Things

The great nineteenth century architect and renovator of ancient buildings, Viollet-le-Duc, maintained that the adoption of absolute principles, when thinking about the past and restoring those things handed down to us from the past, ‘could quickly lead to the absurd’ (Viollet-le-Duc 1854: loc. 6796). From the simple fact that some things that are important to us are so, at least in part, because they are old, many questions spring. Why should the fact that something has been around for a long time confer value on it? Should old things be preserved or should they be left to decay? Preservation, by suspending the aging process, undermines that very value it is designed to preserve. Decay, on the other hand, results in the objects vanishing altogether. Why do we queue to see original objects but are generally indifferent to perceptually identical facsimiles? How can we explain the cult of relics (or reliques)? Why are we indifferent to some old things (stones) but not to others (axe-heads)? Is the reconstruction of damaged or destroyed heritage a matter of fakery (‘Disney-fication’)? What do we even mean by terms such as ‘genuine’ and ‘authentic’? Even if we can throw light on the value conferred by age, how valuable is that value? Is it worth the vast amount of money absorbed by the heritage industry – especially in the face of other pressing needs such as food and shelter?

Aesthetics · Ancient history · Archaeology · Art · Cult · Epistemology · Face (sociological concept) · Face value · Simple (philosophy) · Social science · Sociology · Value (mathematics) · Archaeological Research and Protection · Architecture, Modernity, and Design · Computer Science · Cultural Heritage Management and Preservation · History · Philosophy