KVPT’s Patan Darbar Earthquake Response Campaign - Work to Date - September 2016

Recapturing Lost Elements
— Thoughts About Restoration and
Replacement of Damaged or Missing Parts
in Architectural Heritage Conservation.
A dialogue between the West and Nepal in
the wake of the 2015 earthquake
By Niels Gutschow
Once one accepts the idea that the philosophy of
Enlightenment was only one among others to establish the
principles of an acceptable social coexistence, then one should
also admit that there are no absolute and scientifically
justified criteria on the substratum on which universally
valid values could be based in the context of the protection
of natural and cultural resources.
Philippe Descola, French anthropologist, in a lecture on
16 December 2015 in Paris
Part I
Introduction
The European obsession with patina
The debate about conservation of buildings entertained
in Europe at the end of the 19th century very much
shaped the idea of what makes a “monument” and the
way the state and/or society should take care of it. This
debate was so powerful that its shock-waves keep rocking
through the ongoing debates at the beginning of the
21st century.
The issue of patina—literally (It.) a thin layer, the surface
of objects and buildings, produced by the process of
ageing—is probably the most controversial one among
the many aspects of authenticity. Theoretically, at least
in Europe, the surface of a historic structure has to be
consolidated to prevent further decay. The actual practice,
however, is far from following this powerful principle.
Private and institutional owners try their best to find
or even create good reasons to renew surfaces in order to
recall the original splendor if not glory of a façade, an
interior or even an entire building. As the debate started
in Europe, it mirrored the anxiety of countries which
had entered the process of industrialization and does not
have much meaning for the ongoing discourse in South
Asia.
In contrast, beautification is an all-pervasive impulse
in the care for historic structures in South Asia. Even
the Archaeological Survey of India, which was explicitly
founded by British Colonial rule in 1861 to preserve
prominent archaeological remains, did not refrain from
beautifications and up to this day spends a large proportion,
if not the majority of its funds for gardening to
“improve” the environment of ruins.
A short episode regarding the value of patina demonstrates
that the West has many voices and that there is
no such thing as uniformity of thought and practice.
When fire gutted Uppark, a seventeenth-century house
in West Sussex (England) in 1989, it was restored in the
style of the period in which it was built. The process
of restoration initiated a re-engagement with many forgotten
crafts. However, scorch marks were left on the
woodwork and ragged bits of carpet were left to preserve
the interior from the accusation of inauthenticity. With
his usual aplomb, the New York-born (1923) historian
and geographer David Lowenthal commented, with reference
to this example, in 2011 that heritage stewardship
is not “merely preservative: it is ongoing and creative.
Many cry havoc at the loss of our precious irreplaceable
legacy. But that legacy is neither dwindling nor irreplaceable.
It has an organic life of its own, its make-up
and lineaments re-evaluated by every succeeding generation.”
Lowenthal was wise enough to pass on the debate
to future generations and to avoid rigid precepts.
Theory and Values, conceptualized by European
art historians and conservationists (1849–1916)
For more than 150 years, a controversy has raged be-
Opposite
Inside one of the storage rooms,
set up by KVPT shortly after the
earthquake, for rescued historical
building elements from Patan
Darbar.
Photo by Ashesh Rajbansh, Oct. 2015
27