 |
Jan Woudstra:
The Restoration of Historic
Parks and Gardens |
A very small proportion of parks and gardens is considered to be of such importance in that it provides a vital touchstone in our comprehension of history, as a basis for understanding a past society, its attitudes, ambitions and achievements. In this case there will be considerable emphasis upon the maintenance of the cultural inheritance. Yet parks and gardens rarely reach us in a pristine condition, requiring conservation treatments that guide change. While in extreme cases there may be a philosophy of ‘conserve as found’ -arresting any further change-, conservation of landscapes cannot just prevent change. The unique use of living material, the speed of decay of component features in the outdoors, the extensive range of materials and the difficulties of interpreting the various accretions or often indistinct overlays provides the necessity for a holistic and well-considered approach that addresses these issues. In buildings and works of art there is a well developed restoration philosophy with generally accepted standards, but this is not necessarily the case for parks and gardens despite the presence of international guidelines, such as the Florence Charter (1980). This short paper discusses the fundamental aims of restoration, provides an overview of some current trends of garden restoration and provides some recommendations of important issues surrounding the conservation process.
The essence of historical value is information, which is why considerable importance is adhered to historic fabric -which encompasses direct evidence of the past, and evidence of the design through maintenance of the intended character. Good stewardship therefore involves the continuation of historic fabric and maintenance for this and future generations. This is why those involved in conservation are concerned about the authenticity of materials, craftsmanship, design and setting. They seek to ensure that all significant information concerning the historic fabric or design is gathered before it is lost through decay or change. They will seek ways to extend the timescale of decay and will seek to ensure that the fabric and design is not subverted by deceiving observers that recent changes are more ancient than they are in fact. Thus conservation priorities are: protection of historic fabric, recording of historic fabric and action to conserve them meaningfully.
Restoration is a treatment that refers to returning something to a former state or condition. It infers retention of historic fabric and thereby maintaining authenticity, yet ‘restoration’ is now often used in a much wider context. It has come to include a whole range of other treatments that in fact constitute new work rather than conservation-based work, i.e. pastiches of a former style, including reconstruction (which is an accurate remake but without sufficient historic fabric to claim authenticity), restoration-in-spirit (which realizes the presumed original design afresh based on the designer’s understanding and intuition) and re-creations or period gardens (which are new gardens that reflect past gardening styles), as well as conservation based treatments.
It is clear from the above that while the ideas of non-conservation based treatments may be laudable in that they may help with the interpretation of a site, they do provide an inaccurate impression of the real history of the site. We therefore concentrate on conservation-based treatments, i.e. preservation, maintenance, repair and conjectural detailing.
Preservation, retention without active intervention, eg maintaining earthworks by grazing, or hard detailing that requires little intervention
Maintenance aims at slowing down processes of decay and retaining design effects by regular intervention.
Repair replaces historic fabric that is missing, and by replacing like for like enables maintaining the integrity of the design
Conjectural detailing is most frequently utilised for planting where a policy of like for like replacement may not be possible due to disease, shading or changes in moisture content of the soil.
In Great Britain there has been considerable evolution in the perception of restoration work in parks and gardens over the past twenty years. During this period conservation efforts were dominated by State policy, rather than by the National Trust, the private organisation that had taken the lead in this field after the Second World War. As a result of the 1983 Heritage Act the new quango organisation English Heritage compiled a Register of Historic Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in England that amongst other things enabled the identification of historic landscapes potentially at risk. This came to good use after the great storms of 1987 and 1990 that struck the south of England, when as a result of the register it was possible to assess the damage quickly, with grants made available for damage repair. These grants were available for those landscapes with the most important landscapes, while those of lesser importance were grant aided by Taskforce Trees and later in a Countryside Stewardship Scheme promoted by the Countryside Commission. These grant schemes involved limited amounts of resources, eg £4Million grant aid assisted 280 sites and produced 180 management plans. As a result restoration efforts concentrated on important features, eg avenues, tree clumps and repair of damaged sculptures and garden buildings not otherwise covered by insurance.
This was greatly different with the Urban Parks Programme, launched by the Heritage Lottery Fund in 1996, aiming to redress the overwhelming neglect of public parks over many years. By April 2002 a total of 203 sites received aid and 144 management plans were produced to a total expenditure of £280Million. While the application process enforced a new methodology, which included the presentation of the survey information and analysis together with a conservation plan (inspired by the Burra Charter (1979)), which provides a statement of significance and the basis for a restoration plan, as well as management and maintenance plans, the emphasis has moved away from exact restoration. Emphasis is now on issues related to community, rather than historical accuracy, with adaptation for new uses playing a significant role.
This is contrasted with new standards in conservation practice and theory, with the Royal Parks Historical Survey for example setting new standards with respect to surveying of historic landscapes, specifically in the one on Hampton Court Palace and Bushy Park by Travers Morgan in 1982. It has continued to be updated by the Gardens Strategy Group and is one of the few landscapes with a published strategy. Similarly at Hampton Court, the reconstruction of the baroque layout of the Privy Garden in 1995 set new standards with regard to research methodology, the application of various survey techniques, including intensive archaeology, and historic planting design as a basis for restoration.
The wider implications of garden conservation projects are nowhere clearer than at Heligan in Cornwall, an overgrown eighteenth century country estate with a second rate landscape ‘discovered’ and restored by Tim Smit. He marketed the reconstruction of the gardens under the banner ‘The Lost Gardens of Heligan’, with the aid of television and publicity. His extremely successful project induced crowds of people who had never been interested in gardens before to make visits. It encouraged them to visit the region and has formed a significant boost to the local economy. In this case it was not historical accuracy which was the main aim of the restoration process, but an ability to inspire and enthuse a wider audience by means of a regeneration process. The successful methodology in doing this was copied by television, with a series entitled Lost Gardens. These have unfortunately given the general public a misleading impression that such reconstructions can be done virtually overnight, but their supporters claim that raising the profile of such work must be a benefit overall.
In all there has been significant progress over the last twenty years in that parks and gardens are now perceived as an important part of our cultural heritage. Experience in conservation work continues to emphasise the importance of recording a design, because the accuracy of repairs depends on good records. A whole range of approaches is visible in restoration work in parks and gardens, but it is clear that many are non-conservation based ones and constitute new work. Many of the problems in restoration work emerge from a lack of knowledge and understanding of historic detailing. This is also visible in the inability to maintain historic features appropriately, which has for example resulted in various landscapes being restored twice within twenty years. Such drastic solutions inevitably lead to the loss of historic fabric, and therefore loss of value. Good conservation therefore contains a plea for a long term policy for high standard maintenance by well-qualified gardeners rather the longer term cycle of neglect and restoration. It is a good moment to reflect on the de-skilling of horticulture that has taken place everywhere in the western world, and to consider appropriate education in order to manage and maintain our heritage of parks and gardens. There are still a few shining examples, such as the skills displayed in the maintenance of the gardens of the National Trust, and hopefully they will be able to provide the continuity required, but this will be insufficient to safeguard many other parks and gardens, which should provide a point of urgent consideration.
References
Jan Woudstra, ‘Garden conservation in the United Kingdom’, in Michael Rohde and Rainer Schomann, Historic Gardens Today (Leipzig: Edition Leipzig, 2004), 254-261. /German version: ‘Gartendenkmalpflege in Grossbritannien’ in Michael Rohde and Rainer Schomann, Historische Gärten Heute (Leipzig: Edition Leipzig, 2003), 254-261.
Jan Woudstra and Ken Fieldhouse (eds), The Regeneration of Public Parks (London: E.&F.N.Spon, with Garden History Society and Landscape Design Trust, 2000).
Jan Woudstra, ‘The design of the Privy Garden at Hampton Court’, Tuinkunst: Dutch yearbook of the history of garden and landscape architecture, 2 (1996), 94-120.
Simon Thurley (ed.), The King's Privy Garden at Hampton Court Palace 1689-1995 (London: Apollo, 1995)
David Jacques, Chapter 1 ‘Introduction: The treatment of historic parks and gardens’ in Jan Woudstra, Garden Conservation II: Treatment (Shaftesbury: Donhead, 2006 forthcoming)
|
|
