Výhry, prohry, přešlapy. Proměny památkové péče 20. století na příkladu několika objektů z městské památkové zóny Havlíčkův Brod

Horák, Petr

Digitální knihovna UPCE
→
Univerzita Pardubice
→
Publikace vydané Univerzitou Pardubice / Published by the University of Pardubice
→
Sborníky z konferencí / Conference Proceedings
→
Interdisciplinarita v péči o kulturní dědictví
→
2013 Interdisciplinarita v péči o kulturní dědictví
→
Zobrazit záznam

dc.contributor.author	Horák, Petr
dc.date.accessioned	2016-11-25T10:17:58Z
dc.date.available	2016-11-25T10:17:58Z
dc.date.issued	2013
dc.identifier.isbn	978-80-7395-594-6 (Print)
dc.identifier.isbn	978-80-7395-595-3 (PDF)
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10195/66818
dc.format	p. 145-158	eng
dc.language.iso	cze
dc.publisher	Univerzita Pardubice	cze
dc.rights	open access	eng
dc.subject	Havlíčkův Brod	cze
dc.subject	památková péče	cze
dc.subject	architektura	cze
dc.subject	restaurování	cze
dc.subject	urbanismus	cze
dc.subject	monument care	eng
dc.subject	architecture	eng
dc.subject	restoration-conservation	eng
dc.subject	urbanism	eng
dc.title	Výhry, prohry, přešlapy. Proměny památkové péče 20. století na příkladu několika objektů z městské památkové zóny Havlíčkův Brod	cze
dc.title.alternative	Victories, failures and pitfalls. Transformations of the monument care in the 20th century illustrated by the examples of several objects of the Municipal Conservation Area of Havlíčkův Brod	eng
dc.type	ConferenceObject	eng
dc.description.abstract-translated	Monument care, as a highly complex and interdisciplinary subject area of a human activity, can be viewed from the theoretical perspective considering its objectives, tendencies, aspects of methodology as well as global obstacles put in its way. Nevertheless, such an approach must be accompanied by the view focusing on particular output of practical activities of the branch, which can make the theoretic paradigm specific, support or question it and thus open a way for further consideration, whose implications can be immense. Providing there is no mutual feedback between the theory and practice, something that could be, with a little exaggeration, called “monument care for monument care” could emerge, even if undoubtedly on a high professional level. In short, an apt comparison of such a condition could be made with a situation where a person in a house on fire would be engaged with studying fire safety regulations effective in various parts of the world instead of extinguishing the fire, which even though praiseworthy and conductive, would not help much to localize the raging fire. The purpose of the paper is to describe certain specific, but sometimes to some extent quite typical achievements as well as failures of the monument care, with an example of efforts put within the 20th century into safeguarding particular objects. Among others, it outlines the extraordinary environment of this discipline at the beginning of the 20th century and the activities of the Vienna Central Commission for the Preservation of National Heritage Sites, specifically its conservation scientist of that time, who was one of the most outstanding (though quite contradictory) personalities of the Czech monument care, Zdeněk Wirth. Some attention is also focused on the conflict between the construction efforts of rising firms of the First Czechoslovak Republic and the defenders of the old architecture. It also depicts conservationists’ desperate tilting at windmills of the communist totalitarianism, as well as conservation treatments of the rather confused period after November 1989 – all that demonstrated with the example of the burgher houses, which are situated or used to be situated on Havlíček’s Square in Havlíčkův Brod.	eng
dc.event	Interdisciplinarita v péči o kulturní dědictví (26.-27. April 2012, 23.-24. May 2013, Litomyšl, Czech Republic)	eng
dc.peerreviewed	yes	eng
dc.publicationstatus	published	eng