Running out of time: On finding a fitting decision-making framework for the conservation of modernwooden art.

(1)

On finding a fitting decision-making framework for the conservation of modern

wooden art

Lucas Mantel

Student number: 11136650

MA Thesis Conservation and Restoration: Wood and Furniture University of Amsterdam

Thesis supervisor: Dr. H. den Otter July 2020 17928 words

(2)

Abstract

This thesis addresses the absence of knowledge of modern wooden art conservation. By analyzing and contextualizing several of the characteristics of modern wooden art, it becomes clear that these objects can display unique problems that complexify the decision-making process. In order to examine the impact of these difficulties, two decision making models have been analyzed and the conclusions have been applied on the characteristics of modern wooden art.

Dit onderzoek richt zich op de afwezigheid van kennis van moderne houten kunst conservering. Door het analyseren en contextualiseren van een aantal kenmerken van moderne houten kunstwerken wordt het duidelijk dat deze objecten unieke problemen kunnen vertonen die het besluitvormingsproces bemoeilijken. Om de impact van deze problemen te analyseren zijn twee besluitvormingsmodellen geanalyseerd en zijn de conclusies hiervan toegepast op de kenmerken van de moderne houten kunst.

(3)

Summary

The conservation of modern wooden art is a relatively unexplored part of the field of conservation and restoration of cultural heritage. This present interdisciplinary thesis aims to investigate the difficulties in the decision-making process for the conservation of this diverse group of objects. By analyzing two different decision-making models, the SBMK/CICS’s revised Decision-Making Model (2019) and the revised V&A Ethics Checklist (2005), it becomes clear that the conservation of modern wooden art requires a paradigm shift. The unavailability of certain information, the continuous expansion of available wood-based products and their use in modern artworks, the problematized position of the conservator-restorer in the decision-making field and the subjectivity of the interpretation of the identity of modern wooden art, all create difficulties in the decision-making process of modern wooden art conservation.

In the first chapter the current literature relevant to modern wooden art conservation will be analyzed and it is followed by an assessment of several characteristics of modern wooden art in the second chapter. In the third chapter the main components and ideas of the two decision-making models are analyzed and compared and, in the final chapter, these ideas are applied to the characteristics of modern wooden art as identified in the second chapter. The presented research does not intend to give a definitive answer as to how modern wooden artworks should be conserved or how it is different from wood and furniture conservation or modern art conservation. It does explore these facets, though. This thesis aims, by analyzing the impact of modern wooden art characteristics on the decision-making process, to initiate a different approach to and perspective on the conservation of modern wooden art.

(4)

Preface

The conservation of wood and furniture is traditionally highly focused on materials and manual skills. Although coming from an artisanal practice, conservation nowadays is becoming more and more entangled with material sciences, such as chemical analyses. Although this focus on material science is important, the core of conservation lies, in my opinion, within the culture in which these objects were made. The role of the conservator-restorer to decide what to conserve and preserve goes much further than preserving the material. The conservator-restorer makes decision about what is preserved and what is not and thus contributes to which stories will and can be told. There is an analogy, used by T. Scholte, that compares the work of the conservator with an actor, and the object he or she is conserving with the play the actor is performing. I think this is a striking resemblance and is indicative of the reciprocal connection between the conservator and the object. Some people might disagree, but I think that what you can learn from the material is almost as important as what cultures project onto the material. I hope this thesis will overcome the gap between material sciences on the one hand and social sciences and philosophy on the other and provide both sides with the opportunity to learn from and inspire each other.

(5)

Acknowledgements

I am very grateful to Dr. H. den Otter for his supervision, feedback, enthusiasm, optimism and involvement in the process of writing a master thesis during a time which can be called unorthodox at best. I also wish to extend my gratitude to the teaching staff and the support staff of the Conservation and Restoration Department of the University of Amsterdam, who have made it possible to continue the program under rapidly changing and complicated circumstances.

I would like to thank Prof. Dr. M. van Bommel, Prof. Dr. E. Hendriks and Dr. R. Peschar for their feedback, expertise, enthusiasm in their teachings and their encouragement to think outside the box.

My gratitude also goes to Drs. G.A.M. van Wees and T. van Loon, with whom I had the pleasure to work on the Groot Auditorium in Leiden during the writing process. This provided me with practical experience as well as a welcome distraction from writing. I would like to thank my fellow master students for their support and enthusiasm. And lastly, I would like to thank my fellow Wood and Furniture students, Maxx Folmer, Annemarie Hollants, Welmoed Krebs, and Sterre van der Weerd as well as my friends and family for their support and inspiring thoughts and ideas.

(6)

Introduction

Why are some objects meticulously restored while others are only ‘gathering dust’? What is cultural heritage and what is not? Where lies the border between tangible and intangible heritage?

Only a small group of objects made in the 20th and 21st century is labeled as cultural heritage. The

grounds for inclusion or exclusion of this group is a field of study on its own and the criteria for inclusion in this coveted group of objects are neither straightforward nor clearly defined.

Conservators-restorers1 find themselves in a position where some objects have acquired, in some

form or another, cultural value. These objects are more commonly defined as ‘cultural heritage’. Means and effort are invested in conserving and restoring this cultural heritage and the role of conservators-restorers is, in a nutshell, to conserve and restore these objects. However, the position of conservators-restorers in relation to these objects is continuously being renegotiated and reevaluated. At the base of this relationship lies a matrix of (cultural) values that changes over time

and is open to constant interpretation and reconsideration.2 The aim of this thesis is to investigate

a specific relationship: the one between conservators-restorers and modern wooden artworks. There are multiple reasons for analyzing this specific relationship. The first and foremost reason is the observation that, while there are many modern wooden artworks present in museums, private collections and public spaces, these objects seem not to be included in the academic discourse of conservation and restoration. Why is there not more attention for these objects within the field of conservation? Secondly, conservation science has developed rapidly over the past few decades. One of these developments, mentioned by numerous conservation ethicists, involves the philosophical shift from an object and material-centered perspective to a more holistic approach. In this approach, social and intangible facets, such as the presence and influence of different stakeholders, play a more outspoken role. The role of conservators-restorers has, in this sense, evolved into a more complex activity in respect to the conservator-restorer’s ability to assign and perpetuate cultural values. Because research of the ethical evolution and the socio-political aspects

1_{S. Muñoz Viñas has written a comprehensive book concerning the difficulties in defining ‘conservation’. Both the profession}

and the activity of conservation are complex theme’s which are often interchangeably used. In this thesis ‘conservation’ is used as both. Salvador Muñoz Viñas, Contemporary Theory of Conservation (Oxford ; Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005), 1–26.

2_{Alison Richmond and Alison Lee Bracker, eds., Conservation: Principles, Dilemmas and Uncomfortable Truths (Amsterdam;}

(9)

of conservation and restoration is relatively new,3_{such research towards the ethical norms and} standards is therefore relatively significant to the academic field. ‘Good’ or ‘best’ practice may always have been difficult to define, but since the recent problematization of the social-political aspects of conservation, such as the decision-making field, making and evaluating decisions has become an essential part of the conservation process as a whole. How can wood and furniture conservation adopt or adept to these new developments and what are the practical implications of these developments?

Thirdly, new objects are continuously being made and added to the typological collection of cultural heritage. One of these developments, which is mentioned in the pivotal publication

Modern Art: Who Cares? (1999), is that artists have kept on adding “layers of meaning” to their

work.4 This requires an interdisciplinary and open yet structured approach to restoration.5 New

materials, techniques, ideas and contexts are continuously entering the realm of cultural heritage and it is up to the conservators-restorers to adapt to these new features. Collaboration and interdisciplinary practice and research seem to be the answer to these developments. What is the role and what are the responsibilities of the wood and furniture conservators-restorers in this interdisciplinary field?

These questions are all relevant, however, from the perspective of wood and furniture conservation, there is one issue more poignant than the others: how to conserve and restore these objects? In order to answer this question an assessment of the risks to these objects has to be made first. This is where the research of this thesis comes in. The intention of this thesis is to explore the difficulties of modern wooden art conservation. The analysis of such a large group of objects does not provide answers to specific problems, but aims to look at the more general obstacles. As will be made clear by this thesis, these problems include material aspects as well as more philosophical and ethical concepts.

In order to formulate an appropriate approach to modern wooden art, a theoretical framework derived from decision-making models is used. The decision-making models combine

3_{Richmond and Bracker, xv.}

4_{IJsbrand Hummelen, Dionne Sillé, and Marjan Zijlmans, eds., Modern Art: Who Cares? An Interdisciplinary Research Project}

and an International Symposium on the Conservation of Modern and Contemporary Art (London: Archetype Publications, 1999).

(10)

the theoretical and philosophical issues, such as the impact of conservation on the identity of the artwork, with practical facets of conservations, such as the required skill for the conservation treatment. This has resulted in the following research question: to what extent does the decision-making process of conserving modern wooden art require a distinctive approach according to the Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A) 2005 Ethics Checklist and the Stichting Behoud Moderne Kunst and Cologne Institute of Conservation Science (SBMK/CICS) 2019 Decision-Making

Model for Contemporary Art Conservation and Presentation?6

The definition of modern wooden art is intentionally left vague. Not only because what is considered as art and what is not is an entire field of study on its own. But also because scholars

from different disciplines tend to interpret ‘modern’ differently.7 Therefore, no specific

time-period is mentioned and all artworks made after approximately 1900 are regarded as ‘modern’. The same goes for the distinction between design and art.8 In chapter 2.3 a small part of the discussion concerning the difference between art and design will be discussed, but the larger discussion regarding the nature of art will be circumvented. However, both the definition of modern art and the difference between art and design remain autonomous subjects worth exploring.

This thesis will start with a concise analysis of the current state of conservation literature, as well as a short summary of the surrounding academic fields relevant to the research question. In the second chapter, several characteristics and their relevance to conservation of modern wooden art will be discussed. In the third chapter the V&A Ethics Checklist and the SBMK/CICS Decision-Making Model will be contextualized and analyzed. In addition, the differences and

6_{Victoria and Albert Museum, “Appendix 1:Victoria & Albert Museum Conservation Department Ethics Checklist,” V&A}

Conservation Journal, no. 50 (2005): 56. And Julia Giebelier et al., “The Decision-Making Model for Contemporary Art Conservation and Presentation,” ed. Cologne Institute of Conservation Sciences / TH Köln (Cologne Institute of Conservation Sciences, TH Köln, 2019), https://www.sbmk.nl/nl/tool/besluitvormingsmodel.

7_{Modernism is both a philosophical as well as an art-historical movement, but is also applicable to other fields such as}

linguistics, natural science and fashion. Modernism, in art-historical fields can be regarded as a pictorial and stylistic time-period (roughly from 1850 -1910), a cultural (recurring) phenomenon and even as an philosophical ideal to strive towards. The beginning of modernism differs between disciplines, but it usually starts roughly around the turn of the 20th_{century. For more}

information: Herschel B. Chipp, Theories of Modern Art: A Source Book by Artists and Critics, California Studies in the History of Art 11 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968). And James Elkins, Master Narratives and Their Discontents, Theories of Modernism and Postmodernism in the Visual Arts (Taylor and Francis, 18), https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203699713.

8_{For more information regarding the distinction between design and art, see: Trevor Rayment, The Problem of Assessment in Art}

and Design, 2007. And Tsion Avital, The Confusion between Art and Design: Brain-Tools versus Body-Tools, Vernon Series in Art (Wilmington, Delaware ; Málaga, Spain: Vernon Press, 2018).

(11)

similarities between these models and their purpose and use will be discussed as well. The motivation for choosing the two abovementioned models is twofold. Firstly, these specific models play a prominent role in numerous debates within the field of conservation ethics and are frequently cited in literature. Secondly, both these models have been revised and reviewed, which provides insightful information regarding the utilization of these models in the field and the connection with current debates and developments. In the fourth chapter, the characteristics of modern wooden art derived from the second chapter will be applied on the decision-making models. By highlighting the difficulties certain characteristics of modern wooden artworks pose to the decision-making process, an estimate can be made of the required approach of conservators-restorers to modern wooden art conservation.

(12)

Chapter 1: Current state of research

1.1 Introduction

However a grim conclusion: there are almost no academic publications that solely and explicitly focus on the conservation of modern wooden artworks. This absence not only indicates the difficulty of examining the current state of the research, but also complicates defining the relevant debates. Therefore, this chapter will attempt to identify several of these debates by combining information from several different academic fields. The literature used in this thesis has been categorized into four different sections, in order to structuralize this enquiry: literature on modern wooden art conservation, wood and furniture conservation, modern art conservation and on adjacent academic fields.

Figure 1.1: an example of modern wooden art: Richard Deacon: Laocoon (1996), Steamed beechwood, wood, aluminum, steel bolts, 4300 x 3640 x 3570 mm

(13)

1.2 Literature on modern wooden art

As previously stated, there are almost no academic publications that solely and explicitly analyze the conservation of modern wooden artworks, such as for instance the artwork in Fig 1.1. Admittedly, topical publications may be significantly harder to find given the lack of attention these objects have received in the field of wood and furniture conservation. Although there are many sources of knowledge on modern wooden art, such as conservation reports, artist’s statements and photographs, other documents and obviously the objects themselves, academic publications on the subject are rare. Nonetheless, there are some articles that describe the conservation of modern wooden art. Many of these articles are published as a result of international symposia regarding the use and conservation of modern materials in furniture. These symposia all seem to date from around the turn of the 21st century. An important publication which resulted from an international symposium is: Modern Materials, Modern Problems: Postprints of the

Conference Organized by the UKIC (United Kingdom Institute for Conservation) Furniture Section Held at the Conservation Centre, NMGM, Liverpool, 17 April 1999 (1999)9_{edited by D.} A. Rogers and G. Marley. These publications predominantly discusses modern materials used in furniture, but it also provides one of the only publications solely focused on the conservation of a modern wooden artwork: En Bloc: Art in a Cabinet or Cabinet as Art (1999) written by sculpture

conservator R. Griffith.10_{In this article, several important aspects of modern art are mentioned,}

such as the difficulty in distinguishing the boundaries between art and its container or pedestals, and the role of the artistic ideas in the conservation of these artworks.

Also, the Dutch organization Ebenist has organized one of these symposia in 2003:

Meubels uit de vorige eeuw – Restauraties uit deze eeuw.11 The resulting publication, edited by H. Piena, provides information on several modern materials as well as on the conservation of several modern objects such as a chair designed by Gerrit Rietveld and various objects by Piet Kramer. Although this publication is an extensive source of knowledge regarding the conservation of modern wooden furniture, especially regarding modern materials such as plastics, it provides no

9_{D.A Marley and Dominique A Rogers, Modern Materials - Modern Problems (London: UK Institute for Conservation, 1999).} 10_{Roger Griffith, “En Bloc: Art in a Cabinet or Cabinet as Art,” in Modern Materials -Modern Problems; Postprints of the}

Conference Organized by the UKIC Furniture Section Held at the Conservation Centre NMGM Liverpool, 17 April 1999, ed. Dominique A Rogers and Graham Marley (Modern Materials - Modern Problems, London: The Furniture Section of the United Kingdom Institute for conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, 2000), 40–45.

(14)

information on the restoration of modern wooden artworks. However, it does indicate some of the problems that many wood and furniture conservators experience, when treating, or working, with modern materials.

Another important source of relevant articles are the biennial conference FUTURE TALKS postprints. These conferences, starting from 2009, are hosted by Die Neue Sammlung in Munich

and focus on the conservation problems of both modern artworks as modern design. 12 Several

articles published in these postprints discuss the restoration of modern design, but again there are no articles that focus on the restoration of modern wooden artworks. The articles in the postprints are, however, very useful regarding the treatment of modern art and give an insight in the broadness of objects used in modern art.

The above mentioned publications form the most important literature that focusses on modern wooden art, albeit almost only on modern design and furniture. As already stated, publications about treatment of modern wooden artworks and the related problems are, almost, non-existent. This does not mean there is no information available on modern wooden art conservation, such as conservation reports, but it entails that the discussions regarding overarching themes are uncommon.

1.3 Literature on wood and furniture conservation

Contrarily, there are numerous publications that discuss aspects relevant to the conservation of modern wooden art. As will be discussed in Chapter 2, modern wooden art often incorporates non-modern materials and techniques. Information on these subjects is still relevant to non-modern wooden art conservation. For example, the conservation of a gilded modern wooden artwork, such as Le

cerf (1923) by Ossip Zadkine (1890 – 1967), see Fig. 1.2, requires information on gilding.

Consequently, general publications, such as handbooks, regarding wood and furniture conservation could still be relevant to modern wooden art conservation. However, handbooks, publications and other literature stemming from the field of wood and furniture conservation usually do not incorporate modern materials and techniques. For example, Conservation of

12_{Tim Bechthold, Future talks, and Die Neue Sammlung, eds., Future Talks 009: The Conservation of Modern Materials in Applied}

Arts and Design ; Papers from the Conference Held at the Pinakothek Der Moderne. Munich 22 - 23 October 2009 ; [Published in Conjunction with the Conference Future Talks 009] (Conference Future Talks 009, München: Die Neue Sammlung, 2011).

(15)

Furniture from S. Rivers and N. Umney (2003) and Gilded wood: conservation and history from

Bigelow et al. (1991)13_{, are geared towards objects made before the 20}th_{century. In wood}

conservation literature there are often chapters or small parts focused on modern wooden materials or techniques, but modern wooden art is rarely mentioned or discussed.

One needs to be aware of the limits of wood conservation publications. Subjects like new materials, new ethics, ready-mades, the variety in materials and so on, are usually not included in wood conservation literature. Also, publications prior to the invention of a material cannot possibly contain information on the new material. Additionally, the focus of most of the wood and furniture publications is on furniture and not on modern wooden art. therefore, materials and techniques that

13_{Deborah Bigelow, American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, and American Institute for}

Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, eds., Gilded Wood: Conservation and History (Madison, Conn: Sound View Press, 1991).

Figure 1.2: Ossip Zadkine: Le cerf (1923), wood, gold leaf, shellac, paint, 192 x 132 x 49 cm

(16)

are used in modern wooden art but not in furniture, might not be included in the literature. While other conservation disciplines, such as textiles14_{, paper}15_{and metals}16_{, have counteracted these} risks with publications focusing on modern materials and art, wood and furniture has, with the exception of the postprints mentioned in Chapter 1.3, not done so. Some nuance must be added to this notion, there are a few publications on wooden sheet materials and modern adhesives, but this has been done only marginally.

1.4 Literature on modern art conservation

The conservation of modern art is a relatively new discipline within the field of conservation and restoration. Nevertheless, since its origins, roughly in the 1980’s, many crucial paradigms have

emerged from this field.17_{There are several pivotal publications that have deepened the}

understanding of the conservation of cultural heritage. Some of these are particularly relevant to the conservation of modern wooden art in relation to the absence of information in the field of wood and furniture conservation. These publications almost never discuss wooden artworks, so the link between the artworks and the literature will remain mostly unsubstantiated until more case-studies are available.

One of the cornerstone publications of the conservation of modern art is the symposium

postprint Modern Art: Who Cares (1999)18 edited by Y. Hummelen and D. Sillé, which was one

of the first major publications on the conservation of modern art. This publication has sparked several important discussions within the field of modern art conservation, such as the degradation of plastics, modern art conservation ethics and the diversity of modern artworks. Since then several other publications have discussed these and other important conservation problems regarding modern art. Two other pivotal publications from the field of modern art conservation are also relevant to modern wooden art: Inside Installations: theory and practice in the care of complex

14_{AHRC Research Centre for Textile Conservation and Textile Studies et al., eds., The Future of the 20th Century: Collecting,}

Interpreting and Conserving Modern Materials: Postprints (London: Archetype, 2006).

15_{Alison Richmond, Institute of Paper Conservation. Conference, and modern problems Modern works, Modern Works, Modern}

Problems?: Conference Papers (London: Institute of Paper Conservation, 1994).

16_{Jamie Clapper Morris and Deborah Slaton, “Modern Metals: Finishes, Investigation, and Conservation Considerations,” APT}

Bulletin 46, no. 1 (2015): 29–38.

17_{Hummelen, Sillé, and Zijlmans, Modern Art, 10 11.} 18_{Hummelen, Sillé, and Zijlmans, Modern Art.}

(17)

artworks (2011)19_{, edited by T. Scholte and G. Wharton and The artist interview: for conservation}

and presentation of contemporary art, guidelines and practice (2012)20_{, edited by L. Beerkens.} These publications highlight the importance of contextual and external facets. This type of external facets include the space and context in which the artwork is installed, the agency of the artist and the spectator, as well as temporal factors, such as the process of installing and the ‘coming into being’ of the artwork. Curating different sources of information, documentation changes and facilitating itineraries can all be part of the conservation of an artwork.

These publications often emphasize the complexity and diversity of the artworks and their conservation, and provide ample examples of case-studies in which these complexities are discussed. One of the main conclusions of these publications is emphasizing the importance of the

19_{Tatja Scholte and Glenn Wharton, eds., Inside Installations: Theory and Practice in the Care of Complex Artworks, Cultural}

Heritage Agency of the Netherlands (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2011).

20_{Lydia Beerkens, ed., The Artist Interview: For Conservation and Presentation of Contemporary Art, Guidelines and Practice}

(Heyningen: Jap Sam Books, 2012).

Figure 1.3: Roy Ascott, Video-Roget (1962), wood, Perspex, glass and paint, 1270 × 895 × 75 mm

(18)

‘human factors’, such as the dynamics, negotiations and decisions of the parties involved.21_Apart from these major publications, there are also numerous publications on other themes within modern art, for instance, digital-born artworks, plastics and kinetic art. Although these themes might seem irrelevant, modern wooden artworks often incorporate new materials, such as the plexiglass in Video-Roget (1962) by Roy Ascott, see Fig. 1.3.

1.5 Literature on adjacent academic fields

Apart from wood and furniture conservation literature and modern art conservation literature, there are many publications from adjacent fields that can aid in understanding the difficulties of conserving a modern wooden artwork. Firstly, there are many art-historical publications which offer insight in the identity of modern art. There are innumerable publications about the developments of modern art in the 20th_{and 21}st_{century and several of these publications can} provide a solid theoretical framework for the many developments of modern art. Three widely

used publications are P. Curtis’ Sculpture 1900 – 1945 (1999)22_{, A. Causey’s Sculpture since 1945}

(1999)23_{from the same Oxford art history series, and Sculpture Now, from A. Moszynska (2013)}24_.

These publications together provide an adequate outline of several major developments in the field of modern art. Alongside art historical handbooks, such as Gardner’s art through the ages: A

global history (2013)25 edited by F.S. Kleiner and Janson’s History of art: the Western tradition

(2016)26 edited by D.J.E. Penelope, technical publications are also very important. As the next

sub-chapter will illustrate, many artworks are made with new materials, which are often unmentioned in conservation literature. To understand the intricacies and applications of these materials, technical information is often needed. Publications such as Forest products and wood science: an

introduction (2011)27 edited by D. Jones and R. Schmulsky, and Handbook of wood chemistry and

21_{Scholte and Wharton, Inside Installations, 15.}

22_{Penelope Curtis, Sculpture 1900 - 1945, Oxford History of Art (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1999).}

23_{Andrew Causey, Sculpture since 1945, Oxford History of Art (Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 1999).} 24_{Anna Moszynska, Sculpture Now (Thames & Hudson, 2013).}

25_{Helen Gardner, Gardner’s Art through the Ages: A Global History, ed. Fred S Kleiner (Australia: Wadsworth, Cengage}

Learning, 2013).

26_{Penelope J. E. Davies, ed., Janson’s History of Art: The Western Tradition, Reissued eighth edition (Boston: Pearson, 2016).} 27_{Rubin Shmulsky and P. David Jones, Forest Products and Wood Science: An Introduction, 6th ed (Chichester, West Sussex,}

(19)

wood composites (2013)28_{edited by R.M. Rowell provide detailed information on wooden and} semi-wooden materials. It must be noted that these publications, both art-historical and technical, are not the home-turf of conservator-restorers. And although they have a lot of common ground with wood and furniture conservation literature, extra care should be put into understanding and interpreting information from these types of publications. The same goes for professional magazines on wooden materials and techniques and other non-academic publications. Acquiring information from non-academic sources is not rare, but the sources from which information might be distilled, can have a significantly different perspective than that of academic sources.

1.6 Conclusion

Having analyzed the literature on modern wooden art as well as other relevant literature, several conclusions can be drawn. Firstly, There are almost no publications that solely and explicitly focus on modern wooden art conservation. An exception is Griffith’s article, En Bloc: Art in a cabinet

or Cabinet as Art, in which he identifies several characteristics relevant to the conservation of this

particular modern wooden artwork: the ambiguous distinction between art and its container or pedestals and the role of the artistic ideas in the conservation of these artworks.29 Both these aspects will be analyzed in the next chapter. Secondly, multiple symposia have put the conservation difficulties caused by modern wooden materials on the agenda. However, the focus of these symposia and accompanying postprints lies on modern furniture and not on modern wooden art. Modern materials and the difference between modern wooden furniture and modern wooden art will be discussed in chapter 2.2 and 2.3. Thirdly, several modern wooden art conservation publications have drawn attention to important facets in the conservation of modern art. These publications emphasize the importance of considering the immaterial facets of an artwork in the conservation-process as well as the role of the conservator-restorer in this process. These notions will be discussed in chapter 2.3 and 2.4. Finally, there are many sources of information from both academic and non-academic sources that can provide information on modern wooden artworks. Publications on wood-science technology, art-history, the conservation of ethnographic and articles from artist’s journals and interviews can provide information relevant

28_{Roger M. Rowell, ed., Handbook of Wood Chemistry and Wood Composites, 2nd edition (Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2013).} 29_{Griffith, “En Bloc: Art in a Cabinet or Cabinet as Art.”}

(20)

to modern wooden art conservation. There is plenty of information available on modern wooden artworks. However, information about modern wooden art conservation is scarce. Adjacent academic fields, such as modern art conservation and the conservation of ethnographic objects, might provide enough information to distill information on the conservation of modern wooden art. The next chapter will explore the decision-making models used in conservation literature from all the above mentioned disciplines.

(21)

Chapter 2: Modern wooden art

2.1 Introduction

Modern wooden art comes in all shapes and sizes. Objects can range from relatively ‘traditional’

artworks such as Karel Appel’s (1921 – 2006) polychrome sculpture Vragende kinderen (1949)to

complex temporary installations such as Baitogogo (2013 until 2016) by Henrique Oliveira (1973), see Fig. 2.1 and 2.2. Consequently, conservator-restorers have to tackle complex problems to conserve and restore these artworks. This chapter aims to explore this diverse group of objects, and in doing so, highlight several facets of modern wooden art relevant to conservation.

The characteristics of modern wooden art discussed in this chapter are: material aspects, object-specific information of non-material aspects and lastly, non-object-specific information on non-material aspects. These characteristics have been chosen not only because they represent several major developments within the field of modern art, but also because of the many connections these themes have with contemporary discussions in conservation literature. The division between material aspects and non-material aspects is derived from B. Applebaum’s characterization grid, see Fig. 2.3.30

30_{Barbara. Appelbaum, Conservation Treatment Methodology (Oxford [etc: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007).}

Figure 2.1 & 2.2: Karel Appel: Vragende kinderen (1949), painted wood, 105 x 67 x 18; Henrique Oliveira: Baitogogo (2013 - 2016), wood and unknown materials, 6,74 x 11,79 x 20,76m

(22)

2.2 Material aspects – modern materials and techniques

In the 20th and 21st century, the availability of different materials to artists has, to put it bluntly,

skyrocketed.31 Not only the availability of materials and products, but also the concept of what can

be regarded as an artwork has been extended to a dazzling range. A. Moszynska, a specialist on contemporary art, writes in her acclaimed publication regarding modern and contemporary

sculpture: Sculpture Now (2013) that in the 20th century “there has been a general, noticeable shift

away from recognizable ‘art’ materials (such as stone, wood and metal) to provisional or everyday

materials that are either ephemeral or markedly machine-made”32_{. Also, “the ‘boundaries’ of}

sculpture have also become increasingly blurred”33_{. But how do these notions help in}

understanding modern wooden artworks? Obviously, some antique furniture was made with pre-made parts and ‘exotic’ materials, and alterations in surviving furniture are more of a rule then an exception. How is modern wooden art different?

31_{There has, of course, also been some form of decline in availability. For instance, some wood species listed on the Convention}

on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) list, are, in general, no longer used.

32_{Moszynska, Sculpture Now, 6.} 33_{Moszynska, 7.}

(23)

Modern wood-based products

Wooden materials used in modern and contemporary art have rigorously diversified in the second

half of the 20th century. To give an example, the availability of different laminates and composites,

such as Oriented Strand Board (OSB), which was developed in the 1980’s 34_{and Medium Density}

Fiberboard (MDF) which was developed in the 1960’s35, has grown considerably since the first

half of the 20th century.36 According to the Handbook of Wood Chemistry and Wood Composites,

edited by professor R.M. Rowell, a specialist in forestry and composite agricultural materials: “The field of wood-based composites has had dramatic changes ever since the 1950s in

terms of production capacities and technological developments. The prospect of producing particles and fibers with various dimensions and shapes, the use of new types of synthetic resins, of modern technologies and specially designed, reliable, partially or completely automated equipment have given a boost to WBP (wood-based products) development. It was the beginning of a new age, not only in the production of WBP, but of other wood-based products as well.”37

This quotation, together with Fig 2.438, gives a small insight in the diversification of the

wood-based composites. This diversification is spread over the entire field of wood-wood-based products. Wood engineering and technology are continuously developing, and new innovations and research results are implemented in all stages of the products lifetime. Development and production of wood-based products and by-products, such as adhesives, coating and non-wood lignocellulosic composites, is a substantial industry. This field of wood-based and related products is continuously

developing and changing and so is the availability of these products.39 The introduction of new

wood-based products or by-products is not a recent development. For instance, the introduction of

non-European products such as ebony40 or Japanese lacquerwares41 have had significant impact

34_{Shmulsky and Jones, Forest Products and Wood Science, 339.}

35_{T.M. Maloney, “The Family of Wood Composite Materials,” Forest Product Journal 46, no. 2 (1996): 21.} 36_{Maloney, 399–401.}

37_{Rowell, Handbook of Wood Chemistry and Wood Composites, 401.} 38_{Rowell, 324.}

39_{Alfredo Aguilera and J. Paulo Davim, eds., Research Developments in Wood Engineering and Technology (Hershey PA:}

Engineering Science Reference, an imprint of IGI Global, 2014).

40_{Reinier Baarsen, “Herman Doomer, Ebony Worker in Amsterdam,” The Burlington Magazine 138, no. 1124 (1996): 739–49.} 41_{“The Influence of East Asian Lacquer on European Furniture,” Victoria and Albert Museum, accessed April 19, 2020,}

(24)

on both the production and stylistic developments of furniture. However, the speed and diversity

in which new wooden products are introduced in the second half of the 20th_{century is unparalleled.}

Not only the available wooden materials are continuously developing, but also the way in

which these wood-based products are used or treated.42 Technological advances in electronics,

metallurgy, chemistry, machinery and IT, just to name a few, have expanded the possibilities with

which wood-based products and by-products can be manipulated.43 Chemically treated wood,

CNC-machinery and acrylic mixtures are only a few examples of the diversity of wood-based products and by-products available to contemporary artists. It goes too far to explicate on the developments of these techniques in detail, but the sentiment of continuous development is a key-notion within the availability of wood based products and by-products.

42_{Christian F. Zander, Vom Hobel Zum Computer : Zur Wirtschaftsgeschichte Des Modernen Tischler- Und Schreinerhandwerks}

in Deutschland, 1. Aufl. (Leinfelden-Echterdingen: DRW, 2008).

43_{Alfred Teischinger, “The Development of Wood Technology and Technology Developments in the Wood Industries—from}

History to Future,” European Journal of Wood and Wood Products 68, no. 3 (2010): 281–287, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-010-0458-2.

(25)

Fi g u re 2 .4 : D ia g ra m o f th e ra n g e o f w o o d c o m p o si te s fr o m H a n d b o o k o f W o od C h em is tr y a n d W o o d Co m p o si te s wh ic h p ro vi d es a s m a ll in si gh t in th e d iv er si ty o f wo o d -b a sed c o m p o si te s.

(26)

Modern techniques

Modern and contemporary artists have extensively used these new wood-based products and by-products. For instance, wooden laminates and composites, and thus the adhesives as well, have been, and are, extensively used by artists. Numerous examples can be found in various collections. For example, Donald Judd’s (1928 – 1994) Untitled/Plywood Piece (DJ26(84-34)) (1984), see Fig. 2.5, from the collection of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, is made from meticulously constructed pieces of plywood. Judd’s artwork is particularly interesting, because he not only used modern wooden products, but he also did not create these objects himself. Judd’s artworks were

often industrially ordered and produced, sometimes even in larger quantities.44 Artists can have

industrially set-up workplaces where modern materials and techniques are used to create artworks, sometimes with several assistants or in collaboration with specialists or other artists. These artists might have a background in woodworking or design or not. The technical quality, if there is one in modern art, can be entirely independent of the artist to whom it is attributed. Some artists, such

as primitivists45, actively abstain from new technologies.

44_{Stedelijk Museum, “Untitled / Plywood Piece (DJ 26 (84-34)) - Donald Judd,” March 22, 2020,}

https://www.stedelijk.nl/nl/collectie/3576-donald-judd-untitled-plywood-piece-%28dj-26-%2884-34%29%29.

45_{Tate, “Primitivism – Art Term,” Tate, accessed June 25, 2020, https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/p/primitivism.}

Figure 2.5: Donald Judd: Untitled/ Plywood Piece (DJ26(84-34)), (1984), plywood, unknown size

(27)

For instance, Constantin Brancusi (1876 – 1957) used basic tools, such as hatchets and bow saws, to create rudimentary artworks, see Fig. 2.6 and 2.7. There are also artists that follow a more artisanal tradition, or a mixture between hand-tools and machinery, such as Martin Puryear (1941 ) or Yoshihiro Suda (1969) see Fig. 2.8 – 2.11. These artists combine high-end artisanal and modern techniques in their artworks.

Figure 2.8, 2.9, 2.10, 2.11 clockwise starting top left: Martin Puryear: Ladder for Booker T. Washington (1996), Ash and Maple, 1097 x 58 (narrowing to 3) x 7 cm; Martin Puryear in his studio (1987); View of artist studio Yoshihiro Suda (2009); Yoshihiro Suda: Morning Glory (2010), painted wood, variable dimensions

(28)

The scope of wood-based products and by-products used in modern art as well as how the artists manipulated these materials remains hazy. There is some information available on individual objects or the studio-practices of some artists. Brancusi’s work for instance is relatively documented, but less art-historically canonized artists, such as Puryear’s work, are far less well-documented, even though their works are present in numerous renowned collections. Information about the techniques used by artists is available in some cases, There are journals on studio practices and the work process and used materials of several artists is very well documented. But the accuracy and detail of this information is varied. Sometimes art-labels simply state that an artwork is made of wood without mentioning that it is made of a wooden laminate, but then in other cases the exact sheet-material or production technique is mentioned. There are many wooden artworks present in collections of which no, or very little information is present as to their materials and techniques, even when the artists are still alive to transfer or provide this information. For information and conservation, museums often rely on the artists’ studios, but artists are, unlike conservator-restorers, not bound by documentation and reversibility principles. When an artist is no longer available, an important source of information on the used materials and techniques is

much more difficult to obtain. Artists active in the 20th_{century will become more and more}

unavailable and so will their information.

Figure 2.6: Constantin Brancusi working in his studio on one of his Colonne sans fins (unknown date).Fig. 2.7: Constantin Brancusi (before 1928, Colonne sans fin III, poplar, 301,5 x 30 x 30 cm

(29)

Combining materials and techniques

Not only have artists used and combined new and old techniques, but they have also used ‘techniques’ which can be called ‘unorthodox’ at best. For instance, the Dutch artist Maarten Baas has set fire to several pieces of wooden furniture, which he then impregnated with synthetic resin, see Figure 2.12: “Smoke” Baroque Console (2005). This artwork illustrates the lengths to which artists go in order to create their artworks. In conservation literature there have been several

publications regarding the conservation of burnt wood46 and there might be some publications

regarding the conservation of epoxy resins in wood. However, the conservation of the combination

of these two has only been researched once, in the consolidation treatment of a 10th_century

church.47

Baas is not the only modern artist that has applied an ‘unorthodox’ and unique method in order to create artworks. To illustrate this concept with another example, in Stepahné Thidet’s Sans Titre

(Le Refuge) (2007), see Fig 2.13 and 2.14 a running sprinkler is installed within a wooden cabin

in which some assorted pieces of wooden furniture are placed. In both cases, the ‘damage’ caused

46_{D. W. Grattan and R. L. Barclay, “A Study of Gap-Fillers for Wooden Objects,” Studies in Conservation 33, no. 2 (1988): 71–}

86, https://doi.org/10.2307/1506304.

47_{Benedetto Pizzo et al., “On Site Consolidation of Burnt and Partially Charred Wood in Dry Conditions,” Journal of Cultural}

Heritage 12, no. 1 (March 1, 2011): 19–27, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2010.09.003.

Figure 2.12: Maarten Baas: "Smoke" Baroque Console (2005), burnt wood and epoxy resin, 77.5 × 108.3 × 44 cm

(30)

by water and fire, which are both listed as one of the ten agents of deterioration and loss48_{, are a} significant factor contributing to the identity of the artwork . Both Thidet’s and Baas’ artwork can be categorized as modern wooden art, but include some very particular materials. Modern artists have combined wooden materials from the entire spectrum of wood-based products and have merged these with modern and traditional materials and techniques. On top of that, artists have also used non-wooden products, such as plastics, metals or other exotic materials into their works. Although this is also the case for antique furniture, the range of objects used in modern wooden art is very large. For instance, antique furniture can contain an range of metal components, such as screws or Boulle-marquetry. These types of metal components are frequently discussed in conservation literature. However, more unorthodox or modern metal components, such as the sprinklers in Thidet’s Sans Titre (Le Refuge), are not included in literature.

It is not a stretch of the imagination to realize that these modern materials and techniques pose very unique conservation problems. Some of these materials have already been described in

literature. Particularly the delamination49 and other structural deficits50 of plywood are relatively

thoroughly discussed. On the other hand, there is no literature regarding the specific conservation problems posed by for instance MDF or HDF (High Density Fiberboard). See, for example, Julian Opie’s (1958 -) It Is Believed That Some Dinosaurs Could Run Faster Than a Cheetah (1991), Fig

48_{Cultuur en Wetenschap Ministerie van Onderwijs, “De 10 schadefactoren - Veilig erfgoed - Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel}

Erfgoed,” onderwerp, March 18, 2019, https://www.cultureelerfgoed.nl/onderwerpen/veilig-erfgoed/de-10-schadefactoren.

49_{Voichita Bucur, ed., Delamination in Wood, Wood Products and Wood-Based Composites (Dordrecht: Springer, 2011).} 50_{Cleo Cafmeyer, “Gelaagd hout, Moderne materialen, specifieke degradatiemechanismen en nieuwe restauratieproblemen,”}

Ebenist, 6 (2003): 26–35.

Figure 2.13 & 2.14: Inside and outside view of Stephané Thidet: Sans Titre (Le Refuge) (2007), wooden cabin, ceiling with running sprinkler installation and assorted pieces of furniture and objects, 424 x 560 x 400 cm

(31)

2.15. This implies that a conservator-restorer who might encounter an artwork made of or made with MDF, does not have literature to fall back on. Moreover, due to the diversity of modern wooden products and techniques, it is almost unfeasible to describe or examine all available materials and techniques.

In conclusion, new materials and techniques have increased the diversity of the objects and materials used in modern wooden art, and continue to develop. Conservation literature regarding these modern materials and techniques is lacking and it can be challenging to find information regarding the use of these new materials and techniques. In addition, artworks often combine a variety of old and new materials, and hand-made and industrial products. On top of that, sometimes old and new materials, or hand-made and industrial products, are used in the same artwork.

2.3 Object-specific information of non-material aspects - Ready-mades and contexts As mentioned in the previous sub-chapter, modern and contemporary artists have used and combined a large variety of materials and techniques. However, artists also incorporate various objects from different contexts, such as bicycle wheels or wheelbarrows, into their artworks. The function or context of these objects can be a significant part of the identity of the artwork. Modern art has blurred, crossed and redefined what is regarded as art and cultural heritage. Modern wooden art does not exempt from this rule. Intuitively there is a significant difference between Art and

Figure 2.15: Julian Opie: It Is Believed That Some Dinosaurs Could Run Faster Than a Cheetah ( 1991), MDF and acrylic paint, 2000 × 2000 × 2800 mm

(32)

applied art, or design. Generally, design and Art are differentiated as follows: design is functional

and Art is aesthetic.51_{If an object is Art or design, according to this logic, depends on its function.}

This sub-chapter focusses on the use of design or ready-made objects, and illustrates the difficulty and importance of distinguishing between aesthetical and functional objects within the same artwork.

Ready-mades

As mentioned in the previous paragraph, some modern wooden artworks are made of, or are combined with, pre-made objects. A pivotal example from the art historical canon is Marcel Duchamp’s (1887 – 1968) Bicycle Wheel (1951), see figure 2.16, which is considered one of the

first ‘ready-made’ artworks.52_{While it is fairly obvious that Bicycle Wheel is an esthetical object,}

it is made of two functional objects: a bicycle wheel and a wooden stool. This type of artwork, often referred to as ready-mades, emerged in the 1950’s and the concept of using pre-made objects

and present them as aesthetical objects, or art, has been used ever since.53_{The diversity of}

repurposed objects used in modern artworks is seemingly limitless and ranges from junk and

51_{Moszynska, Sculpture Now, 132. And Avital, The Confusion between Art and Design.}

52_{Museum of Modern Art, “Bicycle Wheel: Marcel Duchamp,” 1951,}

https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/marcel-duchamp-bicycle-wheel-new-york-1951-third-version-after-lost-original-of-1913/.

53_{Moszynska, Sculpture Now, 42–65, 132–56.}

Figure 2.16, 2.17 & 2.18: Marcel Duchamp: Bicycle Wheel (1951), wheel mounted on wooden stool, 129.5 x 63.5 x 41.9 cm; front and back of Martin Puryear C.F.A.O. (2006-2007), Painted and unpainted pine and found wheelbarrow, 255.9 x 196.9 x 154.9 cm

(33)

everyday objects to antique furniture and culturally loaded objects. The background of the used objects in the artwork can be pivotal to the identity of the artwork.

The significance of the information that lies within these ‘ready-mades’ or ‘objets trouvés’ is not always legible. For instance: Puryear’s C.F.A.O (2006-2007), see Fig. 2.17 – 2.18, is made of a chaotic construction of small pinewood beams and an old, ‘found’ wheelbarrow. In this case, the wheelbarrow has a significant role in the identity of the artwork. Puryear found this

wheelbarrow in the artist residence of the renowned artist Alexander Calder (1898 – 1976).54 The

wheelbarrow contains information that not only relates the artwork to a period in Puryear’s life and the location the artwork was made, but also to the art of the canonized artist, Calder, and his oeuvre. The wheelbarrow is therefore not just ‘any’ wheelbarrow, but carries a significant amount of information. The damages and other wear and tear found on this object can become suddenly more important to the stories the object tell. Materials and objects used in modern wooden art can function as palimpsests: re-used documents containing information from both the old function as the new. Artists have intentionally, or unintentionally used these objects to connect their artworks to ‘things’ outside the artworks. These ‘things’, just like the artworks themselves, can be (art) historical phenomena but also, philosophical texts, geographical phenomena, biological processes and so forth. These ready-made objects carry their own historical trajectory with the material marks and traces that go with it. Information regarding the objects and materials used in the artwork can therefore be a significant contributor to the identity of the artworks.

54_{Martin Puryear, C.F.A.O., 2007 2006, Painted and unpainted pine and found wheelbarrow, 255.9 x 196.9 x 154.9 cm, 2007 2006,}

(34)

Context – The non-material

The identity and meaning(s) of artworks can be determined by the space or circumstance they are located in. Some artworks are specifically created for a specific time and place. For instance, Oliveira’s installation Transarquitetônica, see Fig. 2.19 – 2.22 is created specifically for the museum of contemporary art in São Paulo in 2014. Not only are objects created for specific spaces, the space artworks are located in can influence the object itself. Objects can become artworks just by being placed in an artistic context. For example, the chairs in Fig. 2.23 – 2.25, are all part of a museum collection, and neither of these chairs are currently being used as ‘normal’ chairs. These chairs have lost their utilitarian qualities. The question remains if these chairs were intended to be used. Joseph Kosuth’s (1945) installation One and Three Chairs (1965) in Fig 2.23 is attributed to the Conceptual Art movement, in which the chair’s relation to the other parts of the installation is critical to the identity of the artwork. William Stone’s, chair, Fig 2.24, is part of a gallery Figure 2.19, 2.20, 2.21 & 2.22: four views, inside and outside, of Henrique Oliveira: Transarquitetônica, 2014, Wood, bricks, pressed soil, plywood, tree branches and other materials, 5 x 18 x 73 m, in Museu de Arte Contemporanea São Paulo.

(35)

exhibition, in which he investigates the boundaries that encompass the definition of a chair, making the visitor question if they are to be used or not. And the chairs in Fig 2.25, designed by G. Rietveld (1888 – 1964) and produced by Metz & Co, are originally intended to be used. Although it might appear obvious that the context of these three examples is important to the identity of the chairs, there is nothing but the context that dictates how and if these chairs should be used. The context of the artworks can play an unknown part in how these objects are used and perceived. Some objects become artworks just by being placed in an artistic context, while other objects are artworks without context to label them as such. Indicators which might give a hint to the use of a modern wooden artwork, might be used to put the observer on the wrong track. Simple indicators such as wear and tear, or the notion that furniture is made to be used, have been challenged by artists. The relation between an artwork and its context is complex and reciprocal. There are fields of study, such as museum studies or exhibition studies, that are (partially) dedicated to exploring the relation

between artworks and their contexts. The position and agency55 of these artworks in their contexts

is cultural and can even be political. To clarify: every conservator-restorer is familiar with the fact that the color perception of the artwork can change depending on the lighting of the space it is in. In modern art, not only the appearance of the artwork is reliant on the room it is in, but also its identity as art.

55_{Agency is a complex concept derived from art historical theories. See for more information: Caroline van Eck, Art, Agency and}

Living Presence: From the Animated Image to the Excessive Object, Studien Aus Dem Warburg-Haus, Bd. 16 (Boston, Mass.: De Gruyter, 2015).

Figure 2.23, 2.24 & 2.25: Jospeh Kosuth, One and Three Chairs (1965), Wood folding chair, mounted photograph of a chair, and mounted photographic enlargement, 1 82 x 37.8 x 53 cm; William Stone, Monumental (2009), wooden chair on pediment, unknown size; Gerrit Rietveld & Metz&Co, ZigZagStoel (1935 – 1971), Elmwood and brass nuts and bolts, unknown size

(36)

In conclusion, information or indicators regarding the readability and identity of the artwork might be found outside the object and can even contradict the indicators within the object. It is challenging to distinguish between what the artist made and what not. Different objects, products and processes come together in modern wooden artworks and information regarding the identity and readability of an object might be found in other places than is expected. Context can have a great deal of influence in how an object is interpreted.

2.4 non-object-specific information on non-material aspects - the spectra of authenticity Since the Nara Conference on Authenticity (1994), authenticity has become a problematized notion

in conservation.56 The complexity and non-absolute definition of authenticity already surfaced in

the previous sub-chapter, but in this sub-chapter its relevance for the conservation of modern wooden art will be explored. Before analyzing authenticity, it is important to explore some different facets of this concept.

Realness

Authenticity is often associated with notions of ‘realness’, or a certain honesty that proves or exhibits attributes that we associate with a specific moment in history or a specific cultural value. Already in 1935, 59 years prior to the Nara Conference on Authenticity, the philosopher W. Benjamin, a key theorist in the field of art history, problematized authenticity in art in his pivotal publication Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit (1935). Benjamin connects authenticity to the ‘aura’ of the object, which is diminished by reproduction. It is too much to dive into this art-philosophical subject, but it is important to note that authenticity is subjective. M. M. Brooks, co-author of Authenticity and replications: the ‘real thing’ in art and

conservation, goes a step further and describes authenticity as “neither a subjective, discursive construction nor a latent property (…) but a distributed property that emerges through the

56_{Stephanie Rabourdin-Auffret, “The Authenticity of French Furniture: Interpretation and Preservation Issues,” in Art}

Conservation and Authenticities: Material, Concept, Context, ed. Erma Hermens and Tina Fiske (London: Archetype Publications, 2009), 80.

(37)

interaction of people and things”57_{This post-structuralist and problematized approach is} characteristic for the way authenticity is perceived in modern art.

Forms of authenticity

Conservator-restorer S. Rabourdin-Auffret wrote an essay on authenticity in furniture conservation in 2009. She concludes that there are several ‘layers’ or ‘levels’ of authenticity, and that it is crucial for conservators to argue why to focus on one level and to disregard the other levels. She writes: “in terms of restoration the evolution in our relationship to furniture has resulted in either

respecting or disregarding different levels of its authenticity: form, material, technique and function”.58 Form, material, technique and function, she argues, all reside within the object; In other words, these concepts are linked to the physical state of the object. However, as discussed in sub-chapter 2.3, modern wooden art can derive (parts of) its identity from non-material, contextual, aspects, such as the location, but also the artist’s intent. Authenticity is a mixture of cultural notions, such as aura, materials facets and contextual influences. In other words, the extent of authenticity is influenced by the relation between the object and the people around it. This includes its audience, but also the conservator-restorer. Rabourdin-Auffret hints at this connection in her conclusion: “It is crucial for conservators to focus on why they are aiming to preserve one level of

authenticity rather than another”59_{. It is important to think of authenticity as a subjective field in} which concepts such as form, material, technique and function are only a part of the authenticity of the artwork. Negotiating between different significances, or spectra of authenticity is crucial for conservation.

The active negotiation of authenticity is particularly relevant for modern wooden art for two reasons. Firstly, it allows for a fluid interpretation of material qualities. Modern artworks often contain material ambiguities in which, for instance, the artist’s intention behind damages or later alterations becomes uncertain. This is most poignant in the restoration/conservation debate. In this debate the questions often revolve around whether or not to conserve or restore part of an object. This part can either be seen as damage, as a prior restoration with uncertain origins or as an

57_{Mary M. Brooks, “‘Indisputable Authenticity’: Engaging with Real in the Museum,” in Authenticity and Replication: The}

“real Thing” in Art and Conservation, ed. Rebecca Gordon, Erma Hermens, and Frances Lennard, 2014, 3.

58_{Rabourdin-Auffret, “The Authenticity of French Furniture: Interpretation and Preservation Issues,” 85–86.} 59_{Rabourdin-Auffret, 87.}

(38)

alteration of the object. 60_{Deciding which parts to conserve and which to restore is difficult in} itself, but modern artists have excelled at defying and twisting, or questioning, the general expectations that govern the way damages and structural integrity problems are perceived. For instance, some artworks might be intended to be dirty, broken or badly constructed. Decay or deconstruction might be just as an integral part of an artwork like a solid construction is to a dining table. There is even a separate art-style: auto-destructive art. Art and destruction are, according to

art historian J. Walden and conservators R. Miller and J. Bodor, connected.61 This practice

intensifies the importance of knowing when and how certain damages appeared in the object and if these damages are even ‘damages’ at all. For instance, world famous artists such as Tony Cragg (1941) have used found materials and objects in their artworks, which were broken and dirty to begin with. In Axehead (1982), Cragg has arranged several old wooden objects on the floor, see Fig.2.26. In this case it would be very problematic to distinguish which damages are harmful or a risk to the object and which are not. Generally, wood and furniture contain several basic concepts with which damages can be assessed: structural integrity for instance, and also a semi-stylistic unity. Deviation from these concepts might indicate that an object is broken or altered. In Modern wooden art, a crack in a panel might be pre-existent to the artists intervention of creating the artwork and is therefore relevant to the artist’s intended aesthetic of the object. Conservator-restorer L. Smith remarks: “The decision to compensate a loss, or not, who decides, and why, has

become increasingly complex and multi-faceted as we grow more aware of the intangible cultural meanings”62

60_{Shayne Rivers and Nick Umney, Conservation of Furniture (New York: Routledge, 2003), 371.}

61_{Jennifer Walden, Art and Destruction, 2013, 1–8. And Emily O’Reilly, Rose Miller, and Judit Bodor, “Curation, Conservation,}

and the Artist in Silent Explosion: Ivor Davies and Destruction in Art,” Studies in Conservation 61, no. sup2 (June 1, 2016): 167– 73, https://doi.org/10.1080/00393630.2016.1188250.

62_{Landis Smith, “Collaborative Decisions in Context: Loss Compensation in Native American Museum Objects,” in Objects}

Specialty Group Postprints, Volume Two, 1994 (New York: The American Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works, 2005), 1–8.