42 C O N T E X T 1 2 6 : S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 2 Conference report: Niasvizh, Belarus An anchor in an age of crisis The workshop ‘World Heritage Properties: conservation and use for sustainable development’ was held at Niasvizh Castle, Belarus, in May, as part of the worldwide series of events sponsored by UNESCO and partners to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the 1972World Heritage Convention. At various stages in its history Niasvizh (also transliterated as Nesvizh) has been sacked, abandoned, damaged in wars and, in the Soviet period, converted to a sanatorium. The castle comprises important historical layers from its medieval origins, through 16th century renaissance-baroque transformation and 18th century enlargement, to extensive 19th century remodelling and, following its inscription as a world heritage site in 2005, the new layers evidenced in its recently completed comprehensive restoration. The countries represented at the workshop – Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia – shared common histories for prolonged periods in the 20th century. As Jacek Purchla, UNESCO chair for heritage and urban studies at Krakow University of Economics, recalled, until 1989 heritage was isolated from the market economy, and perceived primarily in commemorative and monumental terms. The convergence in the post-socialist era of heritage and development has been rapid, the concept of heritage as the contemporary use of the past has challenged preservationist orthodoxy, and there has been a lack of effective tools to manage the power of global capitalism. ‘Urban heritage is a keystone of liveability, but tourism has a tendency to be aggressive and to undermine authenticity of function.’ Purchla asked: ‘Heritage is important to tourism, but is tourism important to heritage? Cities are important to tourism, but is tourism important to cities?’ Natalia Dushkina, architectural historian, Russian Federation, described the UNESCOWorld Heritage Convention as ‘an anchor in an age of crisis’ and emphasised the importance of authenticity as a basic resource. ‘There is no heritage without authenticity,’ she said. ‘The art market confirms this. But why is authenticity so difficult to secure with the architectural heritage?’ This raises the question of what we mean by authenticity. Is it simply material, or an amalgam of components that can vary by time and place? And where does this leave orthodox preservationist doctrine in cases such as the restoration of multilayered Niasvizh Castle? Vladimir Krogius, deputy director of the Institute on Reconstruction of Historic Towns, Moscow, and longstanding associate member of the IHBC, positioned the confusion at the scale of the largest urban site on the world heritage list, the city of St Petersburg. Here there was an absence of clarity concerning the site boundaries at the time of inscription in 1990, hence of adequate measures to protect the site as a whole; also, a lack of definition of which individual properties were legally protected. One of the accidental advantages of a lack of established legal frameworks is that one is not hidebound by traditional approaches. Several speakers articulated the connections between tangible and intangible heritage, objects and knowhow, arguing that the protection of the former was impossible without the latter. This begs the question, within the UNESCO system, of the rationale of having discrete conventions: the 1972World Heritage Convention for ‘properties’, and the 2003 Convention for Intangible Cultural Heritage. The challenge is especially acute in a nation such as Belarus which, despite all that the 20th century threw at it, has much surviving heritage, but a lack of professional and craft skills. Marina Satolina, head of the legal department of the Belarus constitutional court, spoke of the need for a comprehensive approach that was territorial, anthropogenic and place-specific: a systems-based ‘landscape approach’ that was inter-disciplinary. Dennis Rodwell, architect-planner, consultant in cultural heritage and sustainable urban development Niasvizh Castle, a former residence of the Radziwills Mir Castle, another Radziwill property Niasvizh Castle and its landscaped park
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=