ブックタイトル「近代の文化遺産の保存理念と修復理念」英語版

概要

「近代の文化遺産の保存理念と修復理念」英語版

25industrial heritage properties effective forunderstanding the conditions under whichthey reside. In this way, the significance ofindustrial heritage properties can be studiedfrom a wider viewpoint to release it from thetraditional judgment of the academia, enablinginnovative views on significance and values tobe discovered.but having analyzed the issue, we soon foundout that even in international organizations,the idea of industrial heritage was still underdiscussion and had not yet been established.Therefore, the working group concluded in theirreport that under the present circumstances,it would be very difficult to extract principlesregarding their preservation and restoration.However, as I write this paper, I have come tobelieve that perhaps we would be able to derivea proposal using the Dublin Principles as abasis.　With the passage of time, ideas on industrialheritage have developed into a comprehensiverule. In other words, the entire world related tolife and industry is now a subject of industrialheritage and this encompasses the naturalenvironment as well as the outer space. Itcan be said that by trying to understandand grasp industrial heritage entirely, thetarget may become dispersed. This may be anappropriate way of understanding the ideaof industrial heritage as a whole, but it maylead to difficulties when trying to focus on acertain subject. Generally speaking, all subjectsare connected to the society and the naturalenvironment. All commissioners involved inestablishing the principle need to be well awareof this fact.　Thus, I have come up with the followingconclusion, that is to comprehend the DublinPrinciple as stating that when an industrialheritage property is raised as a subject forstudies, it is necessary to analyze its significanceindividually and specifically from all possibleviewpoints including those mentioned above.Here, the Dublin Principle was taken not asa definite “ruling concept” which determinesthe area and details of industrial heritage tobe included, but as a “rule for acknowledging”2. From the Point of View of Differences inWorks of Architecture, Civil Engineering,and Industrial HeritageIdeas in preservation and restoration ofindustrial heritage will be studied throughthe differences in works of architecture, civilengineering, and industrial heritage. In order tokeep the argument simple, properties that lieon the border of each of these categories willnot be dealt with here.　First, there is the expression of “ken-zo-butsu”or structures. The Japanese word is composedof the letters of ken [ 建] meaning building andzo [ 造] meaning structure. In the world of civilengineering prior to the Second World War,“commodity, firmness and delight” was valuedin designing structures and this was called the“trinity of commodity, firmness and delight” 5).Commodity is function, firmness is durability,and delight is beauty; these three elements wereconsidered to be essentials for a fine structure.　Employing these standards of commodity,firmness, and delight, an additional standardrelated to the structure as a system or a networkwill be adopted to consider the conceptualdifferences in architectural heritage and thoseof civil engineering and industrial heritage(Chart 1).　In architecture, structural elements arecomposed of columns and beams. In creating a