Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Re: What's in a word [Re: Thane O'Dell] #21335 10/13/09 08:08 AM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 306
C
Cecile en Don Wa Offline
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 306
Hello,
Can I turn the question around for a try? Here goes anyway. I'm working on a, let's say, project, a part of which is a window, badly rotted by now. This window is not original but has been there for some time and I decided to keep it. Taking it out I pried up the wooden strips holding shards of broken glass panes, bundled them and set them, with the nails, aside. Then I cut out water rotted wood and lightly cleaned off the whole window.
With PVAC glue I glued in new wood but, consciously, not of the same species, just what I had on hand, imagining that's what a carpenter in a village would have done 100 years ago. I shaped the pieces with hand tools, some of which had been standing in that place as long as the window itself had been. With the wood strips and original nails I had set aside I put 125 year-old hand made glass panes in where the broken ones had been and remounted the window.
So, if my accounting is complete and correct, just what did I do?

Don W.

Last edited by Cecile en Don Wa; 10/13/09 08:19 AM.
Re: What's in a word [Re: Cecile en Don Wa] #21336 10/13/09 08:45 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
K
Ken Hume Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
K
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
Hi Don W,

If you had made the changes to the window whilst it was still in position I would suggest that this might be classed as a repair provided you had chosen to use "like for like" materials but by you own confession you deliberately choose to employ offcuts of a dissimilar nature and hence this might actually be more akin to a fix. Thus in our word list maybe we need to separate out both the terms "repair" and "fix" since there might well be quite a definite distiction between the two.

Given that you choose to remove the window, dissassemble and then make changes to same using dissimilar materials then depending on how much was replaced you might well have possibly have strayed into the territory of salvage - because the window was removed and is now effectively no longer part of the building but is being repaired for reuse i.e. it is being saved or salvaged but is not quite being restored.

Our list of words is now revised as follows :-

Conservation, Preservation, Restoration, Refurbishment, Maintenance, Repair, Fix, Replacement, Delapidate, Demolish, Salvage, Replicataton, Reuse, Conversion (Adaptive Reuse), Change, Alter.

Regards

Ken Hume


Looking back to see the way ahead !
Re: What's in a word [Re: mo] #21337 10/13/09 09:13 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
K
Ken Hume Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
K
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
Hi Mo,

Franklin's house looks to be a bit drafty !

The contrast that you draw between replication and reconstruction is interesting. I think that we need to add reconstruction to the list.

My understanding of "reconstruction" might be that a building is rebuilt on its original site using whatever original materials, information and accounts are to hand in an attempt to create or show the likely original building whereas a "replica" would be an all new building not necessarily built on the site of the original building. For example I once visited Anne Hathaways cottage on Vancouver Island and a very good replica this is too having visited and compared this with the original which is still standing in Staffordshire, England.

The list now reads :-

Conservation, Preservation, Restoration, Refurbishment, Maintenance, Repair, Fix, Replacement, Delapidate, Demolish, Salvage, Reconstruction, Replicataton, Reuse, Conversion (Adaptive Reuse), Change, Alter.

Regards

Ken Hume




Looking back to see the way ahead !
Re: What's in a word [Re: Housewright] #21338 10/13/09 09:38 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
K
Ken Hume Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
K
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
Hi Jim,

You have introduced the term "rehabilitation" into the discussion and I wonder if this has the same meaning (to you) as "refurbishment" (to me)? I am adding this to the list.

"Refurbishment" is a term used mainly by commercial property developers when they take on existing office blocks or old warehouses and modernise same for commercial gain not necessarily taking great care to conserve all features of a building.

I watched a TV programme last night about how a Hugenot church built in brick lane in London was first transformed into a Jewish Synagogue and then later converted into a Muslim Mosque. In the latter change of use all of the ornate Jewish internal woodwork including seats, panelling and dividers was ripped out and junked because Muslims have no need for this in their places of worship. Was this a case of Refurbishment, Rehabilitation or demolition ?

I agree with your point about buildings being best preserved by poor people simply because they don't have loads of money with which they can indulge their flights of fancy. When I was undertaking research for my dissertation I examined about 90 vernacular mainly timber framed houses and both quantified and catagorised changes that had been made over the past 117 years. In nearly all cases the biggest changes made were driven by an excess of available money. One does have to recognise that this form of preservation does carry with it a higher risk of incurring delapidation in the medium to longer term.

The list now reads :-

Conservation, Preservation, Restoration, Refurbishment, Rehabilitation, Maintenance, Repair, Fix, Replacement, Delapidate, Demolish, Salvage, Reconstruction, Replicataton, Reuse, Conversion (Adaptive Reuse), Change, Alter.

Regards

Ken Hume


Looking back to see the way ahead !
Re: What's in a word [Re: Ken Hume] #21339 10/13/09 10:04 AM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 306
C
Cecile en Don Wa Offline
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 306
So, Ken, Hello,
if it is a salvage job then, why is it not a fix or restoration? Because I took it out of context?
Then I would say the window was in a wall with rotted and weakened framing etc...- mortice & tenon work (visible in the second half of image clip) - which I also re-did - (was it restored?) which is part of the barn which I am also trying to, preserve. Or have I got it all wrong?
I would like to know what I'm doing, actually, now that you've got me thinking.
Don W

Re: What's in a word [Re: Cecile en Don Wa] #21341 10/13/09 01:04 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 918
B
bmike Offline
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 918
Ken -

Any chance we can get your list in a more degenerating order (within quibbling distance, at least) maybe something like this (with some editing):

Conservation, Preservation, Restoration, Refurbishment, Rehabilitation, Reconstruction, Replicataton, Reuse, Conversion (Adaptive Reuse), Change, Alter, Repair and Maintain(ence), Salvage, Replacement, Demolish.

To me, repair and maintain should probably not be in the list... as most buildings need TLC through normal use this would fit into conservation / good use / preservation - so unless we are talking about wholesale changes (which fit into reconstruction or rehabilitation) I think repair and maintain(ence) are just parts of the everyday life of a building (replacing broken panes of glass, touching up plaster, tuck pointing, etc... and the Japanese might argue that replacements of certain post bottoms and other wood components are just part of 'maintain'...)


Mike Beganyi Design and Consulting, LLC.
www.mikebeganyi.com
Re: What's in a word [Re: bmike] #21342 10/13/09 02:08 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 306
C
Cecile en Don Wa Offline
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 306
Hi,
to me this sounds like imposing subjective values on what to now has been approached somewhat objectively. The implication is that conservation, for example, is superior to than say, fixing. If that is so, how and why? If anything, categorize alphabetically or chronologically.
I also question the relevance of the Japanese example. I believe they take apart and then rebuilt particular temples or structures, over regular time-spans of for example 25 or 200 years or something I don't know. Like I said though I think this is a very different topic containing elements of Zen Buddhism.

Re: What's in a word [Re: Cecile en Don Wa] #21345 10/13/09 03:18 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 918
B
bmike Offline
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 918
Originally Posted By: Cecile en Don Wa
Hi,
to me this sounds like imposing subjective values on what to now has been approached somewhat objectively. The implication is that conservation, for example, is superior to than say, fixing. If that is so, how and why? If anything, categorize alphabetically or chronologically.
I also question the relevance of the Japanese example. I believe they take apart and then rebuilt particular temples or structures, over regular time-spans of for example 25 or 200 years or something I don't know. Like I said though I think this is a very different topic containing elements of Zen Buddhism.


OK, so forget about the Japanese reference. I was interested in how more than just our anglo referenced minds might look at that list.

How has this been objective? Isn't language by its nature subjective? The only way to have this work objectively would be to have a formula for applying each term: (but then we could say the formula's were being subjective or politicized or partisan)

Quote:
IF Building A has 75% of its original roof and / or 100% of its original foundation + 80% of glazing intact - the addition and car port put on by the Brady's in the '70s + 10 of 12 daisy wheels and maker's marks + hewn floor joists THEN the building qualifies for conservation IF the client has 60% deposit in cash with bank financing for the balance. OR call in the salvage crew.


And I think that to some extent there is a value issue that should be reinforced. In a world with dwindling resources, dwindling piles of money to throw around at projects (old and new), and environmental resource issues due to over consumption of our consumer economy... doesn't it make more sense to conserve and reuse than to tear down, demolish, and rebuild? To me a continuum of best practices would have that list be in a somewhat hierarchical line.

Or, perhaps there needs to be 2-3 different lists... depending on one's world view, trade, social outlook, etc... If you run a salvage company every older out of plumb building might start to look like $$, and if you run a conservation / restoration business every out of plumb building looks like an opportunity to get in there and make some $$ getting it back to its former glory... and if you like smashing things - every out of plumb building looks like an opportunity to bring in the wrecking ball and dumpsters.

Last edited by bmike; 10/13/09 03:23 PM.

Mike Beganyi Design and Consulting, LLC.
www.mikebeganyi.com
Re: What's in a word [Re: bmike] #21349 10/13/09 10:33 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 306
C
Cecile en Don Wa Offline
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 306
I just wonder- doubt really - if, lets say a Zen monk, or even someone steeped in a truly non-anglo mind-set, would be considering the concept of preservation and the rest of it. What we chat about here is by it's nature, I fear a relatively recent, probably almost exclusively, mid/central European thing. Not to say that they don't do it in Asia at this time.
And it's just got me thinking, on a personal level understand, am I bothered or would I be bothered if someone labeled my work - on this barn, for example - as a salvage job? Or someone said I'm fixin' it up not restoring it. And here is where it gets a bit Eastern now, but my first reaction would be or was, rooted in my ego. Now I am not discounting the distinctions. I find them critical and very important in that being clear headed at this level will influence the many large and small decisions ahead, decisions with short and long term consequences impacting those things written of up there- resources and money and the environment and all that. But in the end, to me I am every bit as happy repairing something as I would be restoring something. Yanagi writes of the utilitarian tea bowls made in their thousands by Korean - what's the English word now- pot bakers, you know, someone who makes cups and plates and vases with clay on a wheel... anyway, can't think o' the word, but these Koreans- slaves they were- made these things constantly, non-stop, never looking up from the potting wheel, they slapped glaze on unevenly or whatever and stacked them on top of each other in ovens. But the bowls they made are the models or the inspiration for potters - that's it, potters!- now, who get the highest prices for their tea bowls.
Makes me think of the hand hewn rail road ties mentioned in another place on this web site. Would this not be the height of achievement for any timber framer around here these days? So if you say that what I'm doing is a-fixin' that barn door, that makes me think of ol' gramps and the grandpa of gramps maybe and what their relationship is to that one over there trying to figure out if that nick on a post was done with an ax head or an adze and how high that post was propped up at the time. Yeah it is all pretty subjective.
Can I just add this, that the floor of my barn is clay in no small part due to the parsimoniousness of the old man who lived here up until he died a few years ago. And this floor is a pain. It's pitted and uneven, I've got to keep the rabbits off it or they dig it up, and on humid Fall days, it is as slippery as an ice rink and all the neighbors say, "you gotta throw dawn a slab of cement over that" by which they mean hire someone to came and do that. I hate cement though and have recently switched to lime- from limestone or seashells it doesn't matter, but it is beautiful, that floor, you don't see many like it either.

Don Wagstaff

Last edited by Cecile en Don Wa; 10/13/09 10:34 PM.
Re: What's in a word [Re: Cecile en Don Wa] #21353 10/14/09 09:51 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
K
Ken Hume Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
K
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
Hi Mike & Don,

I'm afraid that you have both lost me just a bit.

In the first instance I am simply trying to establish what we mean by the various words that tend to be used in the field of historic buildings. I agree that when "we" manage to assemble a list of words that are typically employed and we agree meanings and understandings for those words then we can most probably reorder these words into a more logical framework if indeed that helps.

Re "Maintainence" :- It is a reality (in Europe) that most historic buildings are now covered by some form of protective legislation and this tends to exclude maintenance. So, it might be important to understand where maintenance finishes and repair takes over.

Regards

Ken Hume

Last edited by Ken Hume; 10/14/09 09:52 AM.

Looking back to see the way ahead !
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  Jim Rogers, mdfinc 

Newest Members
HFT, Wrongthinker, kaymaxi, RLTJohn, fendrishi
5134 Registered Users
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3
(Release build 20190728)
PHP: 5.4.45 Page Time: 0.108s Queries: 16 (0.057s) Memory: 3.2291 MB (Peak: 3.3982 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-29 14:17:17 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS