Eis o resumo da conversa com o Professor Richard Wolbers, orientador da III Masterclass 20|21 – “Cleaning Paintings” – entre 28 de Junho a 2 de Julho de 2010.
1. How did you start in the restoration area?
It happened quite by chance (1977). My wife was in graduate school in architecture and decided to specialize in preservation architecture (mostly for what we would now consider ‘green’ reasons). I had degrees in biochemistry and fine arts … but really hadn’t put the two together. It was at a social gathering at her graduate school that someone suggested that with degrees in both art and science, I could do the equivalent, that is, do art conservation and combine the two separate interests into one. One thing led to another (I found a regional conservation center in Denver where we were living at the time, and did volunteer work there; liked it; and applied to one on the graduate training programs in the US, and by 1980 was on my way). I have my ‘earliest’ mentor to thank in this regard: Carl Grimm, who is now the chief conservator at the DeYoung museum in San Francisco.
2. Do you still do restoration? Why?
My original training was in easel painting conservation. For years I worked on essentially studio sized paintings. But I teach in a University degree program that is jointly sponsored by a museum (Winterthur) and the University of Delaware. Winterthur is essentially an American decorative arts museum, and as such, I was often been called upon to consult and work on painted objects as well as do work on the paintings in the collection. Winterthur is a historic house museum as well (that belonged to the DuPont family) and contains architecturally significant room installations from other historic American homes. This ‘cross-over’ naturally led me to work with historic finishes in other house museums as well. I consider myself a ‘decorative finish’ conservator, and primarily do conservation work in historic houses on painted and decorative surfaces, but have now broadened my interests a bit to include building materials as well.
I still do conservation work because I enjoy the practical aspects of working with cultural materials, and the challenges their preservation and restoration pose.
3. As a researcher, what do you like the most doing? Why?
I’m currently working on a PhD; the dissertation essentially is centered on the cleaning and preservation of modern acrylic dispersion (water-borne) paints. In my heart, I’m still a paintings conservator, still interested in paintings, and paintings problems. Modern acrylic films are so complex, so intimately tied to the industrial chemistry that made them possible, and so inherently unstable, the you might say they represent the ‘ultimate’ challenge in terms of research, and push our need for new and better
conservation ‘tools’ to the extreme. I’m also an engineer or ‘applied scientist’ at heart: I love being at the interface between art and science.
4. What was the last technical breakthrough that you attained? What is the one you are working on right now?
I wouldn’t call it a ‘break through’… more of a ‘revelation’ really. It was the notion that we could replace many of the solvent-based methods employed in painting conservation with water-based materials. Really, that’s been a theme in industrial chemistry for decades, and I merely followed the lead of other related technologies. I actually found it exhilarating to go into other fields like paint, coatings, food, cosmetic or pharmaceutical chemistry and look at how they were developing and using materials, and found that many materials and processes could be brought back easily into fine art conservation and be adapted to our needs.
My current interest is in cold plasma modification of surfaces; I’m interested in modifying materials to better effect their preservation both aesthetically and physically. Again, I’m just following the ‘engineering’ leads from other allied fields, and adapting them to my needs. I’m pretty sure that painting conservation in the 21stcentury will be more than coating, cleaning, structural repair, and restoration. It will involve more ’active’ interventions or engineering of materials in ways we have yet begun to explore.
5. To what extent is it possible to practice what you teach in a private studio?
Hopefully, most if not all. The chemistry/theory is difficult of course, as it is for most of us. And the whole idea of using water to replace solvents represents a paradigm shift in conservation. But I’ve generally tried to present materials and methods that could be done on a ‘hand’ scale or with ‘hand’ preparation methods. And generally I only present those materials that I’ve actually used in a treatment myself. The case histories are all drawn from real experiences. I also am adamant about the structure to workshops; they always include theory alongside practical sessions, to help facilitate theory into practice.
6. What did you think of Porto’s Masterclass?
I thought it was great…but what made it great was the enthusiasm of my hosts at 20|21. I’m so very impressed with their level of professionalism, experience, and skill. It was a pleasure to be in Porto and have a chance to do another ‘concerted’ workshop.
