Venice Charter - Opinions On The Charter

Opinions On The Charter

Venice Charter is the most influential document on conservation that is still continuing to be valid since 1964. However the following aspects are not covered in the Venice Charter:

• The concept of site which also applies to historic landscapes and gardens
• The concept of reversibility in restoration
• The social and financial issues

The following years after the publishing, the purpose of the charter was actualized in between the specialists and a number of symposiums took place in order to improve the common understandings and awareness of the people who are intensively involved in the conservation and restoration works of the historic buildings. However, majority of the participants were from Europe, therefore the applications varied according to social, economic and cultural conditions as well as technical qualifications. It is also pointed out that there are translation mistakes and misunderstandings deriving from it.

Beginning with the World Heritage Convention (1972), some of the limited explanations in the Venice Charter were revised. The understanding of cultural heritage, which was expressed as historic monuments, was categorized as monuments, groups of buildings and sites. Later on The Nara Document on Authenticity (1992) carried out the responsibility to clarify the authenticity related issues which were expressed in the articles 6 and 7 of the Venice Charter.

In the Naples ICOMOS meeting on 7 November 1995; the question ‘Should there be a review of the Venice Charter?’ was discussed with participation of Raymound Lemaire, the reporter of the Venice Charter in 1964. Thirty years after the Venice Charter, Lemaire declared that:

“Charters are fashionable. They are considered to contribute to directing action. However they never contain more than the minimum on which the majority has agreed. Only exceptionally do they cover the whole of the issue which concerns them. This is the case with the Venice Charter.”

and he continued with his opinions about the present understanding of monument and restoration. He pointed out the necessity of a new document or an effective adaptation with consideration of the need “ to be addressed with caution and wisdom, with respect for all cultures and above all with ethical and intellectual discipline”.

Even though Venice Charter is being criticized and planned to be rewritten; with its advises, it has served for its purpose since it was first drawn up. The Charter deserves to be respected and reviewed as a historic document that gives a reference point for the conservation and restoration of the monuments and sites.