PDA

View Full Version : Restoration, or Ruin?


ChrWright
September 16th, 2009, 06:05 PM
This is a house very near one of my projects. You can see what work is being done:

http://wrightworks.net/images/IMG_0999.JPG


I'd like to pose a question to those craftsmen who work on old and historic houses:
At what point does restoration ruin the character of an old house?

One of the biggest challenges we all face is how to bring these glorious homes up to modern standards of comfort, safety, and convenience--without fundamentally changing their historic nature. The issue is even more complicated when it comes to repairs.

One of my favorites in the realm of architecture is John Ruskin (1819-1900). He was of the extreme opinion that any kind of "restoration" was ruin.

Two passages from his book, The Seven Lamps of Architecture:

'Neither by the public, nor by those who have the care of public monuments, is the true meaning of the word restoration understood. It means the most total destruction which a building can suffer: a destruction out of which no remnants can be gathered: a destruction accompanied with false description of the thing destroyed. Do not let us deceive ourselves in this important matter; it is impossible, as impossible as to raise the dead, to restore anything that has ever been great or beautiful in architecture.'


'Therefore when we build let us think that we build forever. Let it not be for present delight nor for present use alone. Let it be such Work as our descendants will thank us for and let us think as we lay Stone on Stone that a time is to come when those stones will be held sacred because our hands have touched them and that men will say as they look upon the labor and the wrought substance of them, "See! This our fathers did for us." For, indeed, the greatest glory of a building is not in its stones, nor in its gold. Its glory is in its Age, and in that deep sense of voicefulness, of stern watching, or mysterious sympathy, nay, even of approval or condemnation, which we feel in walls that have long been washed by the passing waves of humanity. It is in their lasting witness against men, in their quiet contrast with the transitional character of all things, in the strength which, through the lapse of seasons and times, and the decline and birth of dynasties, and the changing face of the earth, and of the limits of the sea, maintains its sculptured shapeliness for a time insuperable, connects forgotten and following ages with each other, and half constitutes the identity, as it concentrates the sympathy, of nations: it is in that golden stain of time, that we are to look for the real light, and colour, and preciousness of architecture; and it is not until a building has assumed this character, till it has been entrusted with the fame, and hallowed by the deeds of men, till its walls have been witnesses of suffering, and its pillars rise out of the shadows of death, that its existence, more lasting as it is than that of the natural objects of the world around it, can be gifted with even so much as these possess, of language and of life.'


These houses need work. They need care. A fallen wall must be re-made, a crumbling foundation shored, and that which has been damaged must be made whole again.

But when does an update go too far?

JasonW
September 16th, 2009, 06:13 PM
That's a great article Chris, thanks.

AndyGump
September 17th, 2009, 02:21 AM
I think to answer your initial question "Restoration or Ruin?" this is definitely a ruin.

If the lower stone was really in that bad a condition or they had some other material at some time it would I think have been better to remove all the stone and mix the new with old to keep an appealing look to the whole scheme of the house. Just my two pennies worth.

Andy.

ChrWright
September 17th, 2009, 08:05 AM
I think to answer your initial question "Restoration or Ruin?" this is definitely a ruin.

If the lower stone was really in that bad a condition or they had some other material at some time it would I think have been better to remove all the stone and mix the new with old to keep an appealing look to the whole scheme of the house. Just my two pennies worth.

Andy.

I should have described the work being done better. The original stone is being pressure washed and cleaned, there have been no repairs or replacements. This picture was taken mid-way through the process on the facade.

Don't get me wrong--it's a beautiful home. It will still be beautiful when this restoration is finished. The true color and beauty of the stone has been revealed and the house will look new again. But part of its character as an old home will be gone. Does the patina of age have value? I think it does, not only to the house itself but also in how it relates to the neighborhood and surrounding architecture.

But your post brings up a valid point. If the masonry needed tuck pointed, or sections replaced--those repairs would have stood out like a sore thumb with little chance of artificially weathering them to match the rest of the house. Wouldn't cleaning everything have been the best choice in that case?

A purist like Ruskin would say don't touch it at all. I can almost hear his voice echo, "Restoration is destruction!" But as I said before--that's not always practical. Further, most of these homes have been worked on dozens of times since being built and the issue of preservation in many cases is a moot point. The damage has already been done and we do our best to put Humpty Dumpty back together again, in some semblance of his original form.

To illustrate the issues at stake, here are two entry hall floors in homes I recently renovated. The first was built in the 20s and the marble floor is original, as are many of the elements surrounding it:

http://wrightworks.net/images/Entry0326.JPG
http://wrightworks.net/images/Entry0329.JPG

The second, is in a home built in the 80s and shows a floor we installed new:
http://wrightworks.net/images/hentry101_0174.JPG
http://wrightworks.net/images/hentry100_0064.JPG

The first home sits in a historic district, the second in a more recently built, suburban neighborhood. Both are beautiful floors. There is definitely something to be said for a pristine clean, newly installed stone floor. In that sense you can clearly see the difference between the two, apart from any differences in style.

But it's hard to convey nuances of perception and "feeling" in a photo. You have to stand in the space. The first home has been witness to decades of families, friends, and visitors--and you can feel it. Year after year of Christmases and Thanksgivings... Birthdays... Weddings... Funerals... All the joy and pain and emotion of life, year upon year. It is everything Ruskin talks about in "walls that have long been washed by the passing waves of humanity." The context of this home is equally important as it sits among homes of equal age and glory. Certainly if we'd wanted to, we could have had the old marble polished and made to look new again. But in "restoring" it, we would have taken so much away.

Every home we work on, old or new, is different and presents its own unique challenges. No matter where your opinions fall on the issue, at the end of the day these houses will be standing long after we're gone. Certainly you can choose to get in and get out, cash the checks and move on. Or, you can take the time to ensure the work you do is sensitive and lasting.

A true craftsman, who cares for his work and for the honor of his name, leaves a bit of himself behind with every project he finishes. I am glad to participate in a forum where so many of us are committed to putting that level of care into our projects.

tomstruble
October 11th, 2009, 12:02 AM
very insightful post Chris was a pleasure reading it
thanks

nEighter
October 11th, 2009, 12:47 AM
I think that the original builder/designer didn't take into account what it would look like 200yrs from then. I think it was the initial design that should be held and cherished. The patina and aging of the material is totally a side effect of time. It holds only the value you place in it. IF the house would have seen regular maintenance there would be none of these age defining effects present and you would solely look at the design and not the "weathering" of the materials. I think the beauty is TOTALLY in the eye of the beholder. BUT this is coming from a painter.. I take what looks old and broken down and make it look NEW again.

In short.. as long as the design doesn't change, then the original design is not lost, and thus you are just helping that building's presence live on that much longer, for more generations to enjoy.

Silvertree
October 11th, 2009, 01:00 AM
One of my first jobs was as a laborer for my family, all stone masons, old world craftsman in the true sense.

I went on to work for a restoration company "New England Restoration", a mob owned company that did steam cleaning of stone amongst other things, we then usually put a silicone sealer on the whole building being careful not to get it on anything else. So I removed the patina from buildings for a living.

When clean you could see the nuance built into the carefully set stones, you saw what the masons saw when it was first built.

The heart of the matter, the soul of it all.

loneframer
October 11th, 2009, 08:19 AM
This home is being rebuilt from the ground up, as historically correct as possible. It was originally built by George Daynor, out of nothing but recycled junk and used materials. It will be opened as a tourist attraction when complete.

Eieio
October 11th, 2009, 08:26 AM
This home is being rebuilt from the ground up, as historically correct as possible. It was originally built by George Daynor, out of nothing but recycled junk and used materials. It will be opened as a tourist attraction when complete.


Does it say Vineland N.J. on the bottom of the pic?

loneframer
October 11th, 2009, 08:32 AM
Does it say Vineland N.J. on the bottom of the pic?

Yes it does. Unfortunately the house was demolished when George died. Now some local folks are well underway to rebuilding her. Much of the labor force is volunteer.

blogofbuilding
October 18th, 2009, 10:37 AM
The 7 lamps of Architecture is online as a googlebook Here (http://books.google.com/books?id=X18JAAAAQAAJ&dq=seven+lamps+of+architecture&printsec=frontcover&source=bll&ots=8Hr82Hl-36&sig=zBJUeT8_wz9bnMYAwpdA3kka9Js&hl=en&ei=T0_bSqXkL5Ok8AaA5Zy3BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=15&ved=0CDsQ6AEwDg#v=onepage&q=&f=false).