Brandi has sometimes been called the “pope of restoration”. To tell the truth, it is mostlyEuropeans, and among them continentals of Latin tradition, who gave him this title. are farfrom having such reverence for him. The symposium held in his honor in New York in 2006(Basile and Cecchini, 2011) made an effort to explain this relative disdain, again emphasizedby Anglo-saxon authors (Kanter, 2007; Hughes, 2008). A similar thing happened during thesymposium held in 2008 (Basile and Associazione Giovanni Secco Suardo, 2008). However, inorder to better comprehend this disaffection, these analyses must be completed, and perhaps,some perspectives must also be corrected (Ashley-Smith, 2008).
As the German restorer had seen and understood, both in Teoria and in Le due vie, Brandi very clearly distinguished the recognition of the work of art in its transcendent manifestation and its perception in the historic time. Even more so, in his case studies, he underlined the danger of confusing the manifestation of the transcendent work of art with the temporal time that embraces it in its flow the complete an immutable work of art16 ( Brandi, 2001: 47) (we should understand: immutable in its revelation to conscience, as a work of art). And he continues, regarding to the contemporary work of art:
id: 6d02f7e3c005445980738f9895789041 - page: 9
For these, it seems legitimate and inevitable to have this consubstantiality with the aspirations, the objectives, the morality, the sociality of its time or a fraction of it; legitimate, but not peremptory, only if it is felt by the artist as a premise for the symbolic characterization of the object (Brandi, 2001: 47).
id: 0a58ff73c44dfbec5795e8adab07b9f1 - page: 9
For Hannah Hlling, the under-estimation of the value of time in conservation (Hlling, 2017: 109) is therefore the subject of an invitation to rethink time inside this same conservation, as not being linear following this under authority of Salvador Muoz-Vias (2005: 105). No direct or indirect reference to chapter 4 of Brandis Teoria whose title Time, work of art and restoration contradicts this supposed lack of interest. There is also no reference to the Le due vie. The essay Linserzione del nuovo nel vecchio which provides enlightening developments on the relation to time, and can also induce, even for contemporary art, reflections that are certainly less traditional.
id: df4339eb9a9f476bf0f2975ab6dc6e50 - page: 9
I am far from the idea of considering Brandis thinking as an inevitable matrix. It is absolutely legitimate to leave a system that is judged as inadequate. But it is necessary, before disqualifying it, to explore its potentialities without ignoring its fundamental aspects. The concept of time is at the heart of the Brandian system, and its implications for restoration, in particular that of contemporary art, have simply not been exploited. The fault does not lie with the instrument, but with those who use it. 15 Albano is not quoted here in its original text, but in the publication by Stanley-Price et al. (1996). 16 Original quotation: temps temporel qui accueille dans son flux luvre dart acheve et immuable. 219 Understanding Brandi to think further (and differently?)? The foundation for Brandis vision of the work of art is phenomenology.
id: 062583f1d1ff680b69cc19675798209e - page: 9