Announcement

**SCHUPO** · 05-25-2006, 08:59 AM

Gents,

A good and useful topic. What Bill says makes perfect sense to me. Let's try to put "repairing items" into context with "restoring" material culture artifacts.

Conservation is generally viewed as a conservative approach to dealing with material culture items in the museum setting. It simply means not repairing anything but trying to halt further damage. So, rust would not normally be removed but further rusting would be halted with various techniques. Moth damage would not be repaired but the cloth would be treated to halt insect infestation. Missing pins would not be put on badges and they would not be polished.

Restoration is generally viewed as a more proactive approach and does include repair. Rust would be removed, holes in tunics might be rewoven, improper insignia replaced, and broken pins repaired. There is often not a bright line when conservation becomes restoration but the two techniques are complementary.

Every collector must make their own decision on how to best protect and present the items they collect. There probably is not a right way or wrong way but I always try to err on the side of being conservative. One thing for certain is that folks should know the distinction between the two techniques. I think it is also important to reveal any restoration when selling an item.

George

**IMPERIAL QUEST** · 05-25-2006, 09:09 AM

IMO- Conservation, not replacement, repair or refurbish...

**CWP** · 05-25-2006, 10:43 AM

I agree with Steven 100 percent on this one. I would rather have something broken than something postwar collector restored.

**SCHUPO** · 05-25-2006, 01:32 PM

Here is a true "repair" scenario, which seems to fit the original question. I buy a wartime tunic and the sleeve lining has come loose at the shoulders. The original sleeve lining is still in the sleeves and attached at the cuffs but not at the armpits due to wear and damage occuring sometime between the time it was made and now. The rather fragile lining is being damaged from being pushed down to the cuffs and the sleeves are now unsightly and the cuffs are becoming damaged as well. What am I, as the current conservator/owner, of this damaged garment do?

I choose to re-sew the sleeve lining to the body lining at the shoulders and return it to its original condition. Is this any more, or less, than the original wartime owner would do if the tunic were still in service? Have I damaged the garment or am I halting further damage? Have I compromised the originality of the tunic or am I simply doing conservation/restoration? What if this is a General Assault Badge and I am re-soldering the original pin to the back of the badge? Different or the same?

George

**W.Unland** · 05-25-2006, 06:24 PM

Hello,

I know I should just stay out of this at this point but I just couldn't help myself. Again, I am limiting my observations to cloth, not badges, as I don't think I would ever attempt to repair a medal or badge. That said I just can't believe that the purists who shout NEVER to repair or alteration are really serious.

I recently bought some collar tabs, after I got them out into the sunlight I found they had been thrown together using a lime green synthetic thread. Under the purist arguement I must leave them "as is" and put them into the collection after having obviously been altered by some slime bag dealer to make them look better.

I chose to remove the litzen from the added backing and display them in as close to original condition as I could return them, ie, loose with no backing. Are you really suggesting that this should not be done?

I also recently purchased a Gendarmerie tunic from a German dealer where the eagle had obviously been added post war. The eagle had loose threads from its original application still hanging from it. Again, am I to leave this obviously added eagle on the tunic? I chose to remove it, and found the outline of the original eagle underneath. I replaced it with an original eagle of the same type as would have been originally applied, using period non-synthetic thread. I may be missing something here, but I don't see how this is wrong.

As I tried to suggest in my earlier post, 90% of cloth has been "played" with for 40+ years. Very, very little is in unaltered original condition anymore. Those of us who were around in the 60's and 70's remember the dealers sitting behind their tables at shows, removing and sewing insignia on tunics, and "creating" SS uniforms right before our eyes. There were no references back then, and just about anything was passed off as real. That's one reason I stayed with police. It was not "desirable", and people didn't mess with it so much. Obviously, if lucky enough to come across an unaltered piece I would never dream of touching it, but so much of this stuff is BO, returning it to as near to an original state as possible seems to me to be a valid option.

Once again, NOT "IMPROVING", just restoring. No officer "up grades", no change of branch, none of that BS, just returning to original condition.

Schupo's posts are much more erudite than mine, but I think we are of the same mind.

Regards,
William Unland

**Paul McKee** · 05-28-2006, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by SCHUPO

...the sleeves are now unsightly and the cuffs are becoming damaged as well. What am I, as the current conservator/owner, of this damaged garment do?

I choose to re-sew the sleeve lining to the body lining at the shoulders and return it to its original condition...

IMO, if the work is preventing further damage, then you are doing conservation in this instance.

Paul

Announcement

Pros and Cons of repairing items

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread