Welcome to the second article of my three-part series about different conservation methods! This week, I will discuss restoration practices, and use a recently reworked famous Italian painting as our case study. Cominciano!
 |
| The Last Supper, by Leonardo da Vinci, found at Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan. Source. |
What's the story?
According to a report by The Independent in 2012, The Last Supper was restored out of Leonardo da Vinci's modern studio, by Pinin Brambilla Barcilon and Pietro Marani. The painting had particular damage from grime and also suffered from bad restoration techniques in the past. In 1999, the artwork was finally revealed after twenty years of conservation efforts, but not everyone was pleased.
In situ, the 1498 painting is located on the wall of the Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan. In true Leonardo da Vinci fashion, the tempera painting is on top of sealed stone, which is prone to discolouration and deterioration, especially when exposed to humid climates overtime. However, some people think that the recent restoration overwhelms the painting, and the original work is barely present. People start asking the question: Is it even a Leonardo da Vinci anymore?
In situ, the 1498 painting is located on the wall of the Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan. In true Leonardo da Vinci fashion, the tempera painting is on top of sealed stone, which is prone to discolouration and deterioration, especially when exposed to humid climates overtime. However, some people think that the recent restoration overwhelms the painting, and the original work is barely present. People start asking the question: Is it even a Leonardo da Vinci anymore?
As mentioned in my previous article of this series, humidity is a major threat to historical artifacts and sites! In this case, there were only two options: 1) The conservators intervene and restore the painting, or 2) The painting continues to deteriorate naturally. What do we do when it comes to an original Leonardo da Vinci masterpiece? Most conservators will choose to rescue it.
The choice to restore a piece of history is not an easy one. For The Last Supper, there isn't much to think about, because the painting was produced from a famous artist. It is culturally valuable, and thus deserves conservation efforts. Yet, other artifacts are not so smussato - for example, some pieces may be ancient and historically interesting, but not too publicized, and often overlooked by the general public. Both scholars and the average person needs to be able to find the object culturally important, so that the artifact is worth the money, labour, and resources for conservation.
The choice to restore a piece of history is not an easy one. For The Last Supper, there isn't much to think about, because the painting was produced from a famous artist. It is culturally valuable, and thus deserves conservation efforts. Yet, other artifacts are not so smussato - for example, some pieces may be ancient and historically interesting, but not too publicized, and often overlooked by the general public. Both scholars and the average person needs to be able to find the object culturally important, so that the artifact is worth the money, labour, and resources for conservation.
Focus on the good!
Apart from saving an artifact from completely disappearing off the face of the earth, restoration is useful for two related reasons: First, a restored piece gives the impression that it is one "whole." From the outside, a good restoration job means that you can't tell between the original and the recent reworkings. The artifact gives the illusion that it has not been slowly deteriorating, but instead seems visually complete and untouched. Molto bene!
Second, a restored artifact (especially a Leonardo da Vinci work) attracts tourists. It is the same idea when something new and sparkly comes on display at a jewelry store. When a historical objects comes out of storage for the first time in years, the public wants to see it - in its entirety. Speaking from experience, visitors don't typically enjoy seeing a tiny fragment of an object, while the rest of the item is lost, or fading to dust.
We can't ignore the bad...
Restoration involves intervention. In my opinion, the moment you alter an artifact, it is no longer 100% original. The Last Supper, for example, is still an authentic work, but the object's identity now has an added layer. Despite efforts to replicate the item as smooth and exact as possible, the object's biography changes, and we add a chapter of restoration to its history.
Not only this, restoration resources are expensive, difficult to acquire, and need advanced expertise - not the easiest to come by! Mi dispiace, but you need a large amount of funding and support to get a restoration project approved and completed. Moreover, in the past, a bad restoration job is often met with a fierce public outcry and have not always been fixable.
I'll leave the decision up to you! Which do you prefer, restoration or natural deterioration? It's a bit of a debate among conservators, but one thing is for sure - as long as the conservation technique is reversible without causing damage, why not give it a try? Arrivederci amici!
Additional References
Richmond, A. (2016). "All restoration is not the same." ICON: The Institute of Conservation.
Where are Sue and Mike. [Bloggers] (n.d.). "Old Milan and Leonardo."
Where are Sue and Mike. [Bloggers] (n.d.). "Old Milan and Leonardo."
