Part 3: Conservation of Modern Architecture PDF

PART 3. TOWARDS CONTEMPORARY ISSUES CONSERVATION OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE ALOIS RIEGL (1858 – 1905) Alois Riegl (1858-1905) was a scholar of artistic forms that were not then considered as such, such as the serial artistic production of the late Roman imperial period ("Late Roman Artistic Industry,"...

PART 3. TOWARDS CONTEMPORARY ISSUES CONSERVATION OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE ALOIS RIEGL (1858 – 1905) Alois Riegl (1858-1905) was a scholar of artistic forms that were not then considered as such, such as the serial artistic production of the late Roman imperial period ("Late Roman Artistic Industry," 1901), or the decorative motifs of Oriental carpets (1891). After a period of study in Rome, Riegl also wrote a fundamental essay on the origins of Baroque art, thus starting the reevaluation of an artistic period that had previously been considered marginal or decadent. Riegl’s attention did not focus on celebrated works or artists, but rather on artistic production, examining intentions, the diffusion of models, and variations in relation to established norms. His work represents a significant reflection on the values conveyed by works of art, which are analyzed based on innovative categories, such as the relationship between figure and background, spatial framing, the repetition of figurative patterns, etc. KUNSTWOLLEN It is in this context that the idea emerged that every artistic product corresponds to a perceptual, spiritual, and, more broadly, cultural context. Each work of art thus responds to an artistic intention (Kunstwollen in German) that passes through individual artists and craftsmen, and also concerns the patrons, users, and the audience who receive and accept a particular artistic expression. Artistic value is therefore relative to the context that produced, inspired, and consumed it. Attention shifts from an art history (Kunstgeschichte) to a “cultural history” (Kulturgeschichte) in which artistic production responds to particular mentalities that go beyond traditional concepts of beauty. In this way, Riegl aimed to overcome the positivistic view that style was conditioned by the material used, functional purpose, and technique employed. This view was already present in Viollet-le-Duc and was further developed in late 19th-century Germany, particularly by Gottfried Semper (1803-1879). THE MODERN CULT OF MONUMENTS – THEORY OF VALUE Riegl is also known in the field of restoration for his role as president of the Central Commission for the Preservation of Monuments in the Austro-Hungarian administration, which in 1903 passed a new law on the protection of works of art and monuments. Riegl himself wrote a presentation for the law, which was later published separately under the title The Modern Cult of Monuments (Der moderne Denkmalkultus, 1903). This is a complex text that should be read alongside the law to which it serves as a preface, and here it is summarized, focusing on some of its main points. The title itself highlights the author's position: he does not provide a practical guide on restoration, but instead sheds light on the values attributed to works we call "monuments" over time, up to the early 20th century, a time of intense social conflicts, demands for renewal in science, art, and technology, and groundbreaking developments in the study of the human psyche. Riegl notes that even the concept of a monument is fluid and changes depending on the era in which it is applied. In Greco-Roman antiquity, monuments were considered works erected specifically to commemorate an event or a person, thus carrying an intentional value, such as triumphal arches celebrating military victories, with inscriptions and the name of the victor prominently displayed. In Roman times, a functional building dedicated to entertainment, such as the Colosseum, would rarely be considered a "monument." During the Renaissance, the concept of monument was applied to works regarded as models of aesthetic perfection, worthy of imitation, such as baths, forums, and public buildings (including the Colosseum, which influenced many 16th-century structures). These works were recognized for their absolute artistic value, as exemplars for architects and artists of every era; Michelangelo's works and Raphael's paintings were also considered monuments. Only in the 19th century did the monument acquire value because it documented a past era, serving as a testimony from which to reconstruct the cultural and spiritual life of distant times; thus, it became primarily a historical value, used to document an evolutionary phase of humanity (monument/document). According to the intentional value, one would seek to maintain the monument in its original form, ensuring its communicative capacity by removing signs of decay. According to the absolute artistic value, the monument would be preserved as a model to be imitated, eliminating all later additions that would mar its purity. According to the historical value, the monument would be treated as a document to be restored for readability, without concern for its aesthetic outcome. However, during Riegl's time, another value was emerging, which he argued would dominate in the 20th century—the age of mass culture. This is the value of antiquity or age (Alteswert in German), recognized in a work simply because it belongs to the past and bears the marks of time. Examples include ruins, which fascinate regardless of the original value of the building, or stones aged by patina, which were highly appreciated in the picturesque taste. The Alteswert is thus an "emotional" value, easily understood by the general public, even the less cultured, but it often comes into conflict with other values. Other values are also attributed to a work, especially in architecture. The desire for buildings to meet contemporary aesthetic needs leads to a search for novelty value (or artistic value of novelty). Often, a work from the past is expected to conform to contemporary tastes; this was the case with the reconstruction of San Paolo fuori le mura, for example, which resulted in a new work rather than a conserved ancient building. Finally, it is important not to forget that each building survives only if it guarantees a functional value, i.e., a purpose that requires its maintenance and care, with its preservation being crucial for a certain community. Riegl emphasizes the importance of functional purpose in the protection of buildings and the need to evaluate case by case the function to be maintained or assigned to a building being restored. Use, in essence, ensures the life of a monument. A restoration intervention, Riegl asserts, may cause conflicts between the various values attached to a work, which explains the dissatisfaction often felt when facing a restored work. For example, the historical value demands respect for the document, i.e., respect for additions or changes that have occurred over time, while the novelty value seeks an aesthetically perfect building conforming to current standards. Meanwhile, the value of age demands that the marks of time not be erased. It is primarily the Alteswert that causes the most frequent conflicts with other values. How to proceed? Riegl proposes that restoration works avoid conflicts between the values conveyed by the monument, for example: Where there is a risk of altering the historical value, it is possible and desirable to create copies of the parts at risk of alteration to ensure the preservation of the original work. For instance, famous paintings can be reproduced and displayed to the public if environmental factors or other risks threaten the original. The legitimacy of the novelty value should be recognized, but it should be directed toward the production of contemporary works. It is futile to ask a medieval building to reflect contemporary tastes, which can be better represented by entirely new works. This is a highly debated point today when reactions against contemporary interventions in historic contexts are often motivated by the desire for fame among successful architects, rather than genuine conservation concerns for the monument. Efforts should be made to avoid conflicts with the value of age, which is significant to much of the modern public, by avoiding heavy restoration interventions that highlight, for example, the difference between new stonework and ancient masonry. This would spoil the "pleasure" derived from the Alteswert, and the restoration would not be appreciated. Thus, heavy restoration interventions replacing authentically aged materials should be limited to conservation and maintenance. In this way, Riegl joined the call to abandon stylistic restoration practices in favor of interventions focused solely on conserving materials, a trend that was spreading across Europe based on the thinking of John Ruskin. However, Riegl’s approach was entirely different, detached from the romantic and decadent stance found in Ruskin. For Riegl, restoration did not arise from nostalgic or retrogressive positions, but from a modern interpretation of past artistic production. It was not about entering the mind of the original creator, as with Viollet-le-Duc, but about responding to the needs of contemporary man. Austrian and German historians and architects were influenced by Riegl, following a trend favorable to maintenance. However, his views on restoration were not immediately known in other European countries (although it should be noted that the 1903 Austrian law was valid in the Italian regions then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire), so his influence was primarily felt starting in the 1980s, when the first translations appeared, and mainly in theoretical debates. PRESERVING 20 T H CENTURY HERITAGE CONSERVATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE IN DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES The bombings of World War II caused widespread destruction, leaving some buildings entirely ruined and others significantly damaged. By the 1950s, recognition of the cultural value of these structures led to the application of protective restrictions, even to buildings that were only 30 years old. This marked the first instance of juridical protection for such young architectural heritage. WEISSENHOFSIEDLUNG, STUTTGART, GERMANY (1927) The Weissenhofsiedlung was created as part of a 1927 exhibition in Stuttgart, showcasing avant-garde residential prototypes designed by architects like Walter Gropius, Le Corbusier, and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Initially open to the public for a few months, the buildings were later used as housing until 1938. These experimental designs represented innovative solutions for modern living. In 1981, conservation efforts began, not to preserve the existing state but to restore the original architectural forms. The flat roofs, altered over time, were restored to their initial design, and later-added plaster layers were carefully removed to reveal the original. Sampling techniques were used to match the original plaster's color, though its appearance had changed over time. Disputes arose regarding the exterior color, as traces of a controversial blue paint were linked to the interior facades of the main doors. Despite minimal maintenance issues, this intervention marked one of the earliest restorations of modern architecture, focusing on recreating the original image rather than conserving aged materials. TUGENDHAT HOUSE, BRNO, CZECHIA (1929 –1930) The Tugendhat House, designed by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, was completed in 1930. Its original owners were forced to leave in 1938 due to the German occupation of Czechoslovakia. Over the decades, the house underwent expansions and began to show signs of deterioration by the 1980s. An initial intervention in the 1980s, led by the State Institute for Reconstruction of Historical Towns and Buildings, addressed structural degradation caused by water ingress and restored the house’s geometry to match the original design. Further restoration began in 2010 following the house's inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage List in 2001. This intervention prioritized the preservation of the building’s iconic geometry and materials. Layers of plaster were carefully removed to protect the original, while the kitchen surfaces were recreated using a mix of original and replicated tiles. Structural issues in the masonry walls were resolved using detachment techniques, ensuring authenticity. Flooring, stone materials, and metal supports were restored to reflect the original design, balancing modern conservation techniques with historical fidelity. BAUHAUS, DESSAU, GERMANY (1925 –1926) The Bauhaus in Dessau, designed by Walter Gropius, was an iconic art school that integrated art, craft, and technology. After its closure in 1932, the building experienced varied uses and suffered damage during World War II. In the 1970s, an intervention prioritized recreating the building's original state, paying little attention to its layered history. A more comprehensive restoration took place between 1996 and 2006, following the building's inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage List in 1996. This project focused on recovering original features such as windows, doors, and plaster, while incorporating modern upgrades like photovoltaic panels and energy-efficient windows. Detailed analysis of the building's flooring revealed significant changes in materials and colors, guiding its restoration to align with the original design. The intervention balanced preserving historical elements with optimizing energy efficiency, reflecting evolving conservation priorities. ANTI-TUBERCULOSIS DISPENSARY, ALESSANDRIA, ITALY (1937 –1938) Ignazio Gardella designed the Anti-Tuberculosis Dispensary, but its layout was altered before its inauguration to comply with Fascist policies that required strict gender segregation. This led to the relocation of the staircase to create separate waiting areas for men and women. Between 1993 and 1996, Gardella himself led a restoration project to return the building to its original design. The staircase was relocated to its intended axis-based position, and material degradation was addressed. While the plaster required replacement, the brick elements remained in excellent condition, reflecting the building's structural integrity and Gardella's original vision. POST OFFICE ON VIA MARMORATA, ROME, ITALY (1933 –1935) Designed by Adalberto Libera and Mario De Renzi, the Post Office on Via Marmorata featured alternating stone cladding and travertine porosity. Over time, the building underwent two major interventions. The first intervention, conducted between 1966 and 1971, replaced the original stone coating of the portico with new travertine slabs. Later, a second intervention (1998–2001) aimed to restore historical elements. This involved reintroducing porphyry and adopting modern installation techniques to enhance structural integrity. Stainless steel components were added to support the structure, preserving its historical image while accommodating modern needs. OLIVETTI SHOWROOM, VENICE, ITALY (1957 –1958) Carlo Scarpa's Olivetti Showroom was a masterpiece of material craftsmanship, featuring Venetian stucco, Aurisina stone, and Belgian black marble. However, in 1984, it was converted into a souvenir shop, obscuring its original features with new plaster and finishes. In 2011, a detailed restoration removed these later layers to reveal Scarpa’s original design. Venetian stucco and other materials were carefully exposed and cleaned using specialized techniques. Metal elements, such as the oxidized front door, were treated conservatively to ensure both functionality and preservation. The restoration balanced historical authenticity with contemporary conservation needs, safeguarding the unique character of Scarpa's design. WAR MEMORIAL, MONUMENTAL CEMETERY, MILAN, ITALY (POST -WAR) The War Memorial in Milan evolved through three distinct versions. The first, completed in 1945–1946, featured a brick base with Carrara marble panels and painted iron rods. The second version (1947–1950) replaced the iron rods with bronze and introduced Candoglia marble slabs. By 1955, the final version used Sweden black granite and engraved slabs, commemorating victims of Nazi concentration camps. Unlike other projects that emphasized layering historical elements, this memorial followed a subtractive approach, with each version replacing the previous one. This methodology reflected ongoing debates about authenticity in modern conservation practices, focusing on creating a definitive commemorative structure rather than preserving traces of earlier iterations. Each of these case studies exemplifies the complexities and challenges of preserving 20th- century heritage. They highlight a spectrum of approaches, from meticulous restoration to adaptive reuse, balancing the demands of historical authenticity, material conservation, and contemporary functionality.