Bruce:

> How about we all agree to hang Bill in effigy and return to the
> battlefield of preservation.
>
Done.

----------
Bruce, since you are asking the question, there are definitions you need
to add in some places in order to get better responses.
----------
> trying hard to elaborate for myself  some philosophy and some
> rules of engagement that I can use as guidance when I am
> "on the ground",
>
This is part of what I would hope the PTN would deal with, in trying to
set up a Code of Practice. The first draft of the Code of Practice is
currently part of the first draft of the proposed Frederick Charter. As
the Code of Practice is written now, it really is dealing with the issue
of competency levels of one's skills. I would hope that skill would be
balanced with reason (guidelines).

Too many times the processes used and the outcome of a project is based
on the skills we possess going into the project rather than the outcome
being the result of a more thorough reasoning process. For the quick
process, we all fall back on the skills we are most comfortable with in
our day-to-day work lives This is true for everyone from the pawn to the
king/queen. If it is the efficiency of the outcome that controls the
ultimate project (short term results and cash flow) then the question of
philosophy and guidelines is very important because less long term
reasoning and planning will be involved. Guidelines are also important
on projects that have the luxury of time and study, such as a house
museum. However, it is surprising how many historic sites and house
museums use the efficiency of a process to be the controlling factor. So
the issues of guidelines and decision-tree processes is a great topic.

> What is the relationship of preservation to restoration?

I offer a first pass at, ten words or less, definitions of what I
perceive to be the five levels of preservation.

        - Stablization: to stablize and maintain
        - Conservation: to stablize and repair
        - Restoration:  to return to a previous condition
        - Renovation:   to fix up and change for new use (Remodeling)
        - Reconstruction: to build new to some level of artifical old

Big problem with definitions is what is the context they are being used
in. (And who sets the definition?) At the IPTW we found that in the
presentation by Steve Thomas of 'This Old House', he used these same
words but from a, none specific, mass culture, remodeling view point. To
many at the Workshop, his use of these words did not fit the proper
definition as understood from those that take the preservation of
historic fabric seriously. His use of words and desired outcomes on
projects were very different that saving historic fabric.

> Can a structure or community be considered "preserved"
> if it's future is safeguarded without regard to its intentional
> history?

...Need clarification on 'intentional history'?

> motives: historical, cultural and aesthetic . . .
> can a project of preservation be said to be successful
> if the material fabric is retained for one of the
> three motives mentioned above but out of a context
> that includes the other two.
>

Can we get ten words or less definitions of historical, cultural and
aesthetic as they relate to your question.

> is it possible to establish a guideline so that the argument and
> methodology to preserve a structure or community would consider
> the project contextually and work from there to the possible.

Let's see where it goes. Can you give an example of a project, real or
not, and use this to help define 'consider the project contextually'.

> the approach has been entirely situational and lacking a cohesive
> philosophy.

Cohesive philosophy? There may be one if you consider a growing
awareness of the importance of past and past things as it. If meaning a
cohesive philosophy as how to achieve and why?, then not really unless
so how the Secretary of the Interior Standards are that. I'm not sure if
that really qualifies.

> these guidelines do seem to exist and in dealing with clients I,
> and those I work with, habitually take as the starting point the
> possibility that the object or structure could be returned to its
> state at a particular point in its history.

What are the guidelines you and your associates work from? I assume you
mean guidelines as unwritten but common effort of approaching a project.

........
First pass
--
Bryan