For graduate conservator Dr. Paul-Bernhard Eipper, perseverance is stagnation. The head of the conservation department at the Universal Museum Joanneum in Graz reflects on competition, envy and fear It is well known that there are many things in conservation and restoration, including many that do not belong there. And so I would like to take envy, for example. Because it is ubiquitous, in […]
For graduate restorer Dr. Paul-Bernhard Eipper, perseverance is stagnation. The head of the restoration department at the Universal Museum Joanneum in Graz reflects on competition, envy and fear
As we all know, there are many things in conservation and restoration, including many that don’t belong there. And so I would like to take envy, for example. Because it is ubiquitous, in all faculties, all too abundant. It is as useless as a crop, yet the whole world seems to indulge in it. Somehow it can’t be dealt with, and so I ask myself where it actually comes from, this useless reflex, and where it is located: In the spinal cord? In the cerebellum? As quickly as it is triggered, it is unlikely to be localized in the cerebrum. Perhaps it is even a virus, a treacherous parasite? Why is there no cure for it, why is nobody doing anything about it when everyone suffers from its consequences? Why is it so difficult to share in the joy of progress, to be grateful for it and to support it? Envy is not a basis for constructive dialog, envy does not generate further development.
The heralds of the new wake us up, disturb our comfortable, peaceful existence, they startle us. Why do they do this? A little more zeal and commitment to the cause is quickly perceived as ambition – and this has a negative connotation. If one person sets higher standards, this inevitably pushes others to work harder: they are forced to leave their comfort zone, in which they have settled so nicely. It seems to some that the ambitious ones want to make them appear smaller and outshine them: Perhaps they want to show that others are less capable, less up-to-date, less important. They hide their pomposity behind the communication of new knowledge and want to be supported and applauded. And that should not happen. But wait: why doesn’t anyone stop us in this spiral? Why have we actually become the way we are? And where did we learn this?
Vigor and emotion, too much energy and commitment trigger mistrust. We react like a pushy salesperson: we don’t like it and reject the offer. Overachievers are suspicious. That’s why we tend to inhibit rather than encourage them. Not everyone is enthusiastic and you don’t want to be put under pressure. But if we are not passionate about our work, we will not enjoy what we do. However, if we have decided of our own free will not to do something, we should not blame others who do something different or more than we do.
Why some things take longer
What I want to say: We are all in development, things need to move forward, we need impetus and we need to go with it. The country-specific, self-referential model has had its day. Inertia is stagnation. In other faculties – such as medicine – it would be unthinkable not to keep your knowledge up to date and not to continue your education – even outside of working hours. But why don’t we like anything new? We have also questioned life in mud huts and gathering around the fire. It’s strange: even if everyone agrees that something needs to be changed: It usually doesn’t happen at first. If there is agreement, we think: Be careful, there must be something behind it! That’s why nothing happens and everything stays as it was. If someone wants something or wants to push something through, we believe that they actually want something else or are acting for different reasons than they say. This is why necessary projects are not supported and consequently some things take longer than others.
Complaining alone is not enough
It is only afterwards, when you realize that the obstructionists and obstructionists have wasted 20 or 30 years, that the lamentation is great. And then there’s plenty of reason to complain again, which is of course as useless as it is superfluous and not very positive – but ultimately, unfortunately, it’s also part of our social convention. But if we carry on like this, no one will be surprised that many things take longer here than elsewhere. No, we can’t afford to be defiant. Complaining about the situation together may be a questionable way to join forces, but it’s no way to solve problems. However, naming and addressing issues directly does not necessarily have to restrict your own scope for action, but is the basis for mobilizing people to develop new approaches.
In this context, “live-and-let-live” – an anarchic model in principle – mainly applies to yourself: You give an outward nod to the existing and outdated and live the way you want to in your private sphere. You don’t tolerate any interference here. Every revolutionary effort is therefore exhausted in the comfort zone. Our specific history and upbringing affect us all. Change has a bad reputation per se. A backward climate, however, hinders free thinking, which is inherently suspect to those who are in love with tradition. As suspicion puts the brakes on things, we sometimes import the necessary technical progress, but not an attitude that encourages development. Sometimes you travel in the slipstream of others, lacking the strength to change things in the existing system yourself. Unfortunately, this behavior usually goes hand in hand with a lack of gratitude and an inhibition to apologize even when the occasion arises – as this is usually seen as an admission of guilt. Why are many people so unwilling to engage in discussion and sometimes so humorless? Do we always have to be right? Does it mean a loss of power if you don’t assert yourself?
Progress is made by colleagues who communicate, speak out and publish
If we don’t want to or can’t do something ourselves and others do it for us, then we should be grateful for it and not hold them back, but be happy to support them. It should not be our aim not to support necessary measures because others might applaud them and not ourselves.
With a little enthusiasm, we all have the opportunity in our system to further our education: apprenticeships, internships, studies, doctorates, habilitations. If we arrive at attitudes based on our practical experience, arrive at convictions based on our knowledge, not only apply procedures but also develop them, that’s a good thing. After all, we don’t carry our heads around just to cut our hair or just because we hold a position with them. But why aren’t those who have consciously decided not to do this, i.e. who don’t share their experiences, simply happy that others do?
That’s right: envy is often behind it. Quite normal human envy. Someone has something, can do something, does something that I can’t, don’t want to or am simply too comfortable to do. No one can force you to applaud or say thank you. Those who stand out seem to need to make a name for themselves, they are careerists, profile neurotics, ramp sows. But why shouldn’t it just be about the cause for once?
How does further development come about?
Unfortunately, without those colleagues who communicate, present and publish – even in restoration – nothing would move forward. We would cultivate our secret recipes as in the old days and at most pass on something to colleagues we know. If we had believed and retained everything we had learned in practical courses and studies, many things would not have developed any further and would have remained at the level of knowledge at that time. If we were in love with tradition, many things would remain as they are. So if someone suddenly does something differently than they used to because of insights they have gained, this is not an admission of guilt that they did something wrong in the past, no, they have developed further based on their thoughts and experiences. This is also not a reproach to those who have held on to the traditional, even if they like to see it that way. We all continue to develop in our lives – at least we should, especially with all our opportunities.
So I would like to ask us all to use our inner brakes whenever we feel envy coming on. Let us outwit and trick our cerebellum. It is the most useless reflex we have, it makes us small and narrow, it hinders us in our generosity, in our desire to flow, in our will to do good, in our joy in preserving cultural assets: we don’t need it – in any faculty concerned with the preservation of art – and in restoration last of all. We are not in competition: we want to exchange ideas openly in a constructive dialog.
