Different Approaches to Conservation: Decorative Arts Objects vs. Ethnographic Collections
Thoughts from Robin Allison, Graduate Student at the University of Oklahoma College of Liberal Studies – Museum Studies. https://www.ou.edu/cls/grad/mams
One aspect of the artifact conservation process is the analysis of old repairs made to objects. This analysis includes deciding whether an old repair should remain entwined in the provenance and aesthetics of the object. This decision is, at minimum, a two-step process. Ask yourself, would the object be best preserved and presented with the old repair being left untouched or should it be removed?
The two influences that weigh into the answer to that question are: 1) is the old repair appropriate to the original object materials; in other words is the old repair causing or potentially going to cause structural damage to the original object? And, 2) does the old repair inhibit the original makers aesthetic intent? Pictured are two objects I had the privilege of working on; both allowed me to explore the realities of being faced with old repairs to objects.
In example one, the old frame repair was structurally sound yet aesthetically disruptive to the viewer of the painting in its entirety. In the second example of the breastplate, the strong visual contrast of the bright blue yarn repair to the object’s intended colors took away from the original aesthetic of the object. Additionally, the yarn was attached in such a manner to cause the rawhide structure to begin to warp. After making the determination that the repair was fairly modern, the decision was made to remove the blue yarn. In the case of the picture frame, simple integration through careful filling, carving, and painting satisfied the aesthetic disturbance. The breastplate required removal of the old repair and rebuilding a repair to suit the object both aesthetically and structurally.
Given that I agreed with and even advocated for the cooperative decisions that were ultimately made on how to treat each object, I was surprised to be left with the question, or more accurately the emotion, I experienced upon completion of the breastplate. Were my actions ethically questionable? Was it a mistake to remove the blue yarn and essentially rewrite the provenance of the object? By returning the object to as close to its original state as possible, had I taken away some of the breastplates story, and essentially a section of its humanitarian value?