aw Szmygin, ICOMOS POLAND, 8th US/ICOMOS InternationalSymposium
Interpretation as a Factor Altering Conservation Doctrine:The Case for Reconstruction and Rebuilding.
Within the last thirty years we have assumed that all the cultures areequally valuable. It means that the heritage of all the cultures, nations,countries should be protected. Therefore, more and more attention isdirected at the identification of the heritage and its protection all over the world. And more commonly is understood the fact that the protection of heritage allows the protection of history and identity. The process of identification and the heritage protection should bedescribed by the conservation doctrine. Within its frames there should be worked out three elements:
the methodology enabling the need-analysis of a given society, countryor a culture in order to indicate the elements forming their heritage,
the methodology enabling the description and analysis of the elementsconsidered as heritage,
the conservation principles, which are adjusted to the specificity of theparticular heritage – that means the heritage preserving the valuesimportant to a specific sort of the heritage. The contemporary notion of the heritage is very extensive, thus, at the eachof three mentioned stages there must be done the process of interpretation.It means that the contemporary conservation doctrine cannot be universal,it cannot operate with ready tenets, it cannot utilize the commonconservation principles. The contemporary notion of heritage must be of open and local character, because such is of the contemporary heritage. The conservation doctrine, which has been still used by us, does notfulfill these very three conditions. Above all, this theory does not deal withthe process of analysis of the culture or a community in order to define theelements constituting their heritage. It stems from the fact that thecontemporary conservation theory is still in the mould of the Venice Charter.We can assume so, since all the charters and conservation guidebooks stillquote the Venice Charter as the base document (Washington Charter,Florence Charter, Nara Declaration, Burra Charter, etc.). Meanwhile, theVenice Charter was worked out in the range of European culture in times when the monument was predominantly considered the one out of the great work of architecture. These kinds of objects had been already known anddescribed. Therefore, there was not needed to create the methodology of heritage identification. Thus heritage (the monuments of architecture) was