Dyskusja nad artykułem J. Stankiewicza

• Authors: Bogdanowski Janusz , Kalinowski Wojciech , Krzyżanowski Lech , Billert Andrzej , Czerner Olgierd
• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

EN

Acting in fu ll agreement with the author of the foregoing article ,,At a Turning-Point”, Ass. Prof. Dr. J . Stankiewicz the Editors of this Quarterly have turned to persons to whom dear are the problems of cultural property protection with a request to express their views points dealt with by the author. What follows are the fiv e views which are presented here in a hope that they will start a much wider discussion.

EN

A SUMMARY OF A STATEMENT BY О. CZERNER The author suggest that as the background of J. Stankiewiez’s views is to bo considered his conviction that in the recent times the subject of protective activities is being more and more confined which, «is a consequence, leads to destruction of numerous historic objects. The definition „protection of historical monuments” needs to be changed in an evolutionary way but in co- operation with the „allies” as, e.g. the architects and town planners who have understood that for safeguarding deserve the objects which not necessarily are listed in register of historical monuments. According to the author the issuing of publications dealing with protection of historical monuments and among them of those having the form of registers should not be hampered these latter, however, should not be classifying registers but publications of informative character, i.e. „open” and thus suitable for up-to-dating. What regards the expert staffs the author is of opinion that it is desirable that an institution responsible for preparing of information on historic objects be extended and reorganized whereas quite unnecessary seems the extension of tho conservator’s administrative services. I t is proposed by the author to establish the Institute for Protection of Cultural Environment with its branches acting in the separate voivodships.

EN

A SUMMARY OF A STATEMENT BY J. BOGDANOWSKI The author considers the problems of cultural property protection and those of theory of restoration and conservation as full of contradictions which may be handled as a consequence of varying viewpoints adopted towards the same problem or question. It is the author’s view that too many specialists are usually focussing their interest on a single subject which the fact favours misunderstandings and disinformation. As is well known the flow of information between the various scientific areas has normally a vertical and only very rarely a horizontal direotion. As a decisive factor is to be considered here the enclosing of experts themselves within the borders of their own disciplines which leads to situations in which there is obvious lack of interrelation between architectural investigations, for example, and plans prepared by conservators or investigations carried out by town planners. Worse still develops the co-operation with experts coming from beyond the milieux of those dealing with protection of historical monuments. In the above case easily observable becomes the lack of information concerning the existance of cultural property. The author advances the need to undertake the action aimed at integration of science. As some step forward might be handled the forming of a post of the Chief Conservator of Historical Monuments, however, as the next step the establishing of the Academy of Conservation should follow which the institution would be responsible for scientific co-ordination of the until now disintegrated activities. The planned Academy could have a character of an interdisciplinary institution gathering all those interested in and dealing with problems of cultural property protection. The above protective and preservating activities may find their expression at the extremely varying levels, namely those ranging from a quite negligible object to a „historic landscape unit” . It is indispensable therefore — according to the author — to popularize the new methods that have already been developed in this range as, for irstance, rehabilitative activities carried out at the level of the entire Cracow voivodship by H. Pieńkowska and J. Bogdanowski. The author points to the lack of suitable staffs for realization of plans and once again emphasises the need to establish the Academy of Conservation that could grow to a school responsible for training of the urgently needed experts.

EN

A SUMMARY OF A STATEMENT BY W. KALINOWSKI The author is of opinion that the international respect for the so-called „Polish school of conservation” is to bo considered to a lessor extent as a result of our achievements gained in rebuilding of the objects destroyed and much more as a consequence of advances in methods and techniques used in conservation. It should be noted, however, that both poorly executed realizations or devastations brought to historical monuments are not presented. The author remarks the existence of the advacing crisis in safeguarding of cultural property whose causes are seen by him not only in difficulties of administrative or organizational nature, but also in the steadily growing methodical requirements. In our days the historic cultural environment is subject changes that not in all instances are satisfying the man’s necessities of life or comply with his aesthetic views. In most cases for these changes are applied the pseudo- -economical criteria or they are enforced by menas of administrative regulations. Thus, by no means lesser in importance than the „safeguarding” itself is the problem of „developing” of the historic cultural environment. Within the up to now applied conservation policies conditioned by regulations and registers no concrete design solutions were prosented and to the contrary — an usual practice consisted in issuing of orders or bans. It is the highest time already to pass from the static to dynamic policies which seems entirely possible through arranging by the conservator’s authorities, for example, of architectural or town planning competitions. Referring to an exhibition organized two years ago on which were shown the numerous devastated objects the author catches a glimpse of similarity between the attitude towards historical monuments and that towards the nationalized property which both features are supplying evidence for the back of general culture. Still lacking are the wide publicity actions making the community familiar with importance of cultural property and its rank in nation’s wealth. The at present active authorities in towns are responsible for the future social attitudes of their inhabitants. This problem is reaching as far and deep as to school curricula in which, however, no place has been given to problems of cultural property protection. In the author’s opinion much more important is the proper action than discussion about the terms „historical monument” and „cultural property” .

EN

A SUMMARY OF A STATEMENT BY L. KRZYŻANOWSKI According to the author’s opinion this country should not be referred to as one standing at a turning-point, but rather more properly as that who has already passed it after changes that had place in national economy and administration during the seventies. The above changes have, among the other things, led to building of the new structure of local authorities which is not without effect on activities carried out b y conservators. The action aimed at preparing of documentation of the historic urban centres resulted in a vivid discussion, nevertheless, the systematic forms o f activities in that range are lacking still. The author o f the present shares the opinion expressed by J. Stankiewicz with regard to a confined meaning of the term „monument” . As it follows from experiences the author has gathered in his activities as conservator the term „cultural property” is always being accepted with better understanding. He is of opinion that one of measures serving for preservation of historical monuments could consist in publishing of their registers revised each second year and as example he quotes the central urban district of Warsaw where over 1,617 objects have been included to register. The above register has been made available to all designing organizations, to dwelling house managements and to other municipal sorvicos in the capital city. The author also shares opinion of J. Stankiewicz concerning the disadvantageous results of introducing of classifications. I the every-day practice of the Warsaw Conservator’s Office no classification of historical monuments is being used. According to the author the focus of cultural property protection in Poland shifts to local authorities and the more and more decisive role is being played by the local Conservator’s Offices. It must be stated, however, that as yet they have no clearly set out outlines of their policies and are carrying their actions according to their individual potentialities. The role of the Ministry of Culture and Arts is seen by the author in its considerably wider co-operation at standardization of documentations, preparing the plans for modern uses made of historic buildings, in co-ordinating actions and so on. As the most important task of all persons dealing with protection of cultural property in this country is considered by the author the conferring to that mat high rank in social consciousness and. undertaking of actions aimed at showing that the protection of cultural property is our common need.

EN

A SUMMARY OF A STATEMENT BY A. BILLERT The importance of article by J. Stankiewicz has been uuierlined by the author who is of opinion that it deserves the more attention owing to the fact alone that it deals wiih questions until now not dealt in any more comprehensive manner. Tin author of the present statement has focussed his attention on the problem of some kind of demarcation between the protected spatial settings coming from the past times and the modern architectural and town planning solutions. At the moment when it has come to a direct contact between these two kinds of settings a crisis has arisen in the range of preservation and protection of historical monuments having its background in changes occurring in social consciousness and culture as well as a crisis of the man’s civilizational environment and within it another crisis, this time the crisis of a town as such. The next problem considered by the author consists in transmission of components of culture; ho s tat os that under modern conditions the museum concept is more and more frequently rejected, nevertheless, in every-day practice we have constantly to do with processes of pronounced isolation of the so-called „historic space” from the modern „standardization” which, as a final consequence, leads to „musealisation” . The author of the present statement is in full agreement with J. Stankiewicz in his views concerning the need to create some kind of „sanitary barrior” between the „historic space” and that standardized. Taking an a ttitude towards J. Stankiewicz’s postulate rolating to interdesciplinarity required in conservator’s measures the author expresses a view that the protection of historical monuments exists only as a problem or activity and not as an independent scientific discipline since it in itself constitutes a choice of various specializations from both fields — i.e. technical sciences and humanities. In the field conservation are active the representatives of creative disciplines and reflections as to their activ ities arise in the field of art history, those of aesthetics or history of architecture. The so-called conservation activity is a kind of activity from the sphere of culture and art its evaluation, however, will in each separate case have two aspects — i.e. analytical and critical as well. Basing on the above conclusions the author is of opinion that the solution of problem of demarcation between two environments is to be found in the modern creative activity of developing the space as some kind of entity. From this point of view it seems not important to fight against a single standardized multi-storey point block of flats entering the historic space, but to fight fo preservation of the entire spa,ce. This means the end of a certain stage in protection of historical monuments and the advent of now ideas more dialectically handling the reality.

Keywords

PL

artykuł J. Stankiewicza; Akademia Konserwacji; problematyka kompleksowego podejścia do zabytku; Janusz Bogdanowski; Wojciech Kalinowski; „polska szkoła konserwatorska”; kształtowanie historycznego środowiska kulturowego; Andrzej Billert; Olgierd Czerner

• Publisher: Narodowy Instytut Dziedzictwa
• Journal: Ochrona Zabytków
• Year: 1975
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 111-124

Dates

published

1975

Contributors

author

Bogdanowski Janusz

• doc. dr, Politechnika Krakowska

author

Kalinowski Wojciech

• doc. dr, Instytut Historii Kultury Materialnej PAN — Warszawa

author

Krzyżanowski Lech

• dr, Urząd Konserwatorski m. st. Wdrszawy

author

Billert Andrzej

• mgr, Uniwersytet im. A. Mickiewicza — Poznań

author

Czerner Olgierd

• doc. dr, Muzeum Architektury— Wrocław