Peters, R. 2008. The Brave New World of Conservation. In Diversity in Heritage Conservation: Tradition, Innovation and Participation - Preprints of the ICOM-CC 15th Triennial Conference. Allied Publishers Pvt Ltd: New Delhi, Vol 1, 185-190. (original) (raw)

Abstract

sparkles

AI

The dynamics of control over cultural material held by museums and related institutions in the western world have undergone significant changes in the last 20 years. This relates mainly to the inclusion of non-professional groups in decision-making processes traditionally restricted to museum professionals. The discipline of conservation is now considered a social as well as a technical and scientific process; every conservation action may involve complex negotiations where condition of the material fabric of objects is only one of many factors in play. This socially, politically and economically aware approach is already recognized as placing conservators in complex positions. This paper will address reasons for and implications of these circumstances by looking at some aspects of how the conservation discipline is perceived, understood and practiced in the contemporary western world.

Key takeaways

sparkles

AI

  1. Conservation now incorporates social, political, and economic dimensions, reshaping traditional practices.
  2. Involvement of non-professional groups in decision-making processes has transformed museum operations over 20 years.
  3. The khipu conservation strategy exemplifies complex negotiations between community needs and cultural preservation.
  4. Consultations with source communities enhance empowerment but require careful management of conflicting interests.
  5. Defining conservation's scope remains urgent for professional recognition and effective practice.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (17)

  1. Bernstein, B. 1992. Collaborative strategies for the preservation of North American Indian material culture. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation (31), 23-29.
  2. Brandi, C. 2005. Theory of restoration. In Basile, G (ed.) Theory of restoration. Firenze: Nardini Editore.
  3. Clavir, M. 2002. Preserving what is valued: Museums, conservation, and First Nations. Vancouver, British Columbia: UBC Press.
  4. de Guichen, G. 2007. Forbes Prize Lecture. Studies in Conservation 52(1), 69-73.
  5. Habermas, J. 1995. Modernity -An Incomplete Project. In Foster, H (ed.) The Anti- Aesthetic Essays on Postmodern Culture. Seattle: Bay Press.
  6. Hobsbawm, E. 1995. The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1990. London: Abacus Book.
  7. Johnson, J, Heald, S, McHugh, K, Brown, E and Kaminitz, M. 2005. Practical Aspects of Consultation with Communities. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation 44(3), 203-215.
  8. Kaminitz, M, Kentta, R and Bridges, D. 2005. First person voice: Native communities and conservation consultations at the National Museum of the American Indian. Preprints of the 14th Triennial Meeting of the ICOM Committee for Conservation. The Hague. London: James and James Science Publishers Ltd, 96-112.
  9. Kopytoff, I. 1986. The cultural biography of things: commodization as a process. In Appadurai, A (ed.) The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 64-91.
  10. Layton, R. 1989. Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions. London: Routledge. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) 1990 http:// www.nps.gov/history/nagpra/. Accessed on 15th November 2007. National Museum of the American Indian Act (NMAIA) 1989 http://anthropology.si. edu/repatriation/pdf/nmai_act.pdf. Accessed on 1st December 2007.
  11. Odegaard, N. 1996. Including Native Americans in the development and installation of an interpretive exhibit and the continuation of mutually educational relations. In Montegut, D (ed.) Caring for American Indian cultural materials: Policies and practices. New York: Fashion Institute of Technology, 6-11.
  12. Peters, R, Salomon, F, González, R and González, R Forthcoming. 2008. Traditional Use and Scholarly Investigation: A Collaborative Project to Conserve the Khipu of San Cristóbal de Rapaz. In Dignard, C, Helwig, K, Mason, J, Nanowin, K and Stone, T (eds). Proceedings of Symposium 2007 Preserving Aboriginal Heritage: Technical and Traditional Approaches, Ottawa, Canada, September 24-28, 2007; Ottawa: Canadian Conservation Institute.
  13. Sease, C. 1998. Codes of Ethics for Conservation. International Journal of Cultural Property 7, 98-114.
  14. Shakespeare, W. 1995. The Tempest. London: Penguin Books.
  15. Shanks, M. 1998. The Life of an Object in an Interpretive Archaeology. Fennoscandia Archaeologica 15, 15-30.
  16. The Vermillion Accord on Human Remains. 1989. http://www.worldarchaeological congress.org/site/about_ethi.php#code2. Accessed on 15th November 2007.
  17. Viñas, S M. 2005. Contemporary Theory of Conservation. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth- Heinemann.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What key changes have occurred in museum decision-making processes recently?add

The paper reveals a significant shift towards including non-professional groups in museum decision-making since the 1980s, particularly following the World Archaeology Congress in 1986.

How has the role of conservators evolved in recent decades?add

Conservators now navigate complex social, political, and economic influences, altering their practice to include community perspectives in conservation decisions.

What challenges arise from involving multiple stakeholders in conservation?add

The inclusion of various groups creates complexities due to conflicting interests, requiring conservators to mediate diverse viewpoints during decision-making.

How does conservation influence cultural identity and community empowerment?add

Conservation practices can enhance cultural identity by involving source communities, as seen in the khipu conservation case, which engaged local authority in decision-making.

What is the significance of defining conservation as a profession?add

Establishing clear definitions for conservation practices is vital for professional recognition and ensuring appropriate expertise, as discussed in the 2006 IIC Congress.