Memory and Identity: the conservation and the management of cultural and architectural heritage

At the core of this theme is the question about what we maintain from the past and how. Our approach to the past implies historic differentiation and conscious selection. Those elements of the past, which become heritage, are the result of our choices in the present. Not every historical record becomes heritage because it may not fit into the specific need of contemporaneity. However, the present is constantly changing, which consequently affects our management of the past and of heritage. Moreover, when we select items from the past and grant them the possibility of becoming heritage, we exclude and forget other items, which are thus doomed to disappear from the specific historic narrative we are creating for ourselves. Heritage, as a (visual) realization of memory, is thus tightly linked to the idea of canon (see Graham, Howard 2008: 6). The construction of memory by selection and exclusion of unwanted elements is a key moment in the formation and establishment of identity. By turning into identity, the past offers validation and legitimation to the present, contributing to the strengthening of the national discourse in its relationship to surrounding cultures and states. The intricate dynamics of national identification and preservation of international history in the approach to heritage is also extremely significant in this regard. These complex issues are extremely complicated in the case of Central and Eastern Europe, where different peoples, nations, languages, narratives and memories have coexisted through the centuries. How are different categories of citizens involved in discussions regarding the preservation of heritage? What is the general degree of social awareness in handling with heritage? Is it possible to speak about management of Cultural Heritage and Architectural Heritage at the several levels of society and institutions involved in their safeguard? As to the different manners concerning preservation of heritage, the discussion should focus on the distinction between a stylistic and a historic approach; on the development of the management of Cultural and Architectural Heritage and its implications with the educational approach.