Andrzej Tomaszewski's "Pluralistic conservation philosophy" as a challenge: Do we have a problem with European identity?
Janusz Krawczyk
krawczyk@umk.pla:1:{s:5:"en_US";s:103:"Chair for the Study and Protection of Cultural Heritage of the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń";} (Poland)
Abstract
In the well-known and frequently cited article by Prof. Andrzej Tomaszewski, Towards a Pluralistic Philosophy of Conservation in the 21st Century, from 2002, the history of heritage conservation was divided into three periods. The earliest was called the period of “primary pluralism” because the diversity of concepts and approaches to conservation issues resulted from the isolation of individual “cultural areas” on the world map. The specificity of the second period was determined by efforts to unify the theoretical foundations of conservation work by popularising European experiences and models which, as it was once believed, were universal. The third period, which Tomaszewski believed we entered at the beginning of the 21st century, should be a time of “universal pluralism”, and the contemporary philosophy of conservation, focused on the issues of protecting cultural diversity on a global scale, will no longer turn against local experiences and traditions. The article aims to analyse the assumptions of the pluralism postulated by Tomaszewski in the context of the development of heritage studies and the transformation of UNESCO's global conservation policy. The periodisation proposed by Tomaszewski will be used as a primary reference for analyses aimed at identifying those trends in contemporary conservation discourse that engage in polemics with Eurocentric views. In the summary of considerations on Eurocentrism, an attempt will also be made to answer whether the progressive relativisation of European conservation traditions and values is equivalent to their invalidation as a starting point for new regional concepts for the protection and conservation of architectural heritage. The article will use the results of an analysis of UNESCO and ICOMOS documents, current research by conservation theorists and selected publications in contemporary heritage studies.
Keywords:
conservation theory, Nara Document on Authenticity, pluralism, conservation Eurocentrism, difficult heritageReferences
Araoz, G.F. (2015). Tendencje dziedzictwa dziś i jutro – z perspektywy ewolucji filozofii i teorii konserwacji; Heritage trends today and tomorrow as seen from evolving conservation philosophy and practice. Wiadomości Konserwatorskie – Journal of Heritage Conservation, (44), 9-18. DOI: 10.17425/WK44CONSERVATION
Google Scholar
Brumann, Ch. (2018). Anthropological Utopia, Closet Eurocentrism, and Culture Chaos in the UNESCO World Heritage Arena, Anthropological Quarterly”, t. 91, no 4, 1203-1233. DOI: 10.1353/anq.2018.0063
Google Scholar
Cameron Ch., & Rössler, M. (2013). Many Voices, One Vision: The Early Years of the World Heritage Convention, London : Routledge.
Google Scholar
Choay, F. (1992). L’Allégorie du patrimoine, Paris: Éd. du Seuil.
Google Scholar
Falser, M. (2015). Cultural Heritage as Civilizing Mission: Methodological Considerations. In: Cultural Heritage as Civilizing Mission: From Decay to Recovery. (1-32): Heidelberg: Springer.
Google Scholar
Gfeller, A.É. (2017). The Authenticity of Heritage: Global Norm-Making at the Crossroads of Cultures. The American Historical Review”, 122(3), 758-791. DOI:10.1093/ahr/122.3.758
Google Scholar
Glendinning, M. (2013). The Conservation Movement: A History of Architectural Preservation, Antiquity to Modernity. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Harrison, R. (2010a). What is heritage. In: Understanding the Politics of Heritage. (5-42): Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Google Scholar
Harrison, R. (2010b). The politics of heritage, In: Understanding the Politics of Heritage. (154-196): Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Google Scholar
Harrison, R. (2013). Heritage. Critical Approaches. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Huxley, J. (1946). UNESCO: Its Purposes and Its Philosophy. London: Preparatory Commission of the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.
Google Scholar
ICOMOS, (1996). 10th General Assembly Colombo Proceedings. Padukka: ICOMOS Sri Lanka. (https://openarchive.icomos.org/id/eprint/1679/1/AG1993.pdf) (retrieved: 20.10.2022).
Google Scholar
Kołakowski, L. (1990). Szukanie barbarzyńcy. Złudzenia uniwersalizmu kulturalnego. In: Cywilizacja na ławie oskarżonych. (7-36): Warszawa: ResPublica.
Google Scholar
Kondylis, P. (2013). Etyczne zabarwienie liberalnej utopii. Studia z Historii Filozofii, 3(4), 33-44. DOI 10.12775/szhf.2013.030
Google Scholar
Krawczyk, J. (2024). The Venice Charter in the light of research on conservation Eurocentrism; Karta Wenecka w świetle badań nad europocentryzmem konserwatorskim. Wiadomości Konserwatorskie – Journal of Heritage Conservation, 79.
Google Scholar
Labadi, S. (2005). A review of the Global Strategy for a balanced, representative and credible World Heritage List 1994–2004. Conservation and Management ofArchaeological Sites, 7:2, 89-102, DOI: 10.1179/135050305793137477.
Google Scholar
Larsen, K. (1995). Preface. In: Nara Conference on Authenticity in Relation to the World Heritage Convention, Nara, Japan, 1–6 November 1994: proceedings. (xi-xiv): Trondheim: Tapir Publishers.
Google Scholar
Luxen, J.-L. (1995). Approches de L’authenticité: modestie et pluralism, In: Nara Conference on Authenticity in Relation to the World Heritage Convention, Nara, Japan, 1–6 November 1994: proceedings. (371-374): Trondheim: Tapir Publishers.
Google Scholar
Meskell, L. (2018). A Future in Ruins: UNESCO, World Heritage, and the Dream of Peace, Oxford–New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Nara Document on Authenticity, (1995). In: Nara Conference on Authenticity in Relation to the World Heritage Convention, Nara, Japan, 1–6 November 1994: proceedings. (xxi-xxvi): Trondheim: Tapir Publishers.
Google Scholar
Passini, M., Le patrimoine à l’épreuve de l’histoire transnationale. Circulations culturelles et évolutions du régime patrimonial pendant les années 1930. In: Vingtième Siècle. Revue d'histoire. 137, 49-61. DOI: 10.3917/ving.137.0049.
Google Scholar
Pressouyre, L. (1993). La Convention du patrimoine mondial, vingt ans après. Paris: Editions UNESCO.
Google Scholar
Rehling, A. (2014). Kulturen unter Artenschutz”? Vom Schutz der Kulturschätze als Gemeinsames Erbe der Menschheit zur Erhaltung kultureller Vielfalt. In: Global Commons im 20. Jahrhundert: Entwürfe für eine globale Welt. (109-138): Berlin, München, Boston: De Gruyter Oldenbourg.
Google Scholar
Schatt-Babińska, K (2016). Europocentryczne i dalekowschodnie spojrzenie na wartość autentyzmu zabytku – dokument z Nara jako próba pogodzenia odmiennych poglądów. Gdańskie Studia Azji Wschodniej, 10, 28-40. DOI: 10.4467/23538724GS.16.014.6171
Google Scholar
Smith, L. (2006). Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Sroczyńska, J. (2021). Wartość społeczna zabytków architektury w świetle wybranych dokumentów UNESCO, ICOMOS, Rady Europy, kształtujących teorię ochrony dziedzictwa kulturowego; The Social Value of Architectural Monuments in the Light of Selected Documents of UNESCO Icomos, the Council of Europe, Shaping the Theory of Cultural Heritage Protection. Wiadomości Konserwatorskie – Journal of Heritage Conservation”, 65, 7-19, DOI: 10.48234/WK65MONUMENTS
Google Scholar
Stoczkowski, W. (2009). UNESCO’s doctrine of human diversity: A secular soteriology?. Anthropology Today, 25(3), 7-11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8322.2009.00666.x
Google Scholar
Stubbs, J.H. (2009). Time Honored: A Global View of Architectural Conservation, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Google Scholar
Szmygin, B. (2023). Współczesna teoria konserwatorska w świetle tekstów doktrynalnych – zmiana paradygmatu. In: Międzynarodowe teksty doktrynalne w ochronie i konserwacji zabytków, (31-43): Lublin, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Lubelskiej, Polski Komitet Narodowy Międzynarodowej Rady Ochrony Zabytków ICOMOS POLSKA.
Google Scholar
Tomaszewski, A. (2000). Ku pluralistycznej filozofii konserwatorskiej w XXI wieku. Ochrona Zabytków, 1, 1-4.
Google Scholar
Tomaszewski, A. (2002) Towards a pluralistic philosophy of conservation. In: Estrategias relativas al patrimonio cultural mundial. La salvaguarda en un mundo globalizado. Principios, practicas y perspectivas. 13th ICOMOS General Assembly and Scientific Symposium. Actas. (212-215): Madrid: Comité Nacional Español del ICOMOS.
Google Scholar
Understanding the Politics of Heritage. (2010). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Google Scholar
UNESCO, Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policies. World Conference on Cultural Policies Mexico City, 26 July – 6 August 1982, (https://culturalrights.net/descargas/drets_culturals401.pdf) (retrieved: 17.03.2022).
Google Scholar
World Heritage Committee, (1994). Report of the Expert Meeting on the "Global Strategy" and Thematic Studies for a Representative World Heritage List (20-22 June 1994) (WHC-94/CONF.003/INF.6), (https://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/1566) (retrieved: 21.05.2023).
Google Scholar
World Heritage Committee. (1997). Twenty-first Session, Naples, Italy, 1-6 December 1997, Report, WHC-97/CONF.208/17, https://whc.unesco.org/archive/repcom97.htm (retrieved: 30.11.2022).
Google Scholar
Authors
Janusz Krawczykkrawczyk@umk.pl
a:1:{s:5:"en_US";s:103:"Chair for the Study and Protection of Cultural Heritage of the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń";} Poland
Statistics
Abstract views: 6PDF downloads: 16
