2016 Montreal Round Table From conservation to reconstruction: how World Heritage is changing theory and practice

Transcription

1 2016 Montreal Round Table From conservation to reconstruction: how World Heritage is changing theory and practice By Carly Farmer, Alex Federman and Natalie Miller Introduction As students of the CREATE Heritage Engineering program, we had the privilege to participate in the 2016 Montreal Round Table organized by Christina Cameron, the Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage at the Université de Montréal s School of Architecture. Each year, Christina chooses a controversial topic in World Heritage which has no easy answer or obvious solution. Experts from all over the world are then selected to offer their insights from their unique perspectives on the topic. Including students, there were about attendees. The result is engaging multifaceted discussions and a deeper understanding of the topic. This year s topic is reconstruction which is particularly relevant due to recent terrorist activity and natural disasters. The Round Table commenced the evening of Wednesday March 9 with a public lecture by Mechtild Rössler titled World Heritage Sites under threat by terrorists and UNESCO s response. Thursday had four sessions of presentations and discussions on the following themes: past and present issues; doctrine for reconstructing historic places; regional approaches to reconstructing historic places; and, changing attitudes to reconstruction in the World Heritage system. Friday began with another session on alternate approaches and some reconstruction challenges in practice. This was followed by: the student debate on the theory and practice of reconstruction in Timbuktu; the reports of the rapporteurs; and concluding discussion. Our roles at the Round Table were: Natalie, as an observer; Alex, in the debate; and Carly, as a rapporteur. Reflections by Natalie Miller Reflections on the Public Lecture On Wednesday evening a public lecture was delivered by Mechtild Rössler, Director of the Division for Heritage and the UNESCO World Heritage Centre. This was a thought provoking presentation that raised many issues associated with threats to World Heritage. In the past, conservation theory tends to reject reconstruction, but shifting attitudes are arising and this roundtable discussion showcased some of the thoughts and possibilities. Some of the topics addressed are noted below, along with a personal reflection of the discussion. One example that threatens cultural heritage is looting; items are being stolen, displaced and sold. These items may have significant local or greater value and are often irreplaceable. An attempt to deal with the protection of cultural heritage is to address looting by trying to re-collect stolen cultural property. If items are being recovered, the issue then becomes what to do with them...should they be returned? Is that safe or is further protection required? Safe havens or in-situ protection? Can legislation help address this problem? If so, how would this be done? It is thought that some stolen

2 items are being transported through the same lines in drug trafficking, if so, can officers be trained to help limit the losses of cultural property? When heritage is destroyed, can it be and should it be reconstructed? The technology exists that realistic, virtual 3D visualizations can be created. This is an alternative approach to reconstruction, but the message needs to be considered. For many reconstructions there are often moral or ethical questions that arise. Strong emotions tend to be provoked due the potentially traumatic association of the loss of the prospective reconstructed monument or building. One thing that is clear is that reconstruction must be a local initiative, - but how do you rebuild a community, how does the community regain its heritage? Reflections on the event as a whole The Montreal Roundtable hosted by the Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage was an excellent event to attend to help understand the issues and reactions concerning conservation and reconstruction of World Heritage. I was most interested by the variety of perspectives brought to the table and the changing attitudes overtime in the conservation field. The first session, Setting the stage, included presentations from Christina Cameron and Michael Turner who discussed the need for an updated approach for World Heritage in regard to reconstruction. Typically World Heritage has rejected reconstruction as it is not supported by the Venice Charter or the Nara Document, however, perhaps a re-evaluation of the criteria is necessary to keep up with the challenges faced in the world today. In Michael Turner s presentation, questions are raised about the message that is being sent through reconstruction - our built environment is very much evidence of the past, what history is being showcased and what is being left behind in our collective memory? Is reconstruction to celebrate or to mourn; is it a form of retribution or forgiveness; is it being done to remember or to forget? Reconstruction suggests that a potentially traumatic event has raised the need for it; as such there are often strong emotions involved. As this can be a sensitive topic, guidelines need to be set out for how best to deal with these situations. One important point raised throughout the event was the need for reconstruction to come from the local communities involved. After all, the local communities are most affected in their everyday routines. Through reconstruction, not only is the built heritage surviving, so are some of the intangible heritage aspects such as community connections, skills and knowledge. In the next two sessions different approaches to reconstruction were presented. Ideas were shared from a variety of perspectives from the World Heritage level to national approaches and local thinking. Prominent schools of thought were discussed including Violet-le-duc and Ruskin, as well as the Venice and Burra charters and how they are used in present decision making. This led into the fourth session, where the topic of changing attitudes in reconstruction was examined. It was interesting to consider what caused the need for reconstruction and how that can affect the attitudes was it terrorism or natural disasters or something else? Other considerations are the conditions of inscription ; often the profile on an international stage is important because it means tourism and supporting or allowing the local community to survive. Can places be de-listed or listed and what are the impacts? After many challenges being discussed, the next session considered some alternative approaches to reconstruction including how technology can be used. Elisabeth Lees presented on 3D laser scanning and its capabilities. This is a very neat way to capture huge amounts of data from which a huge amount

3 of information can be interpreted and presented. However, questions of ability to do something compared to need or desire to do this were raised - just because it can be done, should it be done? Another aspect to consider with the digital 3D method of reconstruction is whether the intangible heritage aspects are still being preserved. This is an important consideration as justification for reconstruction is often linked to this necessity or desire to transfer intangible heritage such as skills and knowledge. Overall, I am pleased to have been able to participate in this intriguing discussion surrounding reconstruction and the challenges of World Heritage. I look forward to seeing how this further develops and unfolds in the dynamic world of heritage conservation. Reflections by Alex Federman I am very grateful to have had the opportunity to not only attend the 2016 Montreal Roundtable, but also to be a participant in the student debate. All of the presentations provided me with various levels of insight into the topic of reconstruction on the world stage, but two in particular resonated with me the most. These were the talks given by Michael Turner and Elizabeth Lee. Michael s presentation was titled Past and present: the dilemma of reconstructing historic places, and he analyzed reconstruction from more of a philosophical context. What really sparked my interest was when he spoke about memory, and how the main dilemma is not whether to reconstruct or not, but whether to remember or forget. I had previously written a paper about reconstruction and memory at the Ise Grand Shrine in Japan, and that is primarily where my interest in the topic stems from. It was a very nice surprise to be able to learn more about the role of memory in the reconstruction process from the conference. Elizabeth s presentation, 3D scanning as an alternative to reconstruction, related more towards my thesis topic, in the sense that 3D scanning is a tool for documentation of historic structures. She spoke about her work at Cyark, which is an organization that uses technology as a gateway to get people involved in cultural heritage. This goal is accomplished by providing the public with virtual access to the models of historic sites that Cyark creates from their scanning. Student Debate Session My involvement at the conference was participating in the student debate session. The topic that we discussed related to the reconstruction of sixteen tombs in Timbuktu, Mali that were originally destroyed by terrorists. We had to answer a series of questions during our analysis, with the respective questions and my answers being shown below: 1. What were the values ascribed to the tombs before their destruction and by whom? Before the destruction of tombs, I found that they held, among many others, two core values. These consist of religious/spiritual values, and educational/scientific values. Religious values are associated with the tombs due to their significance in the history of Islam in Africa. Timbuktu is known as the City of 333 Saints in Sufism. The 13th century monuments were shrines of the ancestor Sufi saints and founding fathers and are deeply renowned by the people of Timbuktu. The second value is that of education. Irina Bokova, UNESCO Director General, describes this as the value of exchange. Exchange is represented in the sense that knowledge is being shared by the people of Timbuktu. The tombs held an ancient library that had been looted and burned by

4 the terrorists in their destructive conquest. It contained manuscripts from to the 13th to the 17th centuries that held information pertaining to the Koran, Sufism, philosophy, law, and mathematics, just to name a few subjects. 2. How have these values been conserved, or not, in the reconstruction process? Firstly, the Religious/Spiritual values have absolutely been conserved in the reconstruction process. On February 4, 2016, a consecration ceremony was held for the mausoleums in order to establish a peaceful future. The last time an event like this was held was in the 11th century, thereby showcasing the importance of the tombs, and how they have been engrained in the fabric of the Timbuktu society. The tombs were also believed to protect the city from danger, and can do so once again because of their reconstruction. As well, pilgrimages to Timbuktu can now continue to take place because of the revival of the tombs. In regards to the educational values, the reconstruction was done through traditional building techniques. The masons were contracted locally, and held cultural knowledge about the site and area. This is important because it allows for these techniques, which are intangible aspects of heritage, to be conserved for future generations. Local elders were also consulted in order to ensure that the photographs of the site that were being used for reconstruction matched what was there previously. Additionally, the tombs were repaired with local alhor stone, rice stalks, and banco mortarwhich is a mix of clay and straw. 3. What would you have done and why? I am in complete favour of reconstructing the tombs. Building off of the religious values aspect, if your house of worship was destroyed, wouldn t you do everything in your power for it to be rebuilt again as you remembered it? I certainly would. The tombs are a symbol of that sense of revival and resurgence against the terrorist attacks. Another aspect of this resurgence is that Abu Tourab, one of the men suspected to be responsible for the destruction of the sites was arrested in late He is currently being tried by the International Criminal Court for war crimes through intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion and/or historical monuments. Where would our society be without knowledge? The rebuilt tombs help to serve as an educational tool to not only the people of Timbuktu, but conservators around the world. In 2014, UNESCO published both a Conservation Manual and study on the mausoleums. These published documents can be used as a tool for future generations to gain an understanding of earthen architecture and their overall importance to the Timbuktu people. To conclude, if the reconstructed tombs have the ability to bring an entire group of people together and rise up against injustice and intolerance, while conserving the values associated with the monument, then the entire reconstruction process can be deemed successful in this individual case. Overall, the knowledge about reconstruction that was imparted on me by the Roundtable participants was invaluable, and I am so glad that I had the opportunity to take part. As this was my first formal conference, I was not completely sure what to expect in regards to the format and event proceedings, but after the Roundtable, it made me feel more comfortable in that conference type of setting.

5 Reflections by Carly Farmer I feel very honored to have had the opportunity to participate at this Round Table and learn so much from many people about reconstruction. The arguments for and against reconstruction are incredibly diverse and complex and specific to each project and country. As rapporteur for the session on regional approaches, I took notes and summarized the presentations of Erica Avrami, Stephanie Toothman, and George Green for the third session chaired by Nicole Valois. (This summary is included in the proceedings for the Round Table.) The regional approaches of the World Monuments Watch, U.S. National Parks Service and Parks Canada revealed the great range of methods and reasons for reconstruction. For example, in Haiti s Gingerbread Neighbourhood, and Desa Lingga, Indonesia, reconstruction was used to establish a program to transfer knowledge of traditional construction techniques and maintain local cultural practices. On the other hand, the watchtowers and barbed wire fence of Mansanar Japanese-American war relocation camp was reconstructed as a necessary part to interpret the internees experiences. Likewise, interpretation motivated reconstruction using volumetric structures of the Forges du Saint Maurice, Quebec. However, a wood church in Lunenburg, Nova Scotia was destroyed by fire and subsequently rebuilt in great detail based on extensive documentation to maintain the character of the World Heritage City. Key themes in many projects included: maintaining integrity of the reconstruction through credible research and protection of existing materials; using the restoration of the tangible heritage to maintain and revive intangible values; and also the dynamic between international experts and local interests. I think what most inspired me is the link between reconstruction and social or international development issues. Nobuko s presentation on the debates over reconstructing the Bamian Buddhas are a good illustration of this. Buddhists and muslims in the region are for and against reconstruction for religious reasons. The locals support reconstruction to revive tourism and a group from ICOMOS Germany attempted to reconstruct one of the Buddhas. Conversely, UNESCO opposes reconstruction due to concerns with maintaining authenticity and is generally of the opinion that void is a more powerful memory. At the Friday night student dinner, Mario Santana shared some of his experiences in Bamian, particularly the need for the international community to give greater consideration to the context and people who live nearby with limited access to schools and clean water. How can these decisions on reconstion improve social conditions? Is reconstruction the best use of resources to bring back tourists? The Afghan government had a significant sum of money set aside for reconstruction, but maybe there are better uses for this, such as on schools or diversifying tourism opportunities in the region. Nora Mitchell described cultural landscapes as complex socio-economic systems, and when these are ruptured by a traumatic event, we need to ask the right questions. If, as Michael Turner pointed out, reconstruction is about remembering or forgetting, what is it that we want to remember, why, and how? Elaine O Sullivan discussed the importance of understanding: relationships (with the users of the sites, geopolitical context); memory and reactions to memory; and creating space for creativity and sustainable evolution of the site. The ideas of social sustainablity, mapping a community and their values, defining their problems and passions to understand how a community creates the place are topics I wish to explore in my thesis. Of course it is important to conserve the heritage values for all generations, but the context of the site and the immediate and long term needs of the community who lives there must also be a priority. Afterall, cultural sustainability requires consideration of the economy, society and environment.

6 Conclusion All in all, the 2016 Round Table was an incredibly valuable and useful experience for us to learn about the shifting theory and practice concerning reconstruction. It was certainly a great privilege to meet and learn from so many people take part in the complex discussions about this exciting and highly relevant topic. It is an exciting time to be studying heritage conservation and we look forward to watching these discussions further develop and unfold throughout our careers.