Changes of meaning and perspectives for the destinies of the built Heritage (original) (raw)
Proceedings - 3rd Valencia International Biennial of Research in Architecture, VIBRArch
It is difficult to say what Restoration is today and what place it occupies among the disciplines of architecture, in the fields of education, research and profession. Equally complex is to delimit the concept of Cultural Heritage, which is increasingly extended and differentiated by scale, types of artefacts, age of formation, etc. Furthermore, it is increasingly subject to risks of various kinds that cast doubts on its survival and transmission to the future. On the other hand, we still live in a "liquid" and ever faster changing contemporaneity, according to Zygmunt Bauman, while for the philosopher Umberto Garimberti it would be almost "cemented" and blocked (Palese 2014). Our relationship with the traces of the many pasts that preceded us cannot ignore this fragile, uncertain, but also open nature of the time we live and those that await us. Marc Augè, in this regard, questioned about the two great ways of relating to the future in different human societies ...
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
The dual logic of heritage in the field of architecture
2015
In the field of architecture, a patrimonial nomination marks an explicit context for urban intervention, from the conceptual level till the project. In spite of the fact that heritage plays an important role in some strategic fields of contemporary life, such as the economic and social fields, it is also still a controversial issue. The main dichotomist position was reached in the early 30’s of the 20th century, by the two Athens Charters, in which architects discuss the field of heritage and its importance for contemporary life, leading to conflicting views. On the one hand, we have a group that defends that the perspective of heritage is an ineffective way to confront urban growth, and, on the other hand, there are those who assume heritage as a strategic opportunity for sustainably maintaining urban development. However, even the former, mostly influenced by modern architecture and Le Corbusier’s rationale, embrace the new reality and react differently to heritage. After all, pro...
2021
From the ‘monumental’ to the ‘living’ heritage: a shift in perspective
"After the adoption of the 1972 Convention the meaning and definition of Cultural Heritage went through adjustment and reconsideration which brought to a widening of the idea of cultural heritage. Cultural landscapes and industrial archaeology are just some examples. From the end of the nineties long-claimed requests for the recognition of the importance of ethnological heritage got stronger thanks to the increasing worries for cultural homogenisation as a consequence of the globalisation process. This process of renewal culminated in the adoption of the Convention on Intangible Cultural Heritage in October 2003 and the proposal of a deep renewal in the understanding and approach to heritage as a whole. This new perspective conceives heritage as a wider cultural whole and not only extends the World Heritage ‘brand’ to intangible cultural expressions but widens and redefines the previous meaning and definition of Cultural Heritage. Intangible features are more and more underlined and considered as decisive in the evaluation process of World Heritage sites focusing now on processes (social, biological or cultural) embodied in the sites. The distinction between tangible and intangible, a reflection of an administrative category, demonstrates therefore its artificial nature. Heritage is thus conceived not only as a consecrated masterpiece of the past to be venerated and preserved but as a symbolic and living space to be appropriated by local communities, the mirror of a collective and active memory. The idea of turning living cultures into heritage is however not free from contradictions. The paper shows, in an analytical perspective, the influence of the notion of intangible heritage, its theoretical contradictions and the new challenge facing cultural policies makers."
This paper focuses on theoretical issues of architectural conservation, especially the influential ‘Theory of Restoration’ by Cesare Brandi, and other of his writings. His proposals are both an advanced explanation of restoration and a guide for practice; not only in art conservation, but in architecture in particular. Brandi’s theory seems limited to the work of art as such, and hence is detached from an existential understanding of the human being, offering but a partial account of the relation between humans and Modern Movement architecture. Existentialist concern about collective intentionalities is crucial here, because architecture is bearer of socially significant values, particularly historic significance and collective memory. Awareness about existentialist issues of temporality in conservation has been offered before in the past by several authors. However, these reflections have mainly focused on the past and perhaps the present, but rarely the future. Authors have regarded the problem from a postmodern, relativist perspective; ignoring the manifold condition of architecture; others have characterised conservation as based on changing values in society, seemingly encouraging attitudes of ‘everything goes’. This paper approaches the problem of conservation by uncovering attitudes behind Brandi’s theories, and by envisaging a more comprehensive consideration of time in the relation between architectural place and human existence. The phenomenological ontology proposed by Roman Ingarden and the illuminating treatise about memory by Paul Ricoeur support an approach to memory and the complete spectrum of time which considers conservation and assimilation as processes that facilitate society to accept changes in its environment. The aim of this paper is to assess ontological and phenomenological assumptions regarding architecture and time against Brandi’s theories, and to evaluate their correlation in the context of the architecture of the Modern Movement. This connection between Brandi’s theories about architecture as art and his concept of restoration elucidates his attitude regarding time and memory as well as revealing certain inconsistencies with regard to Modern Movement architecture.
Current and Future Developments in Heritage Studies: From “Retrotopia” to “Prospective”
Traditiones
In the article, the author starts from the different approaches between heritage studies on the one hand and disciplinary heritage approaches on the other hand to consider current and future developments in the field of intangible cultural heritage. In the play between critical studies and broader studies, there are risks of regression as well as opportunities for progress. To underpin his analysis, he refers to his experience of development processes in the field of cultural heritage and to some recent research in France on the institutional functioning of UNESCO in the field of intangible cultural heritage. He then focuses on the notions of “retrotopia” (Bauman, 2017) and “prospective” (Godet, 2004), which seem to him to be suitable for triggering a fundamental anthropological reflection on the future of cultural heritage research. At the end, he draws some conclusions about the possibilities of progress – or, conversely, regression – in intangible cultural heritage.
Architectural Heritage and timeless time. For a temporary permanence
AGATHÓN - International Journal of Architecture Art and Design, 2018
Digitalisation has effects on technological processes and products, as in previous industrial revolutions. Among its disruptive consequences on society and on individuals, the emergence of a different concept of Time is already influencing the operative and, above all, theoretical field of the architectural heritage. Unusual forms of memory undermine the traditional vision of heritage, based on a linear vision of time, which clearly separates the Past from the Future, leaving to the Present a mere role of transporter. Some contemporary strategies may usefully be referred to the oxymoronic Temporary Permanency, because the presumed immutability, ambition of now obsolete rigid and abstract conservative objectives, has been overcome.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Related papers
Re-Maining Material Legacy, Re-Meaning Cultural Heritage: Preserving the Past to Design the Future
G. CORDA, V. LORENZO, S. MALDINA, L. MARCHI, M. MASSARI, P. LAMA (a cura di), The Matter of Future Heritage, TU Delft Open, CPCL Journal, Delft, Bologna 2020, pp. 159-174.