Escuela Taller Magazine - Issue 1

ETFFI Guest
ETFFI Guest
Obtained his Bachelor’s degree in Architecture
from the Escuela Técnica Superior de
Arquitectura of the Universidad de Valladolid
in June of 1995. He studied in the Universidad
La Sapienza in Rome from 1992 to 1993
through a grant under the Erasmus Program.
He worked for 13 years in the Fundación
del Patrimonio Histórico of Castilla y León,
where he was in charge of evaluation,
documentation, hiring, development and postwork
maintenance of numerous restoration
projects of the Historical Heritage of the
Autonomous Community of Castilla y León.
From 2015, he has been working as an
architect at the Fundación Santa María la Real
del Patrimonio Histórico.
At present, he is involved in the restoration
of the Escuelas Mayores of the Universidad
de Salamanca and in other diverse cultural
projects.
He is also a professor
of the Masters
Program “Técnicas
de Diagnósticos
e Intervención en
Bienes del Patrimonio
Histórico” (Diagnostic
Techniques and
Intervention in
Historical Heritage
Resources) of the
Universidad de
Salamanca.
He has been invited
to symposia and
skill development
workshops on
interventions on wood
organized by Escuela
Taller de Filipinas
Foundation Inc., Manila,
Philippines.
JOAQUÍN
GARCÍA
ÁLVAREZ
For the material aspect, the abovementioned
best conditions lead
us to assume that substances
inevitably break down. From the
moment that a heritage resource
is created, its gradual process of
disintegration begins.
Paradoxically, with the passage of
time, as the deterioration increases,
the work’s content and value grows,
making it even more important to its
creators as well as their descendants.
In Spain until recently, conservation
processes 1 have been aiming for
lasting solutions to try to stop
this physical deterioration. These
processes addressed the cause
of the disintegration as well as its
effects, and the prevailing thought
was that the science of Chemistry
allowed these objectives to be met,
especially those concerning the
durability of the materials.
In most cases, the projects were
done performed with absolute
methodological rigor in studying
and documenting the resource as
well as generating documents that
reflect the actions taken as a result
of the diagnosis.
Numerous interventions were
made with the best of intentions.
There were well-prepared
technical teams, protocols of
agreed conduct, and a battery of
1
It is impossible to state all the
conservation theories in this short
article, especially those developed in
the second half of the 19th century.
For this reason, we only refer to
those that are put in practice during
the second half of the 20th century,
products of an intense reflection for
two centuries.
product testing that consolidated
the materials, made them waterresistant,
and improved them with
the inevitable passage of time.
These products were tested by
submitting them through processes
of accelerated ageing – a sort
of contemporary time machine
that placed the object of study
under a simulation of extreme
conditions enough number of times
in order to predict how it would
turn out in the future. In addition,
materials and techniques that were
theoretically reversible were used,
paying attention to one of the basic
principles of modern restoration
– that what was done can be
undone in case it is deemed to be
damaging to the heritage resource
in the long run.
Nevertheless, despite all these
efforts, those interventions are
proving to be inefficient in some
cases. Nowadays, we are obliged
to understand how they worked
and to try to undo their effects,
demonstrating that the reversibility
that was expected was mostly just
theoretical.
On the contrary, when it comes
to the second aspect – the
responsibility of knowing the
heritage resource and the transfer
of this knowledge – far from
diminishing through time, is
always bound to increase with
new content. In Spain, we are
now discovering that there are
important gaps of information
regarding the work finally executed
on our monuments in the last
decades of the 20th century.
66 67
As the works were being
restored, there were numerous
modifications to the originally
prescribed processes due to
variations in the criteria or
unforeseen circumstances
which had no diagnosis. These
kinds of interventions were not
documented.
Now, it is difficult to retrace those
steps and know what was finally
done for the correct action to be
taken. Costly studies have to be
made in order to determine what
was applied and discover their real
effects.
Had there been documentation of
what was done, as well as the state
of the resource before and after
the intervention was performed,
we would be able to deduce
the evolution of the processes.
These could then be improved if
deemed to be effective; or try to
be reversed, if the contrary proved
to be true. The necessary actions
could therefore be applied to stop
the deterioration.
This article aims to provide a
reflection that would allow us
to move forward and attempt to
correct possible mistakes of the
past, which could be useful for
communities that are starting to
preserve their historical legacy.
For this, some simple actions are
suggested that should impact our
stand on historical restoration in
the future.
Concerning the material aspect,
it should be approached in a
careful manner without necessarily
aspiring for absolute results.