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

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

WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO ACHIEVE OR SEE ON THE FURTHER WORK OF RESTORATION? Herb Stovel I think my answer to this question is not so much for technical. It's my feeling that the context in which we do restoration, the legal, the political and economic context have changed very rapidly now. That is important to have a big impact and what we do in the name of restoration. I've just spent a lot of time recently in Eastern Europe and looking at how heritage conservation is working after the political changes of the last decade. And I find it very ironic because most of these governments are trying to strengthen their protection mechanism. At the time when government has less money than ever for heritage conservation. What is happening in most western countries is a shift from the philosophy of protection. How do we guide development? How do we guide change to respect heritage values? It creates a different dialogue. It's not the conservator talking to the conservator. It's the conservator talking to the developer trying to find the common language. And maybe the next international charter will be not just a charter for conservation, not just a charter for authenticity but a charter in which conservation and development are brought together. Maybe we will sooner reach that point. But we will need a document that will allow the development community, the conversation community to work in the same direction, using the same language and the same ideas. Tamás Fejérdy For me the most important is that the restoration should be complex. It means that it has no main purpose. As opposed to restoration the smaller transformations may have stressed goals: the roof must not leak, the building must not get wet. But what should be the main purpose of a complex restoration? It must contain everything we have talked about. And I would like to add that is should be durable in technology and in material We should try to apply everything in technology what we know. And the restoration must be the least possible obsolate in spirit and function. Of course, it will change. Even those things that we are working on right now do not last forever. But this process must be the most possible durable. And it is imporant that the result - the monument - of the restoration should be accepted and loved by the public, and they should find pleasure in it. The monument should be a kind of radiator which tries to integrate, define, influence its environment. And then other functions can be added. If these are together and we know what the most important and what the coordinated things are, then in our changing world the spirit of the monuments will convey something old, something important and lasting. The environment and all the others will change with the age. János Sedlmayr To that question that what would I like to see, first I can give a Utopian answer. Maybe it is wrong. My answer is that there should not be monument protection. Such people should handle the buildings who deal with them as the best specialists. This is that Utopia that could save the buildings and could bring out their best. As we respect the memory of our ancestros we should respect their work in the buildings, in the monuments. Of course, we can say that we do not respect neither of them. If I gave a not Utopian answer but a realistic one I would say that the most important is the complex renovation in which the research, the planning, the restoration, the architectural execution complete each other in a top-level. But it requires the best qualified specialists. That is why I would like to see that more and more well-trained experts take part in the construction of