A műemlékvédelem válsága

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

In the practice of Hungarian monument preservation there are obvious stresses emerging. These stresses are signed by conflicts unfolded recently and has appeared even in electronic and printed media. The debate about the last conservation of the ruins of the late Romanesque abby church in Zsámbék, or the open public capaign against the recently built covering roof above the ruins of the XIth century coronation church in Székesfehérvár, make it obvious, that there is a serious opposition between the professionals of monument preservation and the wide society. Within the field of architecture there is another opposition between the professional architects and the professional specialists of monument preservation. The idea of rebuilding a villa on the hillside of the Buda Castle designed by Miklós Ybl created raging storm in public media as a bitter aftermath of its planning conference. The third firing line is drown between certain groups of specialists of monument preservation. The strict followers of the Chart of Athens and Venice n the chartesians n has been in a continuous debate with other free thinkers of this field. It has always around the item of reconstruction of ruins. This theoretical debate has been international looking back a history of several decades since now. The inconsequent way of handling the phenomenon of the reconstruction of the historic downtowns of Warsow and Gdansk, while the charts had been strictly prohibit the reconstruction of ruins or the Japanese practice of handling the "Ise" sanctuary impossible to fit to European chartesian theories n are all represent several aspects of the inconsistency of monument preservation theories and practice worldwide. Analysing the ruins in Zsámbék I could prove that the recent conservation is in a strict correspondence to chartesian conceptions, so the public opposition has been caused by the theoretical bases. The international problem handling techniques had used to be creating exceptions. The Document of Nara in 1995 and the Chart of Krakow in 2001 underlines the "respect" towards different cultures (Ise-symptom) whereas reinforces the original ideas spreading their validity. When the exceptions getting to be numerous in a certain scientific field the crisis is close. The crisis will lead to a changing of paradigms. After the post-modern turn point in architecture during the 60s and the 70s, I cannot understand why these ideas left the monument preservation untouched, while the post-modern way of thinking is very similar to monument preservation ideas. The basic problem in ideas can be found among the circumstances of the birth of this discipline. As the preconceptions of museology and archeology had major influence on the newborn science the historic monuments has been handled as objects of art. This viewpoint misses the special character of buildings and their vigorous survival capability. Even in museology the "dead object" concept is fading and the reconstruction of the whole culture is prevailing. I offer a new meaning for the term iintegrated monument preservationî: we have to insert our present theories into the larger context of cultural history. In front of this new background the final aim of our activity must be the rebirth of the whole spiritual world that was dormant within the objects. So we should declare the priority of the living spiritual aspects related to traditional antiquity values, and the priority of a living monument related to dead object. For me the term "integrated preservation of heritage" means the reintegration of the past both in spiritual and objective sense of the word. This is the way to regain the lost respect and legitimity of monument preservation, as the Living Heritage will fulfill the role of this field within the society.