Műemlék-helyreállítások tegnap, ma, holnap (A 27. Egri Nyári Egyetem előadásai 1997 Eger, 1997)

Előadások - The phylosophy of monument restoration Debate – moderator: András ROMÁN

knowledge, which still has to teach us. It is about the acquired high-level professional knowledge which is easily forgotten in our automatized world. Herb Stovel I cannot disagree with anything that my collegaues have said. They have summarized effectively many of the key ideas. My favourite definition in this area comes from Sir Bernard Feilden of England and it is my favourite, because it is the most compact expression of complicated ideas. It is also my favourite, because it uses the word: 'authenticity' and he simply says that the goal of monument restoration is to reduce the rate of decay, well clarifying messages and without loss of authenticity. Said even more shortly: „it is simply to give meaning to the past." Or as my colleague said -1 like this phrase - 'to refresh memory'. So we all agree, but I would like to introduce one point which I think has the potential for difficulty in this definition. We all spoke about the need to respect values, but we have to ask: whoes values? In the past experts defined the values and then told the public: 'These are the values of your heritage'. That system worked not too badly, when government held cultural heritage as high priority. In all countries today in the West and in the East cultural heritage is less and less priority in terms of spending and terms of financial support. And what that means for me is that I think we must involve the public in defining the values. Not defining values for the public, but involve the public in the process, because it is their values we are talking about, not our values. And this is a much more difficult and demanding process than the one we are used to. Because it involves sharing knowledge and sharing the process with the public. András Román I think the answers are very similar to each other and basically they express the same with different words or emphases. I have the habit of saying that -and I agree with Tamás Fejérdy and the others- the goal of monument restoration is to save the monument, because when it decays there is no way to bring it back to life again. But furthermore - and it is not in contrast with the previously said opinions, only in other words the main goal of reconstruction is to unfold and to put forth the historical, aesthetic values and the one that derives from them, the ethic values which are hiding in these monuments. Because these are hiding in those buildings which have not been reconstructed. Probably experts see them, but they do not always see them, because they cannot unless uncovering, the artistic, architectural process lights them up and restoration itself puts them forth. A monument without reconstruction includes possibilités, but does not use these possibilités, only when professional reconstruction has been carried out. DO YOU THINK THE VENICE CHARTA IS STILL VALID

7 Tamás Fejérdy As a brief answer I say: Yes. But as in Herb Stovel'

s speech about the birth and the content of the Nara Document we heard that the Venice Charta was established on very well-defined base in a particular time, in a particular cultural atmosphere, in a primarily European context. Nevertheless, more is quoted from the Charta than read. Sometimes the Charta should be read in order to highlight the fact that its basic principles are set as directions and not as detailed descriptions and as so, it is still valid. I think that we should consider not the words of the Charta as valid, but its spirit, the directions