Subject: Architectural drawings
On behalf of Delphine Hannoy and Helene de Tourdonnet, Karen Potje <kpotje [at] cca__qc__ca> writes The following is posted : > We hope someone can help us to take decisions about conservation > treatment: Should we re-adhere the detached windows? With > what adhesive? Should we dismount the partially detached > windows and re-adhere them? If we reattach deteriorating > cellulose acetate windows will they will inevitably continue to > shrink and become unstuck again?. Also, what are recommended > storage conditions? The questions asked relative to the restoration of the "architectural elevations" are highly relevant, however they have been given out of a context. If I understand correctly, we have a sheet of drafting film (probably a polyester), upon which we have not only lines in India ink (or rather, the type that would adhere to polyester film), but also parts that have been applied to the surface. In this context, what might constitute conservation? One of the fundamental questions in applying "Operational Conservation Theory" (which I was pleased to present during the 2003 Annual Meeting of the AIC) is "what is the purpose of the conservation?". To what extent do we want to restore/preserve *function* and to what extent *information*? In the present case, what was the *function* of this type of architectural representation? It could not well have been to prepare diazo process prints, because the coloured plastic would not have given a proper print. It is hence likely that the drafting film was only a support for a representation having some haut relief effect, to be viewed directly. The windows may or may not have been brown (do you not really mean orange as in colour negative film?), but it is equally likely that they were originally clear. I expect this artefact to have been meant to be stored flat, not rolled, if not just to be displayed in front of a well-illuminated surface, i.e. for display, not storage. The proposals for action have different effects in the *function/information* representation of the artefact: * "re-adhere completely detached windows": will maintain the artefact in a dilapidated state, but the deteriorated window material will be put in its proper location. The *information* that the artefact will provide is actually less than at present, because it will become more difficult to obtain a sample of the window material for analysis, and furthermore, the adhesive originally used will now be completely inaccessible for analysis * "dismount partially detached windows and perform complete re-adhesion": the same result as above A proposal based on my perception of the original *function*: remember that you can only preserve that, which you are already conscious of. In the present case I have believed that the *function* of the artefact was to represent some building in a documentary capacity, not to be a work of art in its own right. For this reason it would be justified to restore its capacity to represent, and so to give back the embodiment of the idea of transparency by providing clear windows. Hence: * obtain samples of the "yellow and hard glue" and preserve them in a vial. Remove all existing detached and partly detached windows and preserve them (in a light blocking envelope attached to the artefact or an accompanying file). This means that *information* of part of the artefact "as found" has been preserved. Replace all missing windows with clear polyester foil attached by means of a releasable adhesive. A step further would be to remove all windows and replace them. However, then the deterioration would not be immediately demonstrable, and this particular demonstration might be desirable in another context. This leads to: * "what is the future *function* of this artefact?" And this is where my own guessing stops. George Brock-Nannestad *** Conservation DistList Instance 18:7 Distributed: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Message Id: cdl-18-7-001 ***Received on Friday, 9 July, 2004