Garden landscapes are also part of heritage
Published on page C1 of the July 10, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
THE
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL of Monuments and Sites (Icomos), the global
organization of heritage practitioners based in Paris, is the body that
officially advises the Unesco World Heritage Committee on cultural
heritage issues.
Usually the World Heritage Center calls on Icomos members to give
expert opinions in heritage issues raised by members of the World
Heritage Committee. Icomos is assigned to assess sites that are
nominated to the World Heritage List. It is asked to evaluate the
maintenance of inscribed World Heritage sites and to prescribe methods
for improvement.
However, the more important aspect of Icomos is that the
organization sets international standards to guide the conservation
profession. These are written out in a series of charters, resolutions
and declarations that cover practically all aspects of the conservation
practice.
The 1964 International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration
of Monuments and Sites, popularly known as the Venice Charter, sets the
standard. It establishes the basic principles and guidelines that are
followed by conservation practitioners all over the world today.
The Venice Charter maintains that the historic monuments of past
generations are living witnesses of their age-old traditions. People
are now more conscious of the unity of shared human values and regard
ancient monuments as common heritage. Therefore the responsibility to
safeguard them for future generations is recognized. It is the people’s
duty to safeguard them for future generations and to hand the monuments
to the next generations in the full richness of their authenticity.
“It is essential 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,” the charter says.
The charter adds, “The concept of a historic monument embraces not
only the single architectural work but also its urban or rural setting.”
No alteration
Monuments are best when they are still in use. However, the original
layout and decoration of the building should be maintained. To preserve
the traditional setting of the monument, new construction, demolition
or modification of surroundings should not alter the original
relationship of the building with its neighbors.
A monument is inseparable from its history and setting. Moving all
or part of a monument cannot be allowed except when its safeguarding
demands it, or when justified by national or international interest
regarding it is of paramount importance.
On the restoration issue, the charter states, “The process of
restoration is a highly specialized operation. Its aim is to preserve
and reveal the aesthetic and historic value of the monument, and is
based on respect for original material and authentic documents. It must
stop at the point where conjecture begins, and, in this case moreover,
any extra work which is indispensable must be distinct from the
architectural composition and must bear a contemporary stamp. The
restoration in any case must be preceded and followed by an
archeological and historical study of the monument.
“The valid contributions of all periods to the building of a
monument must be respected, since unity of style is not the aim of a
restoration. When a building includes the superimposed work of
different periods, the revealing of the underlying state can only be
justified in exceptional circumstances and when what is removed is of
little interest and the material which is brought to light is of great
historical, archeological or aesthetic value, and its state of
preservation good enough to justify the action. Evaluation of the
importance of the elements involved and the decision as to what may be
destroyed cannot rest solely on the individual in charge of the work.
“Replacements of missing parts must integrate harmoniously with the
whole, but at the same time must be distinguishable from the original
so that restoration does not falsify the artistic or historic evidence.”
The 1981 Florence Charter on Historic Gardens defines a historic
garden as a monument, an “architectural and horticultural composition
of interest to the public from the historical or artistic point of
view,” and, as a monument, it “must be preserved in accordance with the
spirit of the Venice Charter.”
The term “historic garden” is equally applicable to small gardens
and to large landscaped parks. Whatever their size, designed gardens
express the affinity between man and nature.
Gardens are alive. Therefore continuous maintenance with a specified
cycle of planting and replanting is required to keep the garden and its
decorative features in the unchanged condition required by the Venice
Charter.
The Florence Charter specifies procedures to be followed for
restoration and reconstruction of historic gardens, further
recommending that gardens must be open for public use but must not be
taxed by overuse, and continues to suggest that qualified professionals
be engaged to maintain historic gardens.
Philippine society in general is unaware of the landscape
architecture profession and of the historic significance of the
designed landscape. The Mehan Garden and Arroceros Forest Park debacles
are proof of national disrespect for the designed landscape. Recent
constructions that intrude on the open space of Rizal Park, a national
monument protected by the National Historical Institute, further
illustrate disregard for the designed landscape.
Comments are welcome at pride.place@gmail.com
