian, Spanish, French, Swedish,

Japanese, etc.) Then, and only then,

the three corresponding terms in various

languages could be established and the

equivalent terms given to translators

working in international conferences

such as this.

I t is urgent because increasing

numbers of young practitioners and

politicians, as well as the public, arerequesting a clear definition. A discussion

on art conservation and restoration has

just started on Wikipedia. Some countries

have already made laws, including the

introduction of some definitions at a

national level. This year, the European

Committee for Standardization (CEN/

TC 346 WG1) has the task to def ine

conservation and restoration. Do

we want to have definitions imposed

on us? Would it not be better if all our

professional associations spoke with one

voice? Some people have said that thiswould be difficult, others have said that

this will be a long process, but those are

both excellent reasons to start now.

In conclusion I would like to quote Jean

Monnet, one of the founding fathers of

the EU: The most beautiful achievement

of mankind is to unify mankind.


5/5

FORBES PRIZE LECTURE 73


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would l ike to thank the 1500 col-

leagues who have provided me with their

definitions; Marie Berducou, Bertrand

Lavdrine, Catherine Antomarchi, and

Denis Guillemard, who through long dis-

cussions have contributed greatly to this

debate; Meriem Boudjelti and Maurizio

Quagliuolo for their PowerPoint exper-

tise; Terry Little for helping to perfect

the English in this presentation; the staff

of ICCROM, who have acted as spar-

ring partners; and Mr Forbes, who has

been a continuous inspiration. For those

who attended the lecture, I would like to

remind you of the important role played

by my bathtub.

This text has been adapted for pub-

lication and does not include all of

the illustrations presented during the

conference.

Documents

Fobrbes Price Lecure_2007deguichen