Published 2011-12-31
Keywords
- Sacred heritage objects,
- Cesare Brandi,
- contemporary conservation theory
Copyright (c) 2011 Intervención, Revista Internacional de Conservación, Restauración y Museología

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Abstract
This paper provides responses to the contributions of Eugenia Macías and Yuri Escalante. Although it is impossible to cover them all, it does offers some insights into Macías’ comments, including: 1.- the possible over-simplification of Brandi’s theory of restoration in Mexico; 2.- the relevance of an author within the development of a contemporary theory of conservation, which highlights the needs of sacred heritage objects’ users; 3.- the hegemony that institutional conservators can instill on the social discour se of such users; and 4.- the multiplicity of social “houses” that those users build. This text also poses a single answer concerning Escalante’s points of view: the need for rules, or not, for conservation-restoration practice and theory. It concludes emphasizing on the similarities of concerns and discourses between different fields of knowledge that would seem apparently isolated, and which promote not only interdisciplinary endeavors, but also the possibility of creating a common discourse.
Downloads
References
- Muñoz, Salvador 2003 Teoría contemporánea de la restauración, Madrid, Síntesis (Patrimonio Cultural).
- 2010 “Delicias y riesgos de lo artístico”, Intervención 1 (1):16-18.
- Ndoro, Webber 2005 The Preservation of Great Zimbabwe. Your Monument our Shrine, Roma, ICCROM (Conservation Studies 4).
- Pearce, Susan M. 2000 “The making of cultural heritage”, en Erica Avrami, Randall Mason y Marta de la Torre (coords.), Values and Heritage Conservation. Research Report, Los Ángeles, Getty Conservation Institute, 59-64.
- Stovel, Herb, Nicholas S. Price y Robert Kilick (eds.) 2005 Conservation of Living Religious Heritage, Roma, ICCROM (Conservation Studies 3).