Congruence between Additions and Subtractions in the Restoration of Ruins
A dominant theme in the restoration of ruins would appear to be the antimony of preservation–reconstruction, though this contradiction proves only apparent, seeing that reconstruction often turns out
to be an indispensable element in the safeguarding of a constructed work. It goes without saying that a ruin, viewed in its current condition as a fragment, must be considered ‘something else’ (on a par with a
‘new’ work), precisely on account of the formal interruption that has occurred; but it is equally true that the
underlying reason for materially rebuilding the work is not to reprise an historical or figurative reality, but
rather to set in motion a process of interpretation and revelation, all the while avoiding the temptation to
engage in a form of retroactive reconstruction, even if such a process is cast in philological terms.
It follows that present-day efforts, under which operative criticism and analysis are transformed into design
initiatives, are not rendered explicit through the resumption of an existing idiom, but rather as part of a
syntactic reformulation and rebuilding which results in an exercise involving both additions and subtractions.
