Műemlékvédelem, 2004 (48. évfolyam, 1-6. szám)

2004 / Különszám - LECTURES - PRESENTATIONS - Fejérdy Tamás: Who wanted it? What is the Charter? ...and today?

However, the Venice Charter is based on Eu­ropean cultural values. Thus the Venice Char­ter is not sufficiently universal to be un­equivocally deployed in societies outside Europe or European based cultures. For con­servation programs to be effective in the East Asian societies, conservation should be implemented on the basis of the unique value and aesthetic sense of East Asian culture rather than on the universal values which characterise so much European culture. The conclusion is that conservation principles are determined in relation to the spiritual and naturalistic sensibilities of East Asian cul­ture and architecture. These principles are put forward as a more appropriate basis than the Venice Charter for building conservation philosophy and practice in the East Asian Societies. I hope that the questions in this title will not spoil the celebration of the 4011' anniversary of the Venice Charter’s adoption. 1 know that our answers may be different, but 1 hope at the end of the conference we will have a clearer understanding of the essence of our experiences up until now, which, it is my conviction, will be useful in looking towards the future. One cannot state this situation and ob­jective more concisely than one of the authors of the Charter, Professor Raymond Lemaire, did in his 1993 thoughts on ICOMOS, Un regard en arrière, un coup d'oeil en avant (looking back at the past, it casts an eye to the future). In my presentation I will look for the answers to the questions in the title in the spirit of this thought. First getting back to its roots I will men­tion the people who were the originators and authors of the Charter and I will try to throw light on the intention of the framers. To the question, What is the Charter? REFERENCES Agrawut, O. R: An Asian View of Conservation, Museum, 27 (4), 157-160., 1975 Boerschmunn, Ernst: Chinese Architecture and Its Relation to Chinese Culture, Annual report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, 539-567., 1911 Boyd, Andrew: Chinese Architecture and Town Planning 1500 B. C.-A. D. 1911, Alec Tiranti, Lon­don, 1962 Brooks, Gruhum: The Burra Charter: Australia’s Methodology for Conserving Cultural Heritage, Places, 8 (îj, 84-88., 1992 Lewis, Miles'. Conservation: A Regional Point of View. In Max Bourke, Miles Lewis, Bal Saini (eds), Protecting the Past for the Future, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 1983 Oliver, Puni: Cultural Issues in Conservation Implementation. In R. Zelter (ed.), Conservation of Buildings in Developing Countries, Working Paper, 60, Oxford Polytechnic Department of Town Planning, 1982 The Athens Charter of 1931 The Venice Charter of 1964 the briefest and most concise answer is pro­vided by the introductory words of the Char­ter, It is essentia! that the principles guiding the preservation and restoration of ancient buildings should be agreed and be laid down on an international basis, with each country being responsible for applying the plan within the framework of its own cul­ture and traditions. However, if we analyze the Venice Charter the answer to our ques­tion will most likely be more complex. In relation to its legal status, the Venice Charter is not binding - but even so it has acquired enormous authority. To the extent that people outside the field of historic pres­ervation in many countries have thought, and still do think that it has the force of law in their country. In some cases the historic pres­ervation professional in question even plays along with this, but it still may be stated that the great impact, prestige and durability of the Charter is inarguably the result of, among other things, the tact that it is a standard based Tamás Fejérdy Hungary WHO WANTED IT? WHAT IS THE CHARTER? ...AND TODAY?

Next