00:10
My second takeaway is that it's not that groundbreaking actually because I knew this
already going in, but it was just a confirmation that this field is very Eurocentric or Western
centric field. And that's to do, I think it's more to do with the funding structures of the
type of research that we do than any sort of racism or sort of historical white supremacy
type thing. Although one could definitely go into that interpretation as well.
That it exists as a result of white sort of like top being. Yeah, white supremacy.
The supremacy level there is obviously related to the systems that you were talking about that
give the money. There's a line there, right? There's a line there and it's not one-to-one,
but there is a line there. And I knew this because the system of museum sort of started
in Germany, right? It started in Europe. The idea of making art public, that started in Europe.
And the idea of sort of institutionalizing museum subsequently therefore happened in Europe.
And institutional structure and scientific structure kind of goes hand in hand. Science
loves institutions and that's a topic for another day. But whether it's good or not,
I think it's a fact, right? Academia is an institution and there's no denying of that.
No, I mean if we start on institutions, one, I'm definitely going to want to prepare for that talk.
But two, there's a lot there to talk about. There's a lot, exactly. But I'm just saying
this whole system favors sort of Western structures, like hierarchical and institutional
structures of the Western norm. So it makes sense. I knew that going in, that a lot of the
major players are in Europe and in America, I guess, and in the US. I was one of maybe a handful
of people who were representing non-Western institutions, like non-Western museums or
03:04
associations. And I was the only person who was representing contemporary art institution.
Everyone else was in cultural heritage. When they say heritage,
it means a certain level of oldness. Yes, got it. Heritage, certain level of oldness.
Yes. And this is also a huge misconception too in this field, because people automatically think
old things need preserving. And that's true, but it doesn't mean that the new artwork doesn't
require conservation. Just because it was made 10 years ago, even five years ago, contemporary art,
unlike artists of, let's say, 15th, 16th centuries, who had very limited type of material,
limited palettes, and are extensively studied. Because people love Rembrandt, people love
Vermeer, people love Rubens, and a lot of people and government has put money into it.
So they know a lot about these masters, the old masters of Western art. But
just because it's lesser known artists of contemporary time, doesn't mean that the artist's
work is less valuable. We don't know yet. The whole reason we're doing this is because we
don't know what becomes valuable. All these old masters were at some point contemporary art,
and many of them were worthless in their lifetime, but become super, super valuable and important
cultural heritage cornerstone centuries after they died. So we don't know that yet, simply.
And also, because in contemporary art, a lot more materials are available to the artists,
they can use whatever, honestly, they can use all sorts of things that's not
like artist grade, you know, these are not even sometimes art materials.
One can, in theory, pick cigarette butts from the street and assemble them in a certain way and
call it an art. And who am I to say that it's going to be not valuable in like 200 years time, right?
Yeah, and that's probably somebody else's specialty to sort of, you know, investigate
such predictions. And if we don't preserve it well, now, it's certainly not going to last.
And in many cases, contemporary art needs special attention, because these are specifically not
from artist material, which are made to last, right? They are made and like the artist pigments,
06:07
artists paints, binding mediums, all of these things are made to last. So even after centuries
of time, they can be in a decent condition. But some of these are, you know, many of these
contemporary materials are not made to last. And that's why it's gonna, it needs more attention
sometimes. So I like really think it's really important that this field recognizes that. And I
was kind of surprised that I was pretty much the only person who came from any contemporary art
museum, which, again, shows a huge gap in a literature, right? Like the research effort
going into contemporary art material is so small, compared to the entire field of historical
materials. Yeah. And it's like an ongoing growing gap, right? Because yeah, it's gonna be an ongoing
thing. Yeah. Like contemporary is, as you were saying, is like the now plus or minus a little
bit of time, right? And then at some point, it becomes, quote unquote, heritage, you know, or
historical art. Yeah, yeah. And so there's always something so people are not watching it, I guess,
if those in the group of heritage art are awaiting new heritage art, then they will
catch up on to that if it survives. But that's, that's what you're pointing out is if it doesn't
survive, right, there's the preservation aspect, it will never make it to that point if it isn't
preserved, right? Yeah, yeah, exactly. And, and what complicates this whole thing is, in a way,
it's easier to assign what's, quote unquote, valuable from the old times, because I don't
know, if your artist was hired by the king, he, I'm saying he, because it was almost always a he,
but he was probably a big shot, he was probably important, he was probably one of the best
in the country or something, right? So it's pretty easy to spot like, who is the big guys in the
field? And in contemporary art, we just don't have the same structure, it's so much more flat
structure. And it's really up to individual collector or curators to fish out a few important
people out of this sea of artists. And, again, which means, which is all the more reason why
we should try and conserve, conserve as many of them, or at least be aware of how to do this.
So, so I thought that was kind of alarming. But also, I guess this part makes a little bit more
sense, because a lot of the imaging technique did come from European institutions. So it makes sense
that more people in this subsection of conservation science are from Europe. But
09:09
the few instances the Asian art did show up, or contemporary art, some sometimes Asian
cultural heritage also, like, you know, Chinese scrolls and stuff. They have, they have their own
very specific kind of difficulties in analyzing them. And they are heritage materials. Yeah,
it could use a little bit more PR.
If, if the intent is to preserve it, then a little bit more PR wouldn't hurt it to some degree,
right? This is, I think, touching into that tug of war between leaving it, right, allowing it to
exist in that space to continue, versus interfering. And I do use the word interfering,
I think, intentionally there, because the preservation can also be an act of change.
And yeah, that's, that's a big question there. But yeah, we should also be very aware of that,
right? Like, what does it do when outside influence, right, interact with cultural heritage
of not from that culture. And that's, I think, all the more reason why I want to see more
Asian art taken care of by Asian people and, and let the world know that that's what they're doing,
right? Kind of want to see that happen more. Having been in these kind of very
Western centric environment, I am dying to see people from their respective culture,
taking ownership, not just in a conservation, but in the research of those cultural heritage.
And, like, I never felt so strongly about it until this conference.
Okay, I would say that's definitely another that that takeaway then, right? I don't know
if it's smaller, it's, it's very important to be like, you know what?
Yeah, I mean, like, I don't know, I don't know what to do with it yet. Right? Like,
I just know it's like, oh, yeah. But
you're like, Hey, look, I see it. And I, I might have known it in the back of my brain.
But yeah, but I am aware, right, that now I see it in what's the technicolor, right,
going from black and white TV, to color TV, right? I see it. I see all of it now.
Yeah, like, I see it right in my face.
Yeah, yeah, it's there. So it waved at you and everything. So.
Yeah, yeah. So, wow.
Yeah, like, eventually, I want to do something about it, right? I want to be the agent that
12:01
does something about it. I don't know exactly how or when that's gonna happen. But I think
this is going to be I mean, if I were to stick to this field, I think this is going to be sort of
like the guiding. Okay. Directions. Yeah. For me. Yes, I understand that. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. So yeah, seeing some problematic things, seeing something encouraging as well. And,
you know, because every problem in a way is an opportunity for me to do something about it.
Right. So in a very optimistic way, I mean, I'm saying this as like a baby joining,
you know, newcomer to the field. And maybe like, ask me again in a few years time,
I could be super bitter. But, but for now, let's hope that doesn't happen.
Yeah, let's hope so too. Um, actually, that that leads me to another completely
off tangent thing. But we should just end this recap of conference.
Let's take it with a great conference, two takeaways, and you have like a direction
moving forward, right? That's, that's really powerful. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I think so.
Okay, that's it for the show today. Thanks for listening and find us on x at
Ego de Science. That is E I G O T E S C I E N C. See you next time.
