Today one of the most debated topics in the art world is related to the delicate issue of the conservation of cultural heritage…

very rarely the meaning of the term conservation and the role that it has played in the past, together with the way it has affected how we see works of art in the present have been considered. It is a common practice to think that a painting or a sculpture on display in a museum corresponds to the original object created by the artist in the past centuries, but it is surprising to find out how often this is incorrect because, on the contrary, it has been modified either by natural agents such as the passing of time, or by the human beings as a consequence of reasons of taste, of political nature, or of interventions of conservation.

"Torso Belvedere-02". Con licenza CC BY-SA 3.0 tramite Wikimedia Commons - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Torso_Belvedere-02.jpg#/media/File:Torso_Belvedere-02.jpg

“Torso Belvedere-02”. Con licenza CC BY-SA 3.0 tramite Wikimedia Commons

Probably a few people are aware of the fact that, for example, the Greek and Roman sculptures that we are used to admire as made of immaculate marble were originally polychrome and provided with eyes made by glass, which gave more realism to their gaze. Over the centuries the original pigments fell, and therefore we are today unable to perceive the classical sculptures according to the aesthetics of the Greeks and Romans. Would consequently undertaking a restoration to recreate their original appearance be appropriate, apart from the obvious material and economic difficulties that such an undertaking would entail? Is it right to consider the conservation of cultural heritage as an attempt to restore the original state of a work of art, according to the way it was conceived by the artist himself, or should conservation be intended as an intervention that respects all the various life stages of the artwork itself, including the effects of the passing of time and its subsequent alterations by human beings over the centuries? Which aesthetic consequences would imply, for example, the removal from the Mona Lisa of that yellow layer of varnish formed during time that we are now used to consider as an integral part of the work?
Contrary to what many people might think, interventions of substantial alterations of works of art like removal of entire figures, the dismemberment of wooden altarpieces, cuts or additions of portions of canvases and transfer of works by a support to another –usually from panel to canvas- were a common practice as early as the fifteenth century. So which are the questions a conservator should think about when a work of art enters a museum and an intervention of conservation is deemed necessary? The best answer would probably be to consider conservation as an act aimed at retaining the cultural significance of an object as much as possible. Putting this principle in practice is certainly complex and sometimes controversial and needs careful decisions made case by case, on the basis of accurate scientific, historical, and artistic assessments.
The conservation practice probably becomes even more complex when it enters the sphere of contemporary art and it needs to deal with new artistic media such as the video, the land art or the installation, for which there are no pre-established conservation practices. In case the artist is still alive talking to him/her is fundamental in order to understand his/her vision of the artwork. Some artists conceive the deterioration of the work with the passing of time as part of their aesthetic and a conservator must be able to accept and respect this point of view. Similarly, it is crucial that a contemporary artist expresses clearly and documents his/her opinion regarding conservation practice in order to facilitate one of the most delicate operations in the entire art system and in order to allow the conservators to operate according to the will of the author of the work. Unfortunately, this does not always happen. A prime example in this regard is what happened a few years ago at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art during the intervention of conservation of Steel Structure (1975) by Sol LeWitt. Despite the artist had in fact clearly indicated in his writings that he wanted his work to be cyclically repainted with simple industrial white paint, to compensate for the degradation caused by the passing of time, his will was not respected. The conservators in fact deliberately opted for the use of a white paint made on the model of the one used by Sol LeWitt himself.
The conservation of a work of art is a very complex and delicate practice, in which a high technical and scientific knowledge needs to be combined with careful historical, artistic, aesthetic and moral considerations and evaluations.

This post is also available in: Italian