I

N T
E R N
A T I O
N A L
O R G A N I
Z A T I O N S
Conservati on
T
H
E
S
C
I
E
N
T
I
S
T
R
E
P
A
T
R
I
A
T
I
N
a
t

t
h
e

M
i
l
l
e
n
n
i
u
m
T
h
e

G
e
t
t
y

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

N
e
w
s
l
e
t
t
e
r

V
o
l
u
m
e
1
5
,

N
u
m
b
e
r
1
2
0
0
0
T O U R I S M
M
N
U
M
E
N
T
S
S
I
T
E
S
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
A
R
C
H
I
V
E
S
L
I
B
R
A
R
I
E
P O L I C Y
E T H I C S
E D U C A T I O N
T
E
C
H
N
O
L
O
G
Y
T
H
E
F
T
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
The Getty
Conservation
Institute
Newsletter
Volume 15, Number 1 2000
The J. Paul Getty Trust
Barry Munitz President and Chief Executive Ofcer
Stephen D. Rountree Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Ofcer
John F. Cooke Executive Vice President, External Affairs
Russell S. Gould Executive Vice President, Finance and Investments
The Getty Conservation Institute
Timothy P. Whalen Director
Jeanne Marie Teutonico Special Advisor to the Director
Group Directors
Kathleen Gaines Administration
Alberto de Tagle Science
Jeanne Marie Teutonico Field Projects
(acting)
Marta de la Torre Information & Communication
Conservation, The Getty Conservation Institute Newsletter
Jeffrey Levin Editor
Joe Molloy Design Consultant
Helen Mauch Graphic Designer
Color West Lithography Inc. Lithography
The Getty Conservation Institute works internationally to advance
conservation practice in the visual artsbroadly interpreted to
include objects, collections, architecture, and sites. The Institute
serves the conservation community through scientic research into
the nature, decay, and treatment of materials; education and train-
ing; model eld projects; and the dissemination of information
through traditional publications and electronic means. In all its
endeavors, the GCI is committed to addressing unanswered ques-
tions and promoting the highest possible standards of conservation.
The Institute is a program of the J. Paul Getty Trust, an international
cultural and philanthropic institution devoted to the visual arts and
the humanities that includes an art museum as well as programs
for education, scholarship, and conservation.
Conservation, The Getty Conservation Institute Newsletter,
is distributed free of charge three times per year, to professionals
in conservation and related elds and to members of the public
concerned about conservation. Back issues of the newsletter,
as well as additional information regarding the activities of the GCI,
can be found on the Institutes home page on the World Wide Web:
http://www.getty.edu/gci
The Getty Conservation Institute
1200 Getty Center Drive, Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 900491684
Telephone: 310 4407325
Fax: 310 4407702
Ovra +nr r+s+ nrc+nr, aspects of heritage have become impor-
tant issues in the discourse on place, cultural identity, and own-
ership of the past. Yet for all its engagement with the function,
presentation, and interpretation of heritage as material culture,
conservation lags behind in the larger debate, both in terms
of a critical reassessment of its own principles and in dialogue
with related elds, such as design and aesthetics, as well as his-
tory, anthropology, and the other social sciences. This lag is due
in part to conservations recent and somewhat insular profes-
sional development and its avoidance of a critical examination
of the inherited historical and cultural narratives constructed
through past motives of preservation.
Conservations complex theoretical and methodological
approachbased on art historical, anthropological, and
scientic inquiryrenders it a powerful vehicle for addressing
the questions of form, meaning, and eect of human works.
If we accept the most basic denition of conservation as the
protection of cultural works from deterioration and loss, then
heritage conservation contributes to memory, itself basic to
human existence. Conservation as an intellectual pursuit is
predicated on the belief that knowledge, memory, and experi-
ence are tied to cultural constructs, especially to material
culture. Conservationwhether of a painting, building, or
landscapehelps extend these places and things into the
present and establishes a form of mediation critical to the
interpretive process that reinforces these aspects of human
existence. The objectives of conservation also involve evaluat-
ing and interpreting cultural heritage for its preservation, safe-
guarding it now and for the future. In this respect, conservation
itself is a way of extending and solidifying cultural identities
and historical narratives over time, through the valorization and
interpretation of cultural heritage.
As an academic endeavor, conservation is a modern
concept born out of the notion of history as something that
is linear and that has come to an end. Artifacts and sites are
divorced from their past by the presents historical conscious-
ness, which dictates new motives and methods for their use and
preservation. As Paul Phillipot has noted, in most contempo-
rary professional contexts, conservation has become the desig-
nated term for an objective, scientic approach to the past in
the form of historical knowledge, not the same as the continuity
guaranteed by former tradition; a modern phenomenon of
maintaining living contact with cultural works of the past.
Such motives and methods found various modes of
theoretical and applied expression through the application of
historical and scientic precepts during the late +th and :oth
centuries. The resulting principles attempted to dene a new
approach that related the aesthetic and historical values of art
and architecture to the material form, to ensure the transmis-
sion of the whole work as both idea and thing. Contemporary
theorists such as Vittorio Gregotti have explained conservation
as an anti-Modernist/post-Modernist stance, founded on reac-
tions to notions of progress and based on a belief in the value
and legitimacy of all past artistic contributions. Yet in the end,
conservation is a critical act. Decisions regarding what is con-
served and how it is presented are products of contemporary
values and beliefs about the pasts relationship to the present.
Conservation, The GCI Newsletter
l
Volume 15, Number 1 2000
l
Essays 5
E
s
s
a
y
s
Ethics and
Policy in
Conservation
By Frank Matero
A satiric view of the art of restoring as it appeared in Fun Magazine in 1877.
Just connect.
E. M. Forster,
Howard s End
This relationshipand the stabilizing eect that selected
things and places have by connecting us to a personal or collec-
tive pastis universal. It has become all the more pronounced
in the last jo years, as rapid change and increased mobility have
caused a certain anxiety and dislocation. This is evident in the
resurgence of nostalgia in design, in historical theme parks, in
site reconstructions, and in the romanticization of tradition and
so-called traditional living. With the escalating development
and commodication of heritage for recreational, economic,
and political purposes, the input of conservation professionals
is now all the more critical.
Conservation Principles
Since conservations emergence in the :oth century as a bona de
eld of academic study and professional practice, it has matured
and specialized as a distinct discipline built on a synthesis of theory
and methodology drawn from the humanities and sciences. As early
as the rst International Congress of Architects in Madrid in +o,
numerous attempts were made to codify a set of universal principles
to govern interventions to built works of historic and cultural
signicance. Despite their dierences, all these documents identify
the conservation process as one governed by absolute respect for
the aesthetic, historic, and physical integrity of the work, and one
requiring a high sense of moral responsibility. Implicit is the notion
of cultural heritage as a physical resource that is valuable and
irreplaceablean inheritance that promotes cultural continuity.
This last concern has found renewed expression in recent charters
focused on process and more inclusive denitions of heritage,
authenticity, human rights, and values.
The notion of ethics and ethical practice has long been
associated with conservation, perhaps most explicitly in the +os
with the publication of the Standards of Practice and Professional
Relationships for Conservators (The Murray Pease Report), adopted
in +, and The Code of Ethics for Art Conservators, adopted in
+y by the rrc-American Group. If we take ethics to mean the
moral principles or rules of conduct by which a person is guided,
then, when applied collectively to members of a profession, ethics
denes the duties and responsibilities members have to the public,
to one another, and to themselves in regard to the exercise of their
profession. Implicit in such principles are notions of right and
wrong and actions appropriate and inappropriate, which are based
in part on criteria established by the profession. These principles, in
turn, are often applied in the creation of policy or plans of action.
Implicit in the word and concept of heritage are the notions
of value, birthright, and obligation. Each of these notions estab-
lishes a moral imperative in the treatment of this collective human
inheritance. In response, contemporary conservation has devel-
oped the following principles as the foundation for ethical profes-
sional practice:
the obligation to perform research and documentation; that
is, to record physical, archival, and other evidence before and
after any intervention to generate and safeguard knowledge
embodied as process or product;
the obligation to respect cumulative age-value; that is, to
acknowledge the site or work as a cumulative physical record
of human activity embodying cultural beliefs, values, materi-
als, and techniques, and displaying the passage of time;
the obligation to safeguard authenticitya culturally relative
condition associated with the fabric or fabrication of a thing
or place as a way of ensuring authorship or witness of a time
and place;
the obligation to do no harm, performing minimal interven-
tion that will reestablish structural and aesthetic legibility and
meaning with the least physical interferenceor that will
allow other options and further treatment in the future.
As summarized in the Australia rcoos Charter (Burra
Charter), the aim of conservation is to retain or recover the cultural
signicance of the thing or place, and it must include provision for
its security, its maintenance, and its future. In most cases this
approach is based, rst and foremost, on respect for the existing
fabric, and it involves minimal physical intervention, especially
with regard to traces of alterations related to the history and use
of the thing or place. The conservation policy appropriate to a
thing or place must rst be determined by an understanding of its
cultural signicance and physical condition, which in turn should
determine which uses are compatible with the formal and material
realitynot the reverse.
6 Conservation, The GCI Newsletter
l
Volume 15, Number 1 2000
l
Essays
The Dharb al Ahmer quarter in the medieval section of Cairo. Here, the Aga
Khan Trust for CultureHistoric Cities Support Programme is working with
Egyptian authorities and specialists from the University of Pennsylvania on
a project that combines urban revitalization with conservation, balancing
tradition, continuity, and change. Photo: Frank Matero.
Preservation and Conservation
Contemporary practice has evolved an entire lexicon of interven-
tion strategies based on the degree of intervention. The result
is a sophisticated, though sometimes confusing, denition of
approaches that depend largely on the type and context of heritage.
In certain places, including the United States, the terms preserva-
tion and conservation have come into the professional language as
distinct concepts. Explicit and unique to the denition of preserva-
tion is the notion of retaining the status quo or the means by which
the existing form, integrity, and materials of a work or place are
maintained and deterioration is retarded. Conservation, in the same
context, has been relegated to mean the whole spectrum of technol-
ogy applied to safeguarding cultural heritage.
Both terms have as their fundamental objective the protection
and transmission of cultural heritage. However, whereas preserva-
tion seeks to safeguard and explain by maintaining the existing
physical stateor at least the illusion of no changeconservation,
in its more broadly used meaning, seeks to establish continuity
through controlled change. Both maintain contact with the past
through the identication, transmission, and protection of that
which is considered culturally valuable. Their dierences in
approach can be explained partly in response to negative attitudes
toward past restorations in Europe and North America which,
by todays standards, deprived the works of material integrity and
historical and cultural authenticitythemselves culturally relative
constructs. Both denitions depend on each other for meaning.
A clear understanding of their usage is critical.
For some traditional societies, the concepts and practice
of conservation are often viewed as antithetical to the role of con-
tinuing traditions, or those beliefs, actions, and objects valued by a
group and considered worthy of passing on from one generation to
the next. But while continuity of tradition may be critical to ensur-
ing cultural identity, it is important to remember that tradition is as
dynamic as cultural change itself. Only by recognizing the changing
nature of tradition as constructed memory and cultural identities
can a community responsibly manage its present and future
through personal and collective interpretations of the past, rather
than through ctions imposed from the outside. Conservation, like
history, represents the conscious commitment to cultural continuity
where living memory ends.
All conservation is a critical act, one of interpretation. We
preserve with intentand it is that intent that must be continually
questioned, evaluated, and modied as necessary. By interpretation,
I mean the relation between the visual work itself (thing or place)
and seeing the work and experiencing it. As Goethe once wrote,
we see what we know. I would add, we know what we see.
By dening interpretation as an open relationship between
the work, seeing the work, and experiencing it, I am stressing vision
as the major way of accessing material culture. Certainly vision
dominates our immediate sensory and cognitive transactions with
the physical world. Yet how reliable is the visual as a source of infor-
mation that helps us to understand the original meaning of the
work by those who made or used it? Conservators have long appre-
ciated the visual and physical transformations all material works
experience in an attempt to preserve them. Despite the ultimate
futility, we persevere in attempting to extend and make accessible
the life and meaning of an existing (past) work for the present, not
for the future. Certainly our emotional and intellectual responses to
things and places are based on information beyond sight. These
responses usually depend on learned meaning (such as by members
of a particular group with a direct relationship with the work), taste
(connoisseurship), or experiences and scholarship.
This brings us to the problematic nature of culture. The
concept of culture has provided a platform for the study of humans
as sentient social beings since the mid-+th century, extending into
the :oth century with the development of human psychology and
the emphasis on the importance of the individual. Fundamental
to culture and cultural relativism is the notion of valuea concept
implicit in the meaning of interpretation and, therefore, by exten-
sion, of conservation. Cultural relativism asserts that since each
culture has its own inherent integrity with unique values and
practices, heritage must be contextualized. The role of value in the
determination and preservation of cultural property has long been
recognized. However, who determines that valueand how it plays
out through appropriate methods of use, presentation, interven-
tion, and ownershiphas become a major issue for heritage today.
In conservation, this issue has been explored most commonly
as cultural appropriateness. Professionalsintervening as
cultural outsiders of objects and places that retain meaning for
aliated groups, such as indigenous peoplesshape conservation
treatments and policies in accordance with the cultural beliefs and
values of those groups. Originally relegated to the treatment of
native ethnographic objects and, more recently, traditional cultural
places, the circle has widened as issues of aliated ownership and
power are now applied and challenged by many dierent groups to
all forms of cultural property. Conversely, the concepts of world
heritage and universal conservation principles applicable to all
heritage have also seen renewed vigor in the face of rampant
relativismnot unlike the notion of a list of endangered species or
the concept of universal human rights. Culturally responsive con-
servation and universal notions of heritage preservation, however,
are not philosophically or morally opposed to one another.
Conservation, The GCI Newsletter
l
Volume 15, Number 1 2000
l
Essays 7
Conservation as a Discipline and Profession
Conservation emerges as a hybrid discipline dedicated to
safeguarding cultural heritage by observing and analyzing the evo-
lution, deterioration, and maintenance of material culture; con-
ducting investigations to determine the cause, eect, and solution
of problems; and directing remedial and preventive interventions
focused on maintaining the integrity and quality of the existing
historic fabric and its attending practices and associations.
Conservation, like law, theology, medicine, and architecture, is a
learned profession; academic education plays an important role in
preparation for practice. As a profession, its activities are subject to
theoretical analysis and modication through experience. The the-
ory and practice of professional work in conservation draw upon
this knowledge to create new approaches so that real problems can
be solved synthetically. Like other professions, there are accredited
academic programs and professional organizations guided by
established standards of practice and codes of ethics. Unlike other
professions, however, there is still no certication or licensing.
Science and technology, often associated with conservation,
require some clarication, as they are often taken to represent the
goals or methods of conservation. By science, what is meant is a
systematic and structured way of understanding the material world,
dierent from the approaches of history, philosophy, or aesthetics.
Technology is the application of science, or a body of methods and
materials, to achieve the stated objectives. If we accept the premise
that the practice of conservation began with the study of the under-
lying causes of deterioration, then it was in the +os and +os,
along with the development of museum conservation laboratories
and specialists, that the eld was born.
Yet within the understood limitations of the scientic method
to generate certain kinds of data, conservation still begins and ends
as an interpretation of the work whose questions reside in the
humanities and the sciences. One is not only dealing with the
physical aspects of human-made things and places but with
complex cultural questions of beliefs, convictions, and emotions,
as well as of aesthetic, material, and functional signicance. Science
helps to interpret, but it cannot and should not create absolute
meanings or singularly represent one truth.
Today, conservation has become a major strategy in shaping
and interpreting our cultural world. Every conservation measure
is a form of argument that touches upon cultural values and the
denition, treatment, interpretation, and use of the past. Often
historical arguments for or against the identication, designation,
and physical retention of cultural heritage are based on an episte-
mology of scholarship and facts. Scholarship and facts, however, are
explanations that serve the goals of conservation and are a product
of the academic subculture and of their time and place. Still, they
aord a method of approach that acknowledges both historical and
critical analyses of interpretation. Cultural relativism, like time
itself, is something conservators must explore, if only to reject its
relevance to a given problem. It is time to reenter the dialogue
beyond our immediate concerns and to contribute our knowledge
and expertise to larger social and global issues.
Within the contemporary discipline of conservation, it is
possible to nd any number of incompatible, diametrically opposed
8 Conservation, The GCI Newsletter
l
Volume 15, Number 1 2000
l
Essays
Two views of the entrance to Tsankawi,
a Native American cultural site in
Bandelier National Monument, New
Mexico. The entrance to this archaeo-
logical, ancestral, and recreational site
had suffered erosion as the result of
prehistoric and modern visitation
(1930s image, left). The culturally
appropriate conservation remedy to the
problem of visitation and deterioration
(seen in 1998 image, right) was achieved
through consultation between conserva-
tors and Native American elders.
Photos: Courtesy the Museum of New
Mexico, and Frank Matero.