Zprávy památkové péče 2017, 77(6):621-632

What is the theory of heritage care?

Vít Jesenský

NPÚ, ÚOP středních Čech

This theoretical study attempts to conceptualize the systematics of the theory of heritage care, an outline of its formation and organization (its subject, methods of creation, functions, and mediation). It is the result of theoretical structuralist research. Its sources were professional literature, doctrinal texts, discussions with experts, reflective field practice, and the author's own professional experience. The introductory chapter, recapitulating the state of contemporary theory of heritage care on the background of postmodernism, reveals three decades of the absence of domestic systematic theoretical research.
In the chapter "Principles, Objectives and Tasks of the Theory of Heritage Care", this theory is defined as a deliberately designed tool that deals with the essence (subject matter and fundamental starting points) and the objectives of heritage care and processes them in a consistent interpretation system. The specification of the theory depends on the subject area (heritage care) which is increasingly perceived as a socio-cultural phenomenon. Its specificity is the reason for the discussion of the comprehensiveness and permanence/validity of the theory. The text presents a hypothesis on the value-type and activity-type of the theories of heritage care and the key absence of their interconnection. The fundamental paradigmatic division of the theoretical sphere distinguishes the narrower (ideological basis) and the wider concept of the theory of heritage care (ideological basis and thought instruments of its realization - terminology, methodology, history of the field, systematics, and philosophy).
The second part of the essay deals with the main related cognitive and mediating disciplines: the first is the philosophy in which the thesis on the implications of the origins in analytical and continental philosophy is presented, and the possibilities of a phenomenological concept and an independent philosophy of monument care are discussed. Two other phenomena (activities) are recalled, interpreting experience as not empirically but spiritually as a whole, namely art and religion. Research on their relationship to theory is found to be inadequate. Other related disciplines are ethics and, above all, science, whose role in the field (which as a whole is not scientific), is insufficiently elaborated. The scientism of theory is considered to be the decisive problem, and the question is placed on whether the theory of heritage care must be scientific and, in such a case, what its variants are. The unsuccessful domestic attempt to establish a field of "monumentism", summarizing the science of conservation and social appreciation of the museum nature of monuments, is also commented. The text also focuses on the predictive possibilities of the theory. The field related to theory is methodology. It answers the questions of "how", while theory answers the questions of "what and why". The history of heritage care is a field that is often used, especially in the Czech environment, as a substitute for theory. Managerial and policy disciplines are primarily crucial for addressing field objectives which, in theory, fulfill the function of expected outcomes, visions, and models.
The chapter devoted to the sources, ways of formation, and the forms of the theory of heritage care critically assesses the lack of initial scientific analyses assessing the state of Czech heritage care. It subsequently deals with issues of cognition, mediation, concepts, language, and hierarchy of application levels of theory, as well as with forms of outputs (doctrine, discussion). Other considerations logically lead to the implementers of the theory which mention the negative consequences of the undeveloped nature of academic research of the theory of monument care in the Czech Republic.
The widely-conceived functions, applications, and implications of the deficiencies of theory are the subject of research of the next chapter. Theory serves not only for understanding, planning, and regulating the field, but also fulfills an integration role; it is the framework of science and methodological and legislative solutions in heritage care. It is also the backbone of policy and economics to the level of management and means of mediation of heritage care for the public, education, and the general identity of the field.
The conclusion of the article defends theory as an integral part of heritage care. The importance of theory depends primarily on the awareness of what theory really is. The complexity, generality, and comprehensibility of theoretical thinking is presented for discussion. The article is supplemented by a schematic diagram of the concept of the theory of heritage care:
The theory of heritage care deals with the essence (subject matter and fundamental starting points) and the objective of heritage care and processes them in a consistent interpretation system.
SYSTEM CONCEPT
1) set of knowledge (ideas)
2) the activity of creating knowledge and its mediation (theory as a part - method of care)
3) special discipline of heritage care
4) institutional background (ICOMOS TheoPhilos, ICOM CC, ACHS, etc.)
SUBJECT CONCEPT
1) narrower - specialized
system of the ideological basis (the essence and the goals) - the deliberate model (especially the theory of the value process)
2) broad - general
sum of the ideological basis and theoretical tools of conceiving and applying theor y - terminology, methodology (including the methodology of economics, legislation, management, research, education), history of the field, systematics (of the heritage fund and institutional), and philosophy (mainly axiology, ethics, and aesthetics)
APPLICATION CONCEPT
3 levels of generality and range of theory
1) general - formally abstract
(dealing with the system, strategic goals, models, philosophical foundations)
2) methodologically thematic
(development of general ideas into principles, international documents, methodology, etc.)
3) instrumentally applied
(generalization of concrete practice, empirical doctrine, methodology, etc.)
In the opposite conception of the degree of generalization of experience (1. summary information, 2. generalization of experience and partial patterns, 3. general patterns).
OBJECT CONCEPT
1) universal (international)
2) culturally limited (e.g. national)
METHODOLOGICAL CONCEPTS
1) analytic interpretation
summarizing existing experiences for defining the present with the aim of understanding (may be heuristic - preliminary, exploratory, etc.)
2) constructively normative
constructing visions, models, objectives, or standards for predictions (may even be dogmatic)
RESOLVING THEORY
1) research (scientific theory)
2) professional discussion
3) intuitively ("common sense"), emotions, memories, myth
METHODOLOGICAL CONCEPT
1) research (created by research)
2) discursive (result of discussion, consensus, tradition, authority)
3) intuitive (result of feeling, imagination, inspiration)

Keywords: theory, heritage care, systematics, philosophy, science

Published: December 1, 2017  Show citation