Conservation of South Asian household shrines
The Conservation of South Asian household shrines is an activity dedicated to the preservation of household shrines from South Asia. When applied to cultural heritage, held by either museums or private collectors, this activity is generally undertaken by a conservator-restorer. South Asian shrines held in museum collections around the world are principally shrines relate to Hindu, Jain, or Buddhist households. Due to their original use and sacred nature, these shrines present unique conservation and restoration challenges for those tasked with their care.
Treatment[edit]
Research[edit]
Due to the religious nature of household shrines, in addition to determining the extent of the damage, conservation professionals advocate researching the spiritual nature of the shrine before restoration work begins. A recommended starting point is to ask why something is being conserved.[13] There are multiple approaches to conservation and restoration, and this initial question is a preferred guideline for deciding which approach to take. There are two possible approaches to restoration of household religious objects: materials-based and values-based.[14] Materials-based restoration refers simply to fixing what is broken: the materials are damaged, so they will be fixed.[14] Values-based restoration is concerned with preserving the "intangible" qualities of an object—in this case, its religious properties.[14] This approach involves not removing evidence of use on the object as long as it is not contributing to its deterioration.[14] Values-based is the approach most often argued for, but it is noted that a combination of the two types is frequently the most appropriate.[14]
Wood restoration[edit]
Wood restoration can be an invasive process: to repair warping, for example, shallow cuts are often made in the surface of the wood to allow it to be pulled back into its original position and secured in place.[10] Cracks can be filled with adhesive to both disguise them and prevent them from expanding,[10] while holes or missing pieces are typically patched with replica parts.[8] Wood that has been bleached may be re-stained or inpainted to match the undamaged areas.[10]
Paint restoration[edit]
Loosened or flaking paint can be consolidated by injecting it with adhesive.[6] Scratches can be inpainted,[15] or repainted to reduce their appearance. Painted surfaces may be carefully cleaned with solvents to ensure that only the grime is removed and not the paint layer underneath.[6][9] Lacquer that has delaminated from the paint layer may be glued back into place.[10]
Ethics[edit]
Conflicting ideals[edit]
Conservation and museum display of religious objects, like household shrines, represents two ideologies in conflict. Museums are secular spaces, and restoration is secular work, but family shrines are sacred.[16] The education and aesthetic-focused missions of museums and conservators are inherently at odds with the religious, family, and social functions of household altars.[17] Restoring a shrine for museum display and putting it on exhibit affects its function: it becomes art to those outside its subject religion,[16] but to adherents it can retain its status as an object of veneration even after being removed from its original context.[18]
In addition to these differing principles that affect how a shrine is perceived, religious communities may have restrictions on what actions are appropriate for storage, restoration, and exhibition.[12][18][19] For example, Buddhist writings and inscriptions show evidence of ongoing upkeep on ancient shrines and temples, indicating a prescription within the faith to maintain holy objects.[20] Similarly, Jainic texts indicate that building a new shrine gives karmic reward, but a larger karmic reward is given for restoring an old shrine.[6] Hinduism, by contrast, commands that shrines and statues be worthy receptacles for the gods: if they become damaged, some Hindu groups believe, they should be ritually destroyed and replaced.[3] Buddhism, Jainism, and Hinduism not only vary from each other in their approaches to restoration, but groups and individuals within the religions may differ as well. As such, ethical standards state that the conservation methods undertaken for one object should not be applied to another, however similar, without consultation with the source religious community.[19]
Case studies[edit]
Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art[edit]
The Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art spent more than a year restoring a Jain household shrine that had been in storage for over 70 years.[6] Analysis of the shrine revealed two paint layers underneath the surface dirt: the original layer from the 16th century, and a later coating from the 1800s.[6] The decision was made by the conservators to remove only the surface grime and not attempt to remove the later paint layer: Jainism gives greater spiritual reward for restoring an old shrine than building a new one, so the conservators opted not to undo the spiritual work of the individual(s) who did the 1800s repainting.[6] The shrine has been on display in the Nelson-Atkins Asian Art gallery since 2014.[6]
Philadelphia Museum of Art[edit]
The Philadelphia Museum of Art acquired a one-hundred-year-old Tibetan home altar in 2004.[5] At the time of acquisition, soot and oil from incense and lamp burning had built up on the surface.[5] Consulting with Tibetan Buddhist sources revealed that such surface grime, though a direct result of ritual, is not in and of itself religiously significant and thus was safe to remove.[5] The altar is on display in the museum’s Asian Art gallery.[5]
Newark Museum[edit]
The Newark Museum is also in possession of a Tibetan Buddhist altar; however, this one was built for the museum after the ritual destruction of a shrine dating from 1935.[23] That shrine had also been built as a display piece for the museum and was never consecrated, but the presence of Tibetan ritual objects surrounding it had, in the opinion of religious representatives, sanctified the altar nonetheless.[16] When the decision was made to replace it, a deconsecration ceremony was held by a Buddhist official, and the shrine was dismantled.[16] The new shrine was designed and built by a Tibetan artist.[23]