ABSTRACTMuch of the built environment has been constructed in the last hundred years, particularly in the decades following 1945. These buildings and sites are considered an integral part of our collective heritage, yielding a ‘recent heritage’ that must be considered for preservation. Modernism, followed by New Formalism, Brutalism and Post Modernism, are ‘styles’ that all in one form or another challenge our concept of permanence. Today, architects and designers live longer than their buildings, and, essentially, we are arguing for the preservation of our own buildings. Whereas William Morris and John Ruskin began to formulate a preservation theory at a time when buildings were centuries old, walls were load bearing and 18-inches thick, now they are of our own generation with walls that have been reduced to studs and a layer of sheetrock, a single concrete block or a layer of EIFS (exterior insulation finish system). There is no margin for error and, in that context, the concept of material authenticity – the desire to retain as much as possible the original material as the primary record of the past – would seem to be a contradiction.Preserving modernism has brought into focus the dichotomy between longevity and innovation. With the arrival of Post Modern architecture and particularly its early and whimsical expressions, the design and construction of these buildings seems to have become even more fragile and more temporal. This calls for more intervention, more replacement and reconstruction, creating an economic burden and a philosophical conundrum. While we are still deciding what is important and what to save, the buildings under consideration are rapidly deteriorating and have often become financially obsolete.For these phenomena, we need to develop a broader array of philosophical tenets and material strategies. By looking at some current and past examples of modernism and post modernism, we can begin to explore an approach. This may involve a partial or complete reconstruction or rebuilding, a concept anathema to established theories. Examples range, for instance, from Carlo Scarpa’s restoration and renovation of Castelvecchio in Verona, Italy to Charles Moore’s Piazza d’Italia in New Orleans; such instances may offer some insights into the levels of intervention to be anticipated and to its implications. After all, this dilemma is not entirely new, but must be addressed in the context of our generation, as others did before us.