At 10:04 AM 7/23/98 EDT, Christopher Gray wrote, in part:
>I can't finger it yet (big thoughts required here) but the impulse to
>preserve, even by the most sincerely motivated, low budget homeowner, is
>very frequently marked by the desire to leave a stamp on something - like
>adding vinyl siding or, even, demolishing something.
>
>Christopher Gray
>Office for Metropolitan History
>
All preservation activity, or any interaction with a structure, will always
bear the stamp of its time, from construction technology and method of work
to final design, UNLESS a conscious effort is made to ignore the new in
favor of the old (I know of some restoration contractors that won't use
electric tools...period...because "restoration" to them is partially a
process of construction in addition to the final product itself.  I always
wonder how they find clients willing to pay for them to bucksaw wood....)

Shifting impressions of what constituted "proper" preservation date back to
Violette Le Duc (spelling?) ... I am often asked (in public forum) why we
need all these rules, design standards, codes etc. to restore and
rehabilitate vernacular buildings the were erected without any oversight
whatsover (and which we now seem to believe are worth saving....)  I know
what I answer but I'm curious if anyone else gets the question....

Philosophically (and just to be difficult) what is the essential difference
between adding electricity to a historic building to make it more habitable
and replacing original horizontal board siding with vinyl?

George Kramer, M.S.
Historic Preservation Consultant
Ashland, Oregon