Exhibition Record Book

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

KUAC-C46/KeMCo Exh.3

（Tangite me）：

コロナ時 代 に 修 復 を考える

Tangite me :Reconsidering Conservation during the PandemicContents

068
069

006

009

Introduction

072

Sec.1 Exhibition
010
030
032

Exhibition Scenery
List of Works
Description of Works

077

Miho Kirishima
Wash, Polish and Admire the Sculptures.
Haptic Workshop

Sec.3 Symposium
079

Natsuyuki Nakanishi				Danshi so katarogu (General Catalogue of Males), 1963

Minato City Onarimon Junior High School “Art Club”
Keio Yochisha Elementary School “Fun with Art Club”

Report032

085

Isamu Noguchi and Yoshio Taniguchi
				
The Ex-Noguchi Room [A common room in the Second Faculty				
Building]
034

Junzaburo Nishiwaki
				Untitled

036

Ujihiro Okuma and Chokichi Suzuki
				Miniature Lighthouse, Gifted in Celebration of Fukuzawa
Yukichi’s 60th Birthday

038

Michisei Kono
				
Ashinoko Lake Scene, Hakone
045

Hisashi Suda
				
Ducks

046

Kozo Inoue				
Flower: Grand Swing

048

Enrico Isamu Oyama				
Keio Shiki Senior High School Mural

050

Keio Museum Commons

Eisaku Hasegawa
				
Injo

042

Keio University Art Center

040 Kaheiji Wada
				Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi

Sec.4 Essay
086

Yohko Watanabe
On Care, Conservation, and the Value of “Touch”

092

Shiho Hasegawa
Sedimenting Interpretations: the Layer of Conservation in the Lifeof an Artwork

099

Mayu Hashimoto
Art Appreciation and “Conservation”: Workshops with Children
Providing Clues

104

Nodoka Shimada
The University’s “Excavated Ancient Artifacts” 		
and “Inherited Ancient Artifacts”

111

Katsurako Yamada
Imitate to Copy: Thinking about Conservation by Making Art Education
at Keio University as a Clue

118

Yu Homma
On Opening Access to Conservation Documentation

125

Miho Kirishima
Conservation and Communication: Collection Care in Universities
and Schools

052 Shikai Kitamura
				The Maiden Tekona

Keiji Usami				
Eventually They All Come into a Circle No.1

056

Genichiro Inokuma
				Democracy

058

060

065

Visit the Conservators

Sec.2 Workshop
Report066

Mayu Hashimoto
Why Do We Keep It? How Do We Keep it?
Workshops Thinking about Conservation with Children

Acknowledgements:
We would like to thank the following persons and organisations for their assistance in providing information
connected to the works and the events presented in this publication. [Honorifics omitted]
Bronze Studio
Art Restoration Studio 21
Minato City Onarimon Junior High School
Keio Yochisha Elementary School
Keio Junior High School [Chutobu]
Fukuzawa Memorial Center for Modern JapaneseStudies, Keio University

Hirotake Kurokawa
Yuji Takahashi
Yasuaki Miyazaki
Nagisa Kawata
Shuhei Narita
Takashi Watabe
Yutaka Higano

Hiroshi Miura
Kazuo Kitamura
Shiro Iwata
Takeyuki TokuraIntroduction

Keio Museum Commons

When we try to understand conservation from the perspectiveof contact, the cooperation of conservators, who are the

Keio University Art Center

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic
was an exhibition designed to introduce the work ofconservation through Keio collections. Artworks in university
collections are often not recognised as works of art because
they are encountered within the context of daily academic life.
This brings with it the risk that they will not be conserved as
artworks, or worse, that they will be lost. The first step, then,is to make these works visible. In 2002, Keio founded Keio Art
Committee, which has been attempting to identify, care for,and disseminate information about artworks on campus, notonly through the university but also through the Keio schools.
This exhibition was also an opportunity to see the results ofthese activities.
So, how do we think about “conservation”? We cannot
do so without handling artworks. Normally, we appreciate
artworks by looking at them; keeping our distance fromthem. Any contact with the work is considered taboo. But forconservation, contact is essential.
Furthermore, we realised that we cannot overlook thefact that this exhibition takes place in the fall of 2021. With
the onset of COVID-19, contact has become something weavoid, and no-contact considered vital to the protectionof life. As avoidance of contact has become the norm, we
wondered whether if it was slowly being threatened, andwhether it therefore required careful reconsideration. We
felt that this was the time to consider conservation as an actof “touching” through an exhibition that allowed viewers to
confront artworks, and so we curated: Tangite me (Touch me):Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic.

ones engaged in the very act of “touching” is indispensable.
This exhibition would not have been possible without thetremendous help of conservators. Their shared view on thematter highlights a difficulty at the heart of conservation:“conservation practice involves contact; this both entails caring
for the work, and at the same time, we must acknowledge
that it also involves constant destruction”. The ambivalenceof “conservation” is inherent in both the healing and thedestructive nature of contact itself. The symposium and otherworkshops held as part of this exhibition have provided avaluable opportunity for participants to go beyond usual waysof discussing conservation, and to explore the fundamental
concept of conservation, as well as the role of preparation andjudgment in the act of conservation.
By choosing the theme of conservation and “touch” as key
to the workshops, we believe participants were led to a deeper
viewing experience beyond that of visual appreciation.
In order to organise this exhibition, we decided to compilea record book, which would not be an exhibition catalog
prepared in advance of the exhibition, but a record of thepractice of related events and essays based on the experience ofthe exhibition.
We hope that this book will encourage you to encounternew works of art from the perspective of “conservation” andprovide you with an opportunity to reconsider what it means
to “touch” during COVID-19.
March 2022
Keio University Art Center
Keio Museum Commons

007

006

Exhibition

Tangite me: Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic
Monday 18 October ‒ Friday 3 December 2021
South Venue:
East Venue:
Organisers:
Cooperation:

Keio University Art Space (South Annex 1st Floor, Keio University Mita Campus)
Keio Museum Commons (East Annex, Keio University Mita Campus)
Keio University Art Center (KUAC), Keio Museum Commons (KeMCo), Keio Art Committee
Art Restoration Studio 21, Bronze Studio

Events[Public Open Days of the Ex-Noguchi Room]
Date: Monday 1 November – Saturday 6 November (except 11/3 Wed.)
Venue: Ex-Noguchi Room, Keio University Mita Campus[Why Do We Keep It? How Do We Keep It? : Workshops Thinking about Conservation with Children]
Participant: Minato City Onarimon Junior High School “Art Club”
Date: Tuesday 2 and 9 November
Venues: Keio Museum Commons, Keio University Art Space, and Keio University Mita Campus
Lecturer: Yasuaki Miyazaki (Art Restoration Studio 21)
Facilitators: KUAC/KeMCo Staff
Participant: Keio Yochisha Elementary School “Fun with Art Club”
Date: Thursday 18, 25 November and Thursday 2 December
Venues: Keio Museum Commons, Keio University Art Space,
		 Keio University Mita Campus, and Keio Yochisha Elementary School
Lecturer: Yasuaki Miyazaki
Facilitators: KUAC/KeMCo Staff
Keio University Art Center[Wash, Polish and Admire the Sculptures. Haptic Workshop]
Participants: Students from the Keio University
Date: Friday 5 November, 10:00–12:00/13:30–15:30
Venue: Keio University Mita Campus
Lecturer: Hirotake Kurokawa (Musashino Art University/Bronze Studio)
Facilitators: KUAC/KeMCo Staff[Symposium | Tangite me: Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic]
Date: Saturday 6 November, 13:00–17:00
Venue: Zoom Webinar (free/advance reservation required)
Pannelists: Asa Ito (Tokyo Institute of Technology), Hirotake Kurokawa, Yuji Takahashi (Bronze Studio),		 Yasuaki Miyazaki, and Yohko Watanabe* The recording is available on the KUAC and KeMCo websites (only Japanese).

[Gallery Talk | Take a Closer Look at an Artwork with Conservator:
Miniature Lighthouse, Gifted in Celebration of Fukuzawa Yukichi’s 60th Birthday]
Date: Wednesday 17 November, 17:00–18:00
Venue: Zoom Webinar (free/open to anyone)
Lecturers: Yuji Takahashi and Yohko Watanabe* The recording is available on the KeMCo and KUAC websites (only Japanese).

[Projects Organised and Operated by the Members Based at KeMCo StudI/O]
The “KeMCo StudI/O” is a digital fabrication studio located in the Keio Museum Commons.
During the exhibition, the student staff members (KeMCoM) from the studio took the lead in planning,developing, and managing “digital-flavoured” contents that supports onsite exhibition visits.
[KeMCoM Workshop]
Participants: Students from the Keio Chutobu Junior High School
Date: Tuesday 26 October and Thursday 18 November
Venues: Keio Museum Commons, Keio University Art Center, and Keio University Mita Campus
Facilitators: KeMCoM and KUAC/KeMCo Staff

Sec.1
Exhibition[Tangite me: Exhibition’s Mobile Guide App]
Date: From Monday 18 October to Friday 3 December
Venues: Keio Museum Commons, Keio University Art Center, and Keio University Mita Campus
System Development and Operation: KeMCoM
009

008

Sec. 1
Exhibition

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Exhibition Scenery

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Photo by Katsura Muramatsu (Calo works)

South Venue｜KUAC

011

010

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Exhibition Scenery

012

013

Sec. 1
Exhibition

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Keio University Art Center

Keio Museum Commons

List 2

Exhibition Scenery

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

List 2-1 List 2-2

List 1

List 3015

014

Sec. 1
Exhibition

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Exhibition Scenery

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

East Venue｜KeMCo

017

016

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Exhibition Scenery

018

019

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Exhibition Scenery

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

List 6021

020

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Exhibition Scenery

List 8 List 7

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

023

List 9022

List 4

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

List 5

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Exhibition Scenery

024

025

Sec. 1
Exhibition

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Photo by Shu Nakagawa

Keio Shiki Senior High School List 10

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

Exhibition Scenery

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic(Photo: Keio University Library)

List 11

Keio University Library (the Old Library)

Keio University Library (the New Library, Mita Media Center) List 12

Photo by Ryota Atarashi

027

026

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

作品リスト

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Murals installed in a cafeteria
List 13029

028

Sec. 1

ArtistTitle
Year
Material
Size: cm (H×W×D)
Jurisdiction
Conservation year
Conservator_

2-2
A Detailed Drawing of a Table and a Bench in
the Noguchi Room
Pencil, paper
39.0×61.0
Keio University
3
Junzaburo Nishiwaki
Untitled
Watercolour on canvas
117.0×91.5
Keio University Art Center
2013
Art Restoration Studio 21

7
Michisei Kono
Ashinoko Lake Scene, Hakone
Oil on canvas
50.3×60.7
Keio Yochisha Elementary School
2005
Kobayashi Art Conservation Studio
8
Hisashi Suda
Ducks
1947
Oil on canvas
80.1×116.1
Keio Chutobu Junior High School
1999
Kobayashi Art Conservation Studio

List 1

11
Shikai Kitamura
The Maiden Tekonac.1909Marble169.0×82.0×78.0
Keio University
2005–07
Bronze Studio
12
Keiji Usami
Eventually They All Come into a Circle No.1
1982
Oil on canvas
238.9×679.7
Keio University
2019
Art Restoration Studio 21
13
Genichiro Inokuma
Democracy
1949
Oil on three-layered plywood
East Wall: 442.2×652.3×0.8
West Wall: 447.1×646.0×0.8
Keio University
1988 (Restoration by students of Keio University
under the supervision of the artist)
1992, 2008–09 (Art Restoration Studio 21)

List 3

List 4

List 5

List 7

List 6

List 8

List of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

2-1
A Layout Drawing of the Second Faculty Building
1955
Pencil, paper
56.7×84.0
Keio University

6
Eisaku Hasegawa
Injo
1917
Wood
168.5×62.5×54.5
Keio University
2008
Bronze Studio

Keio Museum Commons

2
Isamu Noguchi
Stool [furniture in the Ex-Noguchi Room]
1951
Wood
H. 36.4×D. 29.9
Keio University
2007, and regularly maintained
Art Restoration Studio 21

List 2

10
Enrico Isamu Oyama
Keio Shiki Senior High School Mural
2003
Acrylic aerosol paint, concrete block
182.0×982.0×15.0
Keio Shiki Senior High School

5
Kaheiji Wada
Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi
1932
Tinted plaster
115.0×103.0×60.0
Keio University
2017–18
Bronze Studio
Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

1
Natsuyuki Nakanishi
Danshi so katarogu(General Catalogue of Males), 1963
1963
Cyanotype scroll
Approx. 1200.0×78.2
Keio University Art Center
2012–13, 2014
Art Restoration Studio 21

9
Kozo Inoue
Flower: Grand Swing
Acrylic resin paint on canvas (polyester, flax), a fivepiece set*Three of the five pieces are on display.
Each 194.0×130.4
Keio University
2010–13
Art Restoration Studio 21

4
Ujihiro Okuma and Chokichi Suzuki
Miniature Lighthouse, Gifted in Celebration of
Fukuzawa Yukichi’s 60th Birthday
1897
Silver, copper, and various alloys
80.5×45.0×45.0
Fukuzawa Memorial Center for Modern JapaneseStudies, Keio University
2008–09
Bronze Studio

Exhibition

List of Works

List 9

List 10

List 11
List 13

List 12031

030

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Natsuyuki Nakanishi
Danshi so katarogu (General Catalogue of Males), 1963
Conservation Year: 2012–13, 2014 | Art Restoration Studio 21

Keio Museum Commons

Natsuyuki Nakanishi: Danshi so katarogu (General Catalogue of Males), 1963

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

中西夏之《男子総カタログ ʼ63》

This 12-metre-long artwork made of several sheets of cyanotype paper is a life-sizeback photograph of Hi-Red Center (hereinafter HRC) members: Natsuyuki Nakanishi, Genpei Akasegawa, and Tatsu Izumi. The photographs were taken during
the “Shelter Plan” by HRC, an event which took place on 26 and 27 January 1964
in the old building of the Imperial Hotel. The aim of the event was to measure andrecord the bodies of guests and sell their life-size “shelters”. The work came to Keio
University in connection with the Hijikata Tatsumi Archive (in Keio University Art
Center).

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

For the exhibition Tatsumi Hijikata + Natsuyuki Nakanishi — Back (in 2012, Keio
University Art Center), a restoration of the work was planned. The work, composedof some sheets of paper, was severely damaged by the past displays. There is a slipof paper on the back of it with the names of the artists involved, indicating that thework had been repaired after every exhibition. In order to preserve the original texture of the work and its documentary value, the appearance had been kept as is. Before the exhibition, the tape traces were removed, and the damaged parts and jointsof the connected papers were restored with washi paper and shofunori (wheat starch
paste) to withstand installation. After the exhibition, a new storage box made of acid-free paper was prepared for long-term preservation.
[SH]

033

032

Sec. 1

Isamu Noguchi and Yoshio Taniguchi
The Ex-Noguchi Room [A common room in the Second Faculty
Building], 1951 (partially relocated in 2005)

Isamu Noguchi and Yoshiro Taniguchi: The Ex-Noguchi Room [A common roomin the Second Faculty Bilding]Exhibition

イサム・ノグチ、谷口吉郎《旧ノグチ・ルーム》［第二研究室 談話室］

Conservation Year: 2007, and regularly maintained | Art Restoration Studio 21

The “Noguchi Room” was a common room on the first floor of the Second Faculty
Building on Mita Campus created in 1951, designed through a collaboration between
the sculptor lsamu Noguchi and the architect Yoshiro Taniguchi.
The Second Faculty Building was dismantled for the construction of the South
Building in 2003, and was partially relocated to the roof terrace on the third-floor of
the South Building in a different form. The “Ex-Noguchi Room” underwent a major restoration in 2007, when the stool and other furniture were loaned to the Isamu
Noguchi Foundation and the Garden Museum in New York.
Keio Museum Commons

Since then, the furniture has been under continuous care, with experts inspecting
its condition once a year, cleaning it, and applying protective wax. At present, the
Ex-Noguchi Room is usually closed to the public, but it is periodically opened to the
public and users are given guidelines on how to use it. We are striving to inherit architectural spaces while maintaining a balance between preservation and utilisation.
[MK]

Description of Works©Keio University Art Center / Photo by Ryota Atarashi

Research conducted during the restoration revealed that the materials used by Noguchi, which were commonly used in Japan in the 1950s, are now hard to find. So,
the materials matching the original were sought. In addition, it was confirmed thatthe furniture was deteriorating due to direct sunlight from the relocation to the roof
terrace. Therefore, furniture covers were made to protect them from sunlight. Also,
UV-blocking film was affixed to the window. These countermeasures slow down deterioration, and are very effective for preserving the works.

035

034

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Junzaburo Nishiwaki
Untitled
Conservation Year: 2013 | Art Restoration Studio 21

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Junzaburo Nishiwaki was a poet and English literature scholar who was active in the
Taisho and Showa eras. As a child he had aspirations to become a painter, and evenafter he gave up on being a professional, he often continued to make paintings. In
recent years, many of these works have been exhibited and presented, but Nishiwaki
continued to make paintings not as a painter, but as an amateur; many of his works,
such as portraits of acquaintances, were made in a casual manner. On the canvas
used as a support for this work, which is usually used for oil paintings, he painted
with a very quick brushstroke touch. In addition to the heads and bodies of humanfigures, there are also some animals and plants in this artwork.
By the time of the donation of this work, most of the layers of paint had cracked
and fallen away, probably due to the fact that the water-based paint used had failed
to adhere to the base. Thus, it was difficult to store the work in the collection in its
original state and immediate restoration was considered. Because of the extent of thepeeled areas, priority was given to preserving the painting in its original state, andthe fragile layers of paint were not filled in or painted over, but rather the adherence[KY]
was strengthened. The spalled surface still remains painfully visible today.
Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

西脇順三郎《作品》
Junzaburo Nishiwaki: Untitled

037

036

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Ujihiro Okuma and Chokichi Suzuki
Miniature Lighthouse, Gifted in Celebration of Fukuzawa
Yukichi’s 60th Birthday, 1897
Conservation Year: 2008–09 | Bronze Studio

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

This miniature lighthouse was donated and produced to celebrate Yukichi Fukuzawa’s 60th birthday. The sculptor Ujihiro Okuma, a leading person of Western-style
sculpture in the Meiji era, made the mould for this work. Its casting was done by
Chokichi Suzuki, the metalworker who inherited metal casting techniques from theEdo period. This work’s significance lies in its unique expression of the Meiji era,
where Western techniques were combined with traditional Japanese ones. The bodyof the lighthouse has a five-layered pattern made from two different types of alloy.
The rough waters in the lower part are silver, crashing against elaborate rocks of copper. These indicate Okuma’s mastery of dynamic expression and Suzuki’s exquisite
craftsmanship.

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Although the work had remained damaged for a long time, its restoration started toprepare for the exhibition Fukuzawa Yukichi: Living the Future (2009, Tokyo National Museum and others). Each process was carefully followed through with thehelp of its blueprint and photographic documentation (printed materials from the
Meiji era, kept at the Fukuzawa Memorial Center for Modern Japanese Studies, Keio
University) attached to the work. With exhibition in mind, the basic policy of theconservation was to reconstruct the appearance of the missing and deformed metalparts without seeking to match the original materials. The parts were reconstructedwith reference to accompanying documents, using materials easy to obtain and workwith such as brass and polyester resin. Its mechanical parts were unrepaired, their colours left in the state of metal oxidation due to ageing.
[SH]

大熊氏廣、鈴木長吉《福澤諭吉還暦祝 灯台》

Ujihiro Okuma and Chokichi Suzuki: Miniature Lighthouse, Giftedin Celebration of Fukuzawa Yukichi’s 60th Birthday
039

038

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Kaheiji Wada
Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi, 1932
Conservation Year: 2017–18 | Bronze StudioThis is a plaster model for the Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi that was placed in the
Yukichi Fukuzawa former residence in Nakatsu City, Oita Prefecture. The bronze
statue was lost due to the government’s metal contribution during World War II;
only the plaster model remains and conveys its original appearance.

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The bronze statue in the Yukichi Fukuzawa former residence was rebuilt after the
war by Kaheiji Wada, and the plaster model of the new statue is also in the Keio University collection, thanks to a donation from his family. Wada, who created the statue of Fukuzawa twice, was a sculptor who graduated from Tokyo University of theArts in 1908 and was active before and after World War II, but not only Wada’s works
but also many other bronze statues of the same period were lost in the war. Therefore, the conservation of the plaster model has an important value in the history of[NS]modern Japanese sculpture.

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

和田嘉平治《福澤諭吉像》

This particular plaster statue was displayed in the canteen of the Keio University
Rowing Club’s training camp. Plaster being a fragile material, the statue had beendamaged in many places over the years, including the nose, ears, and protruding
sleeves, and had been temporarily glued together with unknown material and transparent tape. For the restoration, the old repair marks were removed and the original
shape was restored with appropriate plaster. Using the silicone mould taken from therestored plaster statue, another statue consisted of fibreglass-reinforced-plastics was
installed in the training camp in its place. During the restoration procedure of theplaster statue body, its bottom part was flattened and stabilised. Ensuing final shapecorrection and supplementary colouring, it was stored in Mita Campus.

Kaheiji Wada: Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi
Photo by Katsura Muramatsu (Colo works)

041

040

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Eisaku Hasegawa: Injo

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

長谷川栄作《引接》Photo by Katsura Muramatsu (Colo works)

043

042

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Eisaku Hasegawa
Injo, 1917
Conservation Year: 2008 | Bronze StudioThis work was donated along with the Fujiyama Memorial Hiyoshi Library (present
Fujiyama Memorial Hall, which became the memorial hall with the construction of
the new Hiyoshi Library in 1985), and is assumed to have been in the library until the
new library was built in Hiyoshi. It had been stored in the warehouse of the new library, but was restored when it was transferred to Mita Campus.
[NS]

河野通勢《箱根芦ノ湖風景》
Michisei Kono: Ashinoko Lake Scene, Hakone

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

On the other hand, it is presumed that there had been some application of white colour serves as a way to differentiate expression of female nudity from Buddhist statues. In 2008, a conservation treatment, in which several white residues along withthe difference in colour tone of the hair and the pedestal were carefully observed,
was carried out. After a detailed investigation, by carefully and repeatedly correcting
the brightness, the texture of the wood carving was restored. The little finger of theleft hand was also missing, but fortunately its fingertip was carefully preserved andrestored during the conservation.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

This sculpture was awarded the Special Top Prize at the 11th Bunten Exhibition (aJapanese annual arts exhibition sponsored by the Ministry of Education) in 1917. In
the same year, Eisaku Hasegawa withdrew from the Japan Sculpture Society andestablished a woodcarving organisation, the Sendansha. He was inspired by theYakushi Nyorai statue at Shinyakushiji Temple in Nara, and pursued a deep spirituality through the wood carving technique of ancient Japan to attain a new approach
to expressing nude women. The title “Injo” is a Buddhist word meaning the way
Buddha takes people by the hands to save them. The palm facing the viewers looks
like a mudra, evoking several characteristics of Buddha statues.

044Sec. 1
Exhibition

Michisei Kono, Ashinoko Lake Scene, Hakone
Conservation Year: 2005 | Kobayashi Art Conservation Studio

Mishisei Kono was known for his detailed oil painting style and for the many illustrations he created in his later years. He was a member of the art group, Sodosha led
by Ryusei Kishida, and was appointed teachers of the art department at Keio Yochisha Elementary School along with his fellow Sodosha member Hitoshi Seimiya in
1923 by Kishida’s recommendation. In 1927, Kono was replaced by Sadao Tsubaki,
and this work was donated to the Yochisha as a memorial of his teaching career. The
exact dates of creation and donation are unknown, but the stylistic features suggestthat it was painted in the late Showa era.

須田 寿《家鴨》
Hisashi Suda: Ducks

Keio Museum Commons

When the painting was restored in 2005, it was found to have numerous cracks inthe painting, and the coloured layer on the trees had fallen off. The report also statedthat the frames used to protect the work were weak, that the hanging brackets andstrings were not strong enough, and that the glass had mould. Due to such predicament, it was decided that the restoration would consist of “minimal symptomatic
measures”, such as the removal of dirt as well as the application of anti-seizure andfillers to the damaged areas, along with replacement of the frame and the improvement and reinforcement of the fixation of the work to the frame.
[KY]

Conservation Year: 1999 | Kobayashi Art Conservation Studio

Hisashi Suda’s early works were characterised by oil paintings with a distinct essenceof Academism. However, after the end of World War II he absorbed the Cubist styles
of Picasso and transformed himself into an artist with an entirely different style.
This work was accepted for exhibition in the 3rd Nitten Exhibition (a Japanese annual fine arts exhibition) in 1947, and was donated by the artist to Keio Gijuku in
1948. From 1949 to 1952, Suda was a teacher of art techniques at Keio Chutobu JuniorHigh School.

Description of Works

Hisashi Suda, Ducks, 1947

The restoration report of 1999 showed that the painting had not been adequately
protected and that dust and mites had stained the painting, affecting its colour. It
also reported that the paint layer was fragile and in a “very dangerous condition” dueto ageing. As a result, there was a decision to clean the painting, keep it from flaking,reinforce and reattach the painting cloth, and improve the framing. After the restoration, the colour tone of the painting was improved and the rippling of the cloth
was reduced. Spacers were also added to the frame to strengthen the work’s hold.
[KY]
Today, the work is still hanging in the Keio Chutobu Junior High School.
047

046

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Kozo Inoue
Flower: Grand Swing
Conservation Year: 2010–13 | Art Restoration Studio 21

Kozo Inoue moved to France after graduating from Keio University in 1960. After
studying at the Académie de la Grande Chaumière, he worked mainly in Paris. Inoue’s style is characterised by the concise form and delicate shading of the motifs.
Starting with silkscreen prints, he left behind many works in the field of environmental art, including murals and designs.

Kozo Inoue: Flower: Grand Swing

Keio Museum Commons

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

井上公三《花 グランドスイング》

The number of colours in this work is small, and the expression of shading in the repeated motifs is slightly different in each of the five paintings. In addition, since thefive paintings had been soiled to various degrees, the conservator had to carefully adjust the complementary colours, requiring a great deal of time for restoration. [MK]Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

049

048

(Photo: Office of Communications and Public Relations, Keio University)

This work was a wall decoration for the Fujiyama Memorial Hiyoshi Library. The
work is a five-piece set, but when it was removed after the library was relocated, it was
divided into two and three pieces and stored separately. Some of them went missing
for a while, but were found later. All pieces were damaged, and some of the canvases were stained with graffiti because the lower part of the work was at an accessibleheight. Therefore, the five pieces were repaired together. As it was difficult to remove
the graffiti written in pencil, watercolour was used to make up for it. Damaged partsof the support were repaired with flax fibre.

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Enrico Isamu Oyama
Keio Shiki Senior High School Mural, 2003
Conservation project continues since 2019.
This artwork was created by Enrico Isamu Oyama, a contemporary artist who developed his own motif “Quick Turn Structure” (hereinafter QTS) when he graduatedfrom Keio Shiki Senior High School. This is one of the artworks which marks his
starting point as an artist. He has had a strong interest in writing culture since hishigh school days, and this work developing as an abstract form, although it remains
somewhat literal, serves as an allusion of QTS’ cultivation.

大山エンリコイサム《慶應義塾志木高等学校 壁画》

Photo by Shu Nakagawa

Keio Museum Commons

Enrico Isamu Oyama: Keio Shiki Senior High School Mural

Description of Works

Painted on the school’s block wall, this work stands in a particular area of the schoolyard for many years. However, due to deterioration of the concrete wall by the ageing, it has to be replaced; followed by the Keio Shiki Senior High School’s proposal
to enact a conservation project of the work. In 2019, field surveys were carried out byconservators of sculptures because the supporting medium is a three-dimensional
block wall and by conservators of paintings because of the aerosol painting. Based on
their reports, several people, including the teachers and staff at the Keio Shiki SeniorHigh School, department staff of the building construction in Keio University, internal art experts, external conservators, and the artist himself, have been discussing
the conservation policy of the artwork. This project could be considered a challenge
to conserve contemporary art from the perspectives of preserving street art, artworks[SH]
as a part of buildings, and artworks in the education field.

051

050

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The entrance hall of the Old Library before the war.
(Photo: Fukuzawa Memorial Center for Modern Japanese Studies, Keio University)

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

北村四海《手古奈》

Shikai Kitamura: The Maiden Tekona

The entrance hall of the Old Library immediately after Great Tokyo Air Raid.
(Photo: Fukuzawa Memorial Center for Modern Japanese Studies, Keio University)
Photo by Ryota Atarashi

053

052

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Shikai Kitamura
The Maiden Tekona, c.1909
Conservation Year: 2005–07 | Bronze Studio

Keio Museum Commons

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

This is a marble sculpture by Shikai Kitamura, who was active during the Meiji andTaisho eras. “Tekona” was a beautiful girl who was described in the Man’yoshu (8thcentury anthology of Japanese poetry) as the girl from Mama (a place name in Ichikawa City, Chiba Prefecture), based on a legend that she drowned herself because she
was saddened by the fact that the men who wanted to marry her were fighting overher. Created for a public exhibition, this work is highly valued as it exemplifies Kitamura’s artistic statement of melancholic female beauty based on ancient Japanesemyths and legends.
The sculpture was donated to Keio University by Kitamura for the library (now the
Old Library) built to celebrate its 50th anniversary. It was displayed in the staircase
hall on the first floor of the library, but was damaged in the Great Tokyo Air Raid in1945. The masterpiece, 170cm high and weighing 1 ton in total, was unable to standon its own due to deep cracks and losses. Therefore, it was stored laying down, never
to be seen again for 60 years.

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Not restoring the arms and not completely removing the soot from the incendiarybombs was chosen as its method of conservation; notwithstanding the casualty, its
aesthetic value as well as its historical value as a war survivor will not be lost. The
Maiden Tekona is now once again placed in
the entrance hall of the Old Library, passing on its tragic history to the newer generation.
[NS]

The Original figure, it was first produced. From Monbusho dai
3 kai Bijutsu Tenrankai: Zuroku Seiyoga oyobi Choso no bu [The3rd Exhibition Catalogue of the Ministry of Education, Western
Painting and Sculpture Department], Shinbishoin, 1909.
(Photo: Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)

055

054

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Keiji Usami
Eventually They All Come into a Circle No.1, 1982
Conservation Year: 2019 | Art Restoration Studio 21

Keio Museum Commons

Keiji Usami: Eventually They All Come into a Circle No.1

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

宇佐美圭司《やがてすべては一つの円のなかに No.1》

Keiji Usami is an artist known for his use of four human figures extracted from photographs of the Black riots in Watts, Los Angeles, published in LIFE magazine. This
work is the first in a series of murals commissioned by Fumihiko Maki, the architectof the Keio University’s new library. It is the first work in the series of the same name.
From the image of four human figures enclosed in a circle, it can be regarded as acontinuation of “One Hundred Drawings” series that began in 1978. According toUsami, the composition of the work was inspired by “the composition of a picture
scroll, with repeated images in a horizontal line” in mind, in order to respond to theflow of people coming and going in the library entrance lobby.

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

The work is not framed with any sort of protection such as acrylic panels as the artist
insisted that the viewer should always be able to see the painting directly. Furthermore, due to the work being installed close to a doorway, as well as it being a large
painting that reaches towards the floor, there were signs of staining and peeling, possibly caused by people passing in front of the work. In order to determine the best
method of restoration, a part of the painting was subjected to a cleaning test and thecleaning method was carefully studied. Reversible paints were used to cover the flaking areas.
[KY]

057

056

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Genichiro Inokuma
Democracy, 1949
1988 (Restoration by students of Keio University under the supervision of the artist),
1992 and 2008–09 (Art Restoration Studio 21)
At the request of the architect Yoshiro Taniguchi, Genichiro Inokuma produced thiswork as murals for the east and west walls of the Student Hall that Taniguchi designed
and completed in 1949 on the Mita Campus of Keio University. The mural depicts
young people’s carefree attitude with Inokuma’s wish to “give the students a feelingof liberation without being particular.” Due to the shortage of materials after thewar, this work was painted on plywood using a mixture of oil paints and fat paints.

Keio Museum Commons

Genichiro Inokuma: Democracy

Keio University Art Center

猪熊弦一郎《デモクラシー》

Description of Works

It is currently installed in the cafeteria of the west school building. This work has
been restored three times so far, including the course of relocations. In 2008, it wasobserved that the surface was stained and the varnish applied during the old procedure had yellowed to a light brown colour. There was also a lot of delamination of
the plywood. In order to restore the large painting, which is approximately 4.5 metreslong and 6.5 metres wide, scaffolding was first erected and the panels were removed
from the wall one by one. Then, the detached supports were glued, the surface wascleaned, the old varnish was removed and re-varnished, the paint layers were filled
and shaped, and supplementary colours were applied. Since the mural was installed
in a cafeteria, regular maintenance would be required in the future. In order to reduce the load during installation and removal, and to ensure air permeability, a grid[MK]of Japanese cypress cubes was attached to the mural.

Genichiro Inokuma at the completion ceremony of the Student Hall.

059

058

(Photo: Fukuzawa Memorial Center for Modern Japanese Studies, Keio University)

Sec. 1
Exhibition

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Visit the Conservators

060

061

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Visit the Conservators

062

063

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Sec.2

Workshop065

064

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Why Do We Keep It? How Do We Keep it?
Workshops Thinking about Conservation withChildrenMayu Hashimoto

After the workshops were held, participating children and students were asked
to write an essay giving their own impressions. These are included in the Japanese edition of this publication.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The conservator Yasuaki Miyazaki (Art Restoration Studio 21) was a guest
speaker at workshops for children from Minato City Onarimon Junior HighSchool’s “Art Club” and Keio Yochisha Elementary School’s “Fun with Art
Club”, where students were encouraged to think about the conservation of fineart. The restoration of individual pieces require meticulous care in accordancewith that work’s specific issues. But what approach is such restoration basedon? What kind of procedures are carried out? Tools used in actual restoration
projects and other reference materials were passed around, and an analysis wasmade of the process of restoration for artworks including sculptures, murals,
and paintings.

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Description of Works

066

067

Sec. 2Workshop

Minato City Onarimon
Junior High School “Art Club”
Workshop Outline
1st Session

Date: Tuesday 2 November 2021, 16:30–18:00
Venues: Keio Museum Commons, Keio
University Art Space, Keio University
Mita Campus
Participants: 11 students, 2 teachers
Facilitators: KUAC/KeMCo Staff
2nd Session

occupation. Hopefully, we can continue
to engage in such educational activities incollaboration with local schools.
Keio Yochisha Elementary School“Fun with Art Club”
Workshop Outline
1st Session

Date: Thursday 18 November 2021, 15:00–15:15
Venue: Keio Yochisha Elementary School
Participants: 6 students, 2 teachers
Facilitators: KUAC Staff
2nd Session

Date:Thursday 25 November 2021, 15:00–16:10
Venues: Keio Museum Commons, Keio
University Art Space, Keio University
Mita Campus
Participants: 7 students, 2 teachers
Facilitators: KUAC/KeMCo Staff
3rd Session

Date: Thursday 2 December 2021, 14:35–15:45
Venue: Keio Yochisha Elementary School
Lecturer: Yasuaki Miyazaki (Art Restoration Studio 21)
Participants: 8 students, 2 teachers
Facilitators: KUAC/KeMCo Staff

Mayu Hashimoto

jects with care”, “observing”, “recording”,
and “listening to a multitude of opinions”.
He also presented reference materials andphotographs, then gave a detailed explanation of the restoration process for Flower:
Grand Swing, and Democracy. Students
then moved to the exhibition rooms, andunder Mr. Miyazaki’s direction learned
how to use various tools. The children
seemed fascinated by these, and were keen
to pick them up to see how they felt. Afterwards, they viewed some works alongside Mr. Miyazaki. They were struck by
the scale of restoration in the mural Democracy, and in The Ex-Noguchi Room
[A common room in the Second Faculty
Building] they considered how Spatial Art
could be preserved, restored, and passed
on to future generations.
Throughout the two days, students
saw many works and could know actualareas of restoration. They gazed with fresheyes, not just at the artworks, but the university buildings and environment as they
moved around the campus. It was impressive to see how politely and enthusiastically they interacted with their surroundings,
even though it was all new to them. Theiressays communicate just how valuable theworkshop was as an opportunity to meetan actual conservator and learn about his

Reportvation independently. In the Old Librarybuilding they viewed The Maiden Tekona
from the perspective of “conservation andthe memory of war”. It was explained thatthe statue had been damaged and its arms
lost during air raids and the chaos of war,
but rather than being returned to a stateof perfection, it had been restored in a waythat retained the memory of that conflict.
One of the students wrote in their essay afterwards, “There are things that can’t be
expressed simply by fixing them,” showing how deeply they’d reflected on this.
Finally, in the Art Space, students viewed
Danshi so katarogu (General Catalogue ofMales), 1963, and Untitled by Junzaburo
Nishiwaki, and using them as examples,learned about contemporary art’s diversity of expression, and the restoration ofmodern pieces.
The second session was held with theconservator Yasuaki Miyazaki. In a slideshow lecture he described the “important
aspects of conservation” as being basic objectives and attitudes such as “treating ob-

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

The workshop for children from Minato
City Onarimon Junior High School’s “ArtClub” was held over two sessions. In thefirst session’s introduction, basic campus
information was given to those students
visiting Mita Campus for the first time.
Next, restoration was introduced using
the example of medical care, so students
could consider the concept while substituting it with something familiar fromtheir own experience. They were thencalled to view the exhibition, and to ask
themselves, “What has been restored?”
After they’d had some free viewing timein the Keio Museum Commons room,
staff drew the students’ attention to theworks Injo, Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi, and Miniature Lighthouse, Giftedin Celebration of Fukuzawa Yukichiʼs 60th
Birthday, as well as giving some commentary; though their explanations were nota one-sided discourse intended to impartknowledge, instead the students were asked
questions, and in the process of answering
them, could begin to think about conser-

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Date: Tuesday 9 November 2021, 16:30–18:00
Venues: Keio Museum Commons, Keio
University Mita Campus
Lecturer: Yasuaki Miyazaki (Art Restoration Studio 21)
Participants: 13 students, 2 teachers
Facilitators: KUAC/KeMCo Staff

The workshop for children in Yochisha’s
069

068

Sec. 2WorkshopWorksheets distributed to children(designed by Shiho Hasegawa).

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Reporthad risen up from the supporting framework had been repeatedly fixed back inplace by hand, one-by-one, and how thebackground fluorescent lights had been
replaced with LEDs. After the lecture,
the children viewed the actual piece, under Mr. Miyazaki’s guidance. It was an opportunity for them to learn anew about
the creation of such a familiar work, andthrough its restoration, how it had cometo be there in its present condition. Finally, the children returned to the modelingroom and watched Mr. Miyazaki make anappraisal of two pictures from Yochisha’s

collection with the view of restoring them.
He shone a light from the side to inspect
which areas of paint were peeling off, andconsidered what treatments were neededwith the children.
While the workshop at Keio Yochisha Elementary School was linked to theefforts of the Keio Art Committee, whichis responsible for the care of works held byKeio University, it also made good use of
Keio’s particular status as a fully integrated educational institution (going fromelementary to higher education). Many

works are exhibited in Yochisha’s schoolbuildings, and Mr. Miyazaki referred tothese when he said, “A great number ofpieces at Yochisha were made by artists
with a connection to Yochisha and Keio
University, which is why they are imbued
with such feeling. Each carries a passionate message from the artist.” These words,
from someone in the position of a conservator with hands-on experience, musthave deeply engraved themselves on thechildren’s minds.

Mayu Hashimoto

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

after-school club “Fun with Art” was held
over three sessions. Following on from thefirst session’s introduction, in the second
session students visited the Mita Campus
and viewed various artworks. Their movement around the Keio Museum Commonsand Art Space took the form of a self-guided exploration, without commentary fromthe staff, in order to encourage a proactive
relationship with the works. A worksheet
was produced to aid their appreciation.
On this was printed every work exhibited,along with a question for each, picking
out a specific point to consider. For example, in the case of Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi, the question was asked, “Before his restoration, Fukuzawa Sensei washurt in many places. Can you see where?”Also, to get students to move about andview works in both the Museum Commons and the Art Space, and to see The
Maiden Tekona in the Old Library building and Democracy in the student cafeteria, a stamp station was placed in eachof these four locations. The participants
stamped the spaces on their worksheet, andthrough this additional mechanism, wereable to better acquaint themselves with thecampus environment. Children were seen
clasping their worksheets and taking in
those works they found most interesting,sometimes on their own, or sometimes
while talking with friends or staff.
A week after the second session, theworkshop’s third session took place withthe conservator Yasuaki Miyazaki at thechildren’s own school. Mr. Miyazaki gavea detailed lecture on the restoration process of Seiji Fujishiro’s large piece Foals
Flying the Nest in Shadows and Sunbeams(2008) which adorns the side wall of Yochisha Elementary School’s main entrance,
as well as the work Democracy which thechildren had viewed the week before. He
explained how during the first work’s 2019
restoration, picture cutouts and paper that

071

070

Sec. 1
Exhibition

Wash, Polish and Admire the Sculptures.
Haptic Workshop
Miho Kirishima

Workshop Outline

In the morning session, all the participants
carried out maintenance work on Heiwa Kitaru after an explanation of the procedure.
In the afternoon session, the lecturers
demonstrated the maintenance procedureand method for the Bust of Fukuzawa Yukichi, after which everyone carried out maintenance on the Youth.

Description of Works

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic[Works maintained at the workshop]Morning session: Fumio Asakura, Heiwa
Kitaru (Coming of Peace), bronze, 1952.
Afternoon session: Kaseki Shibata, Bust of
Fukuzawa Yukichi, bronze, 1953; Kazuo
Kikuchi, Youth, bronze, 1948.

Keio University undertakes bi-annual outdoor sculpture maintenance on each campus and Keio schools as one of the activitiesof the Keio Art Committee. On the occasion of this exhibition under the themeof restoration and contact, we decided toorganise the outdoor sculpture maintenance programme as a related programme
to this exhibition, in which sculptures arecared for while being directly touched by
the workers. Therefore, we have set up themaintenance period on the Mita Campus
during the exhibition period and organised
the workshop with Hirotake Kurokawa of
the Bronze Studio, who will give a lecture,
and who has long been involved in themaintenance of the University's outdoor
sculptures. The target was Keio University students, and we hoped that this would
provide an opportunity for them to lookat the familiar artworks on the campus
grounds in a new light.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Date: Friday 5 November 2021
Morning session: 10:00–12:00
Afternoon session: 13:30–15:30
Lecturers: Hirotake Kurokawa (Professor,
Musashino Art University/Bronze Studio)
Mirai Shinozaki (Outdoor Sculpture Conservation Researcher/Former Curatorof the Kodaira City Hirakushi Denchu
Sculpture Museum)
Naoto Takashima (Steering Committee
Member of the Japan Institute for theSurvey and Conservation of Outdoor
Sculpture)
Participants: 8 students in the morning session, 4 students in the afternoon session.
Facilitators: KUAC/KeMCo Staff

Planning backgroundWorkshop process

First, the Art Center staff informed theparticipants that the University and Keioschools have outdoor sculptures scatteredaround the premises, and Mr. Kurokawa,the lecturer for the workshop, has been
maintaining them for many years. The
workshop began with the lecture by Mr.
073

072

Sec. 2WorkshopStudents, conservators,
and their attachment to the sculptures

The participants felt that the sculpturesʼ
expressions changed from time to time
during the process of watering, waxing
and polishing. Each task was simple anduncomplicated. However, it was refreshing and full of discovery to touch sculp-

tures that we usually have no chance toand to do the tasks with our own hands
and directly feel the changes in the sculptures. What the participants were particularly enthusiastic about were making thegloss adjustments to create expressions inthe sculptures. The excitement that theparticipants felt in deciding the look of the
sculptures for the next two years created asense of unity among them.
In everyday university life, there were
few opportunities to face the outdoor sculptures head-on, even though they were regularly passing by them. However, the studentsʼ impressions show that they havebecome more familiar with and attachedto these sculptures as a result of this workshop. It was not only the novelty of touching the outdoor sculptures that enabled
the students to actively engage in thework. They were also encouraged by theconservator, Mr. Kurokawa, who spoke
affectionately about the artwork. After
this workshop, the students may see thecampus landscape through new eyes. The
sculptures, which have been well-caredfor, will enrich the campus landscape andwill be admired by other students. Having an intense experience with the artwork while at the university and schools

Miho Kirishima

while keeping in mind the composition
and framework of each sculptural work.
Gloss affects how the sculptures appear,
so how the gloss is used is related to theinterpretation of the artwork. After hearing this, the participating students began
to take the task very seriously. Finally, all
the participants appreciated the artworkand realised the differences in expression
before and after maintenance, and their
original beauty. Mr. Kurokawa said, “Joy iscreated from intimacy with artwork. You
must have sensed some sensation in yourbodies that came from deep within you...”In response to these words, the participants reflected on their individual tasks.
The staff concluded the workshop by explaining that the maintenance that everyone had worked on this time would protect the sculptures for the next two years.

ReportTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic“clearly see the unevenness” and “feel thedifference between the bones and muscles”. Afterwards, the detergent was thoroughly washed off, and surface moisture
wiped off with a cloth and then dried witha blower. Waxing is the next step in theprocess. After the components of the wax
were explained, a brush was used to cover
the sculptures entirely with wax. The next
step was to polish after the wax had dried.
The sculptures were partially glossed

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Kurokawa, followed by the maintenanceprocedures — prewashing with water, washing with detergent, waxing and polishing.
In the lecture, Mr. Kurokawa spoke about
sculpture in the context of art history. The
maintenance work began with his words,“Feel the essence of haptic art.”
A preliminary observation of the condition of the sculptures was made and recorded by Mr. Kurokawa, during which
Ms. Shinozaki explained the overall workflow and the tools used, such as detergent
and brushes. Then the participants wereencouraged to touch the sculptures andfeel their temperature. Everyone felt thewarmth of the sculptures exposed to sunlight. The participants were surprised tolearn that surface temperatures can reacharound 80 degrees Celsius in summer.
Then they washed the sculptures withwater. A hose with a shower nozzle wasused to remove dirt from the artworks.
Three different water output levels, high,low and misting, were tested. After being taught by the instructor how to appreciate pouring water over sculptures,the participants, with their eyes, followed
and stroked the water flowing over thesurface of the pieces. Then, they checked
how the sculptures had cooled down after the water had been poured over them.
The next step was washing with detergent. Detergent was applied to large, medium and small brushes and the sculptures
were scrubbed. The participants were advised to use different brushes for different areas, such as a large brush for large,smooth areas, and a small brush or toothbrush for the smaller areas such as the faceand between the fingers. The whole groupwas surprised to hear Mr. Kurokawaʼs remark that “a toothbrush can change theworld” as he cleaned the sculptures withthe brush. Everyone experienced the fascination of touching artworks through atool, noting, for example, that they could

075

074

Sec.3
Symposium

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

will be a valuable experience for the students. Taking advantage of the educational institution setting, and from the con-tinuous practice of care, we keep striving
to create such opportunities in the future.

077

076

Sec. 3Asa Ito (Tokyo Institute of Technology)
Hirotake Kurokawa (Musashino Art University/Bronze Studio)
Yuji Takahashi (Bronze Studio)
Yasuaki Miyazaki (Art Restoration Studio 21)
Yohko Watanabe (Keio University Art
Center/Keio Museum Commons)
Programme[Watanabe] Conservation begins with the work’s
invitation for touch — “tangite me”.

Session 1: Considering “Touch” in the Arts
Yohko Watanabe, “Discovering, Caring for,and Promoting Artworks”
Asa Ito, “Caring Hands”[Kurokawa] Cleaning a work with a toothbrushcan deepen appreciation and change the world.

You can watch videos recorded the symposium on our YouTube channel below.

[Miyazaki] Exploring the work before restoration is like the time spent preparing for a bungee jump.

(Only Japanese)

Session 1 and 2

Session 3

Session 3: Discussion
Asa ItoHirotake Kurokawa
Yuji Takahashi
Yasuaki Miyazaki
Moderator: Yohko Watanabe

This is the summary report of the individual panel presentations that took
place as part of a symposium held on
Saturday 6 November, 2021. The symposium was organised into three sessions and addressed the importance of“touch” in handling artworks, taking
a number of conservation case studies
as an opportunity to consider “touch”
from both a practical and theoreticalperspective. The discussions brought together experts from various fields.

The first session, “Considering ‘Touch’in the Arts”, brought together exhibition
curator Yohko Watanabe and art theorist
Asa Ito.

Yohko Watanabe, “Discovering,
Caring for, and Promoting
Artworks”

Yohko Watanabe opened the symposiumwith an overview of the exhibition andthe ongoing work of the Keio Art Committee. She identified three key areas in thecare and management of artworks withina university that differ from the operationsof public museums: “discovery”, or finding and acquiring artworks; “care”, or thepreservation of acquired artworks; and“promoting awareness”, or explaining theprocesses of preservation and creating theconditions through which the importanceof artworks can be understood.
In the related exhibition, our aim had
been to begin with the idea of “touching”
artworks to “restore” them in order to establish a framework for restoring through“touch”. Taking this theme of “touching”
as a way into the labour of conservation,
Watanabe suggested the hope was to open
up new ways of thinking about conservation which could challenge received modern approaches. The aim had been to show
both sides of “touch” — as a force for “healing” and “destruction” — at a time when,
due to the pandemic, “touching” had itself
become something to avoid. In relation tothis, Watanabe discussed the differences
between two Japanese terms for touch,sawaru and fureru, drawing on Asa Ito’s
work Te no Rinri (Ethics of Hands, 2020).
She proposed we experience touching as
fureru when we encounter works within

ReportTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic[Takahashi] With polishing, what you have to
be careful of is where to stop.

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える[Ito] You see a completely different human image
through touch than through sight.

Session 2: The Practice of Conserving Artworks
Hirotake Kurokawa, “Cleaning Sculpturesand Haptic Appreciation”
Yuji Takahashi, “Thoughts of a Conservator”
Yasuaki Miyazaki, “What Matters for Conservation”

Session 1: Considering “Touch” inthe Arts

Symposium

Speakers079

078

Sec. 3
Symposium

Asa Ito, “Caring Hands”

as a way to help encounter artworks less as“objects” than as other beings.
Session 2: The Practice ofConserving Artworks

In this session, we invited presentations
from three conservators who work with
Keio Collections. The session, titled “The
Practice of Conserving Artworks”, involved a discussion of the physical work ofconservation in the context of related theories and ideas.

Hirotake Kurokawa,“Cleaning Sculptures and Haptic
Appreciation”

The conservator responsible for cleaning
and restoring sculptural works throughout the Keio University campuses, Hirotake Kurokawa, proposed that sculpture
conservation could be an occasion for aesthetic appreciation. He began with the example of Fumio Asakura’s Heiwa Kitaru(Coming of Peace) (1952), which he began
restoring in the late 1990s, to illustrate thecorrosive effects of air pollution on bronze
sculpture. To remove the dry deposits ofpollutants that had accumulated in the
1970s and 1980s, Kurokawa used a threestage process: first he removed an acidic substances on corroded areas, then heregulated the sheen on the sculpture, andthen he protected its surface. Since then,
the work has been regularly cleaned and aprotective wax coat reapplied. Any patinathat may have developed beneath the wax
has also been carefully monitored.
During his presentation, Kurokawa
showed slides of a workshop he had conducted with students the day before inwhich they learned how to use water andbrushes to clean the sculpture, apply thewax, and polish the sculpture to bringout its sheen. These workshops not only
presented an opportunity for students tolearn conservation techniques, but also
to appreciate the works — to enjoy themwhilst preserving them. The cleaning wasa chance to understand how to both ap-

ReportTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Asa Ito began by introducing her researchon human touch in terms of the difference between sawaru and fureru, which
she elucidated through a series of casestudies. Though both differ according tocultural context and each person’s embodied perspective, sawaru tends to invoke a
one-directional object-oriented notion oftouch, where fureru implies a mutual intersubjective one, with the former corresponding to a “communicative mode” (aone-directional communication of a message from sender to receiver), and the latter corresponding to a “generative mode”(a person-to-person exchange out of which
a message is born). Ito highlighted the importance of both verbal communicationand non-verbal touch-based communication between the carer and cared-forin the context of nursing homes and other environments where caregiving takes
place. She suggested there were multiple
ways through which human relationships
emerge from touch — stirring up memories, facilitating recognition, and communicating information. Ito drew on several examples to illustrate the importance of
touch for caregiving relationships. She described the flow of information from one
person’s body to another through the useof tools or objects, such as when a carer
uses a thread to co-run a marathon witha blind person, or a dancer uses a stick toguide a person with cerebral palsy; shehighlighted the persuasive power of sawaru in the context of attending to someone on their deathbed, where people areoften handled with an uncaring or inhuman touch; and she discussed the loss oftactile feelings and memories which canarise, say, with the death of a guide dog. In
relation to the exhibition title, “Tangite me(Touch me)”, she suggested we might consider ideas of “touch” in human relationships — in terms of sawaru and fureru —Keio Museum Commons

exhibition environments like art museums; a suggestion which segued organically into Ito’s presentation.

Kurokawa Slides

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Ito Slides

081

080

Sec. 3
Symposium

Yuji Takahashi has been involved in theconservation and restoration of sculpture
for many years. Taking the example of his
restoration of a sculpture by the Italianartist Arnaldo Pomodoro, Gyroscope of theSun (1988), kept at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Tokyo, he asked: “whatdoes a conservator think about when restoring a work?” Takahashi considered
this question from several angles, asking“what is conservation on the one hand
and what is a sculptural work on the other?” He discussed the importance of un-

work; its disassembly; the cleaning andpolishing of the work in the studio; andits reconstruction.

Yasuaki Miyazaki, “What Matters
for Conservation”

Yasuaki Miyazaki began his talk discussing his own relationship to conservation,
introducing an example of his restorationof an oil painting by Genichiro Inokuma, Democracy. There is nothing natural
about a work of art standing before us: wemust be aware that this is only possible
with the efforts of our predecessors. The
conservator’s right to touch an artwork depends, above all, on the preparation andcare they take with handling it. During
the restoration work itself they must be
careful to observe and record the condition of the artwork, and if any questions
or problems arise they should not assume
it is only their opinion that matters, butalso consult the owner, the artist, the family of the artist, and academics. What mat-ters is taking the time to stop, reflect, anddraw knowledge from the continued workof restoration and conservation.
Democracy has been restored threetimes — the last two of which were undertaken by Miyazaki’s workplace, Art Restoration Studio 21. He shared documentation which showed the various tools usedin the restoration process, and the condition of the artwork at different stages, discussing the particularities of caring fora work that is incorporated into a building's design. He compared this to the restoration of a contemporaneous work in
Ueno Station, Freedom (1951), reflecting
on how different each was, despite the useof similar materials and techniques.

ReportYuji Takahashi, “Thoughts of aConservator”

derstanding the cultural context of thework, the artist’s characteristic style, andthe background of the conservator themselves. When restoring a large sculptural
work over the course of 2–5 years, the firstyear is spent taking time to research andinternalise the particularities of the workand the style of the artist. In the later stages of restoration, the focus is more exclusively on the practical side of restoration:
on, that is, using one’s hands. When thework is large enough to require disassembly and reconstruction then the conservator must both assess the condition of thework and also consider how to execute thereconstruction safely. When there is serious damage, they must evaluate whether it is wisest to disassemble, reweld, andre-finish the work, knowing that it is justas important to understand what is notnecessary as it is to understand what is. Illustrating his account with detailed slides,
Takahashi explained how the work of restoration involves a series of local judgements which reflect various processes: aninvestigation into the condition of the

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

preciate and preserve artworks. It allowed
for the development of “haptic” appreciation, an understanding of the textureof artworks through using tools (brushes etc.), as well as an enjoyment of the detail of artworks. This enjoyment of detailis fundamental to the appreciation of artworks more generally.

Miyazaki Slides

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Takahashi Slides

Session 3: Discussion

The final session in the symposium consisted in a discussion with all of the panellists. This roamed over a range of topics that had arisen in the first half of thesymposium: the difference between sawaru and fureru, the “bungy jump” of the
083

082

conservator when they make a decision totouch a work, cleaning as a work of citizenship-building, the appreciation and restoration of works, and the generative communication that arises when confronting
a work. Responding to questions from thefloor, the discussion was largely freeform,
but the panellists were all invited to reflect
on the title of the exhibition at the end:“tangite me” (touch me) — derived froma biblical phrase, “noli me tangere” (touchme not).
The panellists (Ito, Kurokawa, Takahashi, and Miyazaki) were invited to reflect
on “touch” from the different approachesof “conservation” and “care”, drawing on
their diverse experiences and specialisms.
This was an opportunity to shed new lighton the practices of restoration and conservation in relation to “touch”; to reflect
on the physicality of conservation; to discuss how to approach a work with integrity; to consider the moment-by-moment
judgement involved in restoration; and toforeground the generative communication
with a work of art that is involved.
For a more detailed account, please see
the Keio University Art Center/Keio Museum Commons webpage for more information.

Yohko Watanabe

On Care, Conservation, and the Value of “Touch”
Shiho Hasegawa

Sedimenting Interpretations:the Layer of Conservation in the Life of an Artwork
Mayu Hashimoto

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Reported by Shiho Hasegawa and Koyuri Sato

Sec.4

Art Appreciation and “Conservation”:
Workshops with Children Providing Clues

Essay

Nodoka Shimada

The University’s “Excavated Ancient Artifacts”
and “Inherited Ancient Artifacts”
Katsurako Yamada

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Imitate to Copy:
Thinking about Conservation by Making Art Education
at Keio University as a Clue
Yu Homma

On Opening Access to Conservation Documentation
Miho Kirishima

Conservation and Communication:
Collection Care in Universities and Schools

085

084

Sec. 4

Yohko Watanabe
Professor and Curator, Keio University Art Center
Vice Director, Keio Museum Commons

The Exhibition Space

Artworks are “not to be touched” in an exhibition space. This seems natural
with aesthetic objects in that they are considered visual works. There are, however, certain processes which require a human touch: restoration and conservation cannot occur without touching an artwork. The artwork is not viewed
at a distance, but comes under close scrutiny and analysis, for which it must be

To consider conservation a “generative” act because of the care with which artworks are treated may seem simplistic. Like medical care, conservation is often
seen as a matter of healing damage that has occurred. When a doctor touches a patient it is, in fact, with a sense of sawaru more than fureru — that is,with a one-directional “touch”. They “touch” them (as sawaru) in order to heal
them. They do, of course, attain information from the body through contact,
but there is no ambiguity in terms of how the doctor and patient relate to one
another: there is a clear physical division of roles, with the patient’s body transmitting information about their illness and physiology *4 . As long as there is thissurgical sense of conservation, it seems a “communicative” conception of contact is unavoidable.
In the symposium held alongside the exhibition, Asa Ito joined conservators
Hirotake Kurokawa, Yuji Takahashi, and Yasuaki Miyazaki for a discussion*5.
I was struck by their accounts of how long the preparatory work for conservation took. Takahashi, who is based at the Bronze Studio, thoroughly researches artworks before he takes them into the studio for restoration, however longit might take. The time required could be anything from a brief interlude toseveral years. Miyazaki, who works with Art Restoration Studio 21, compared
conservation to a bungee jump: you have to make instantaneous decisions constantly, sometimes allowing you to jump quickly, other times taking longer.
A conservator must find a way to encounter and communicate with the artwork
before they begin conservation. They must first research the artwork, listen toit, and gather information from it. This might, in a sense, be considered a “generative” form of communication. The bungee jump might not be a single mo-

Yohko Watanabe

Conservation and Contact

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

There are two words to express “touch” in Japanese, one is fureru, the othersawaru — each is used with subtly different nuance in everyday contexts. Asa Ito,in her work Te no Rinri (Ethics of Hands), has suggested there is a sense of mutuality expressed in fureru, whereas there is a more one-sided interaction communicated by sawaru — though she is careful to point out the two cannot easily beseparated, and are related in complex ways*1. Ito further suggests that “simply
because the thing in front of you is human this does not ensure a human relationship.”*2 The sign I began with attempts to communicate a sense that “human touch is not desired because it will damage the work.” Nonetheless, it tends
to be written: “please do not touch (using the verb fureru)” rather than simply“do not touch (using sawaru)”, which carries the slightly different sense of handling something in a human way. Even though the work is conceived of as an
object, there is nonetheless an invitation to consider its value and particularity.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える“Please do not touch” is such a familiar sign in exhibition spaces people no longer even notice it. Everyone understands an exhibition space as somewhere tolook but not touch; a place where looking is very much alive, but touch is prohibited.

Essay

physically handled. Conservation is very much responsive to the fact that an
artwork has a physical reality as a thing. This makes the distinction between
fureru and sawaru particularly important. Of course the artwork is a “thing”,
but the conservator does not approach it in a one-directional way as though it
were an object, so much as with the more human sense of sawaru — with thehope that some kind of communication can take place. Asa Ito writes of sawaru
and fureru in terms of communication, with the former expressing a one-directional “communicative mode”, and the latter a “generative mode”*3. Whencommunication is “communicative” there is a clear division of roles between
the sender and receiver of a message. When, however, it is “generative”, the division between sender and receiver is less clear, and the message emerges instead
through mutual exchange.

On Care, Conservation, and the Value of “Touch”*3 ― Ibid, pp. 119–130.
*1 ― Asa Ito, Te no Rinri [Ethics of Hands], Kodansha, 2022, p. 5.

*4 ― Ibid, p. 6.

*2 ― Ibid, p. 5.

*5 ― See Symposium Report (pp. 79–84).

087

086

Sec. 4

*7 ― Ito suggests “safety” is the tendency to attempt to eliminate uncertainty, whereas“faith” is to accept the possibility of uncertainty. The former tends to involve a mechanicaland administrative approach, whereas the latter begins with touch, and involves leaping intoa relationship without being over-rational. See “Dai 3 sho: Shinrai [Chapter 3: Trust]”, Te no
Rinri, pp. 87–109.

If we take a “theory of a caregiver’s hands” when the caregiver is literally understood to be a pure means or tool for assistance they become someone who
is “by” or is the means “by” which another person lives. Whereas, in fact, acaregiver should be understood in terms of being “in” a relationship instead.*9

This understanding of the relationship between caregiver and cared-for is notdissimilar from that between a conservator and the work they conserve. In her“Afterword” to Hozon Shufuku no Gihou to Shisou (Ideas and Techniques ofConservation and Restoration), conservator and researcher Kaori Taguchi suggested that it was only when she began conservation work that she realised it
involved leaving one’s ego behind and discovered the attraction of working behind-the-scenes. With experience, however, she began to doubt this initial impression:Once I became actively involved in conservation, I started to doubt whether this abandonment of the ego was actually possible. When you consider awork of art as carrying traces of intervention and layers of restoration, thenyou realise that even when you try “not to intervene” you cannot help but
leave your own distinctive “colour” or style on the artwork. Every instant of

Yohko Watanabethat ‘interrupts’ the artwork visually, historically, and spatially.” Kaori Taguchi, Hozon Shufuku no Gihou to Shisou: Kotengeijutsu, Renaissance Kaiga kara Gendai Art made [Ideas andTechniques of Conservation and Restoration: From Ancient and Renaissance Paintings toContemporary Art], Heibonsha, 2015, p. 151. This book has very much informed my understanding of conservation. It is based on Cesare Brandi’s theory that “existing approaches toconservation must be renewed with the concept of ‘value with age’”, which introduces “theimportance of using critical judgement to intervene in art objects.” See Kaori Taguchi, “Hozon to Shufuku — Toki no Nagare ni sakaratte [Conservation and Restoration: Against the
Flow of Time]”, Encyclopaedia of Aesthetics, Maruzen Publishing, 2020, p. 221.

Ito’s keynote lecture during the symposium, “Caring Hands”, drew on the workof Takuya Maeda, and his idea that the relationship of care between a personwith a disability and their caregiver is not one of being “by” one another but ofbeing “in” a caring relationship. As Maeda put it:

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic*6 ― “Intervening is at the same time intruding in the natural life of the artwork, as an act

Caring Hands

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Restoration is not only a matter of looking at the physical properties and construction of an artwork, but is a condensed way of encountering the cultural context and background of an artwork’s creation, its relationship to provenance, and the whole expansive network of historical relations expanding out
from it in space and time. This is because restoration also constitutes an intervention in the historical time of the artwork from a different point in time*6.
However thoroughly a conservator researches the object, reflects on possible
approaches, and imagines possible results, there is no way to be completely assured of one’s decision. The conservator is confronted by the “thing” that is awork of art, and must engage in a “generative mode” of communication withit, which — however risky — involves a sense of “faith” before making the leap
into conservation*7. There is an inevitable proximity between conservation anddestruction. The “contact” involved in conservation can heal a work, but it always carries the risk of destroying it; it can always become the act of destruc-Essaytion*8. This awareness and fear of destruction is always in the background ofrestoration work. “Touch” is always a double-edged sword: both restorativeand violent, intimate and destructive. This becomes apparent when comparing
touch to other senses like sight and listening. Touch is somehow a kind of “zero”
sense — or a “minus” sense — in that it cannot arise with distance, and this canbe deeply threating; it can even threaten life. It is for this reason that it has beenplaced historically at the bottom of any western hierarchy of the senses, where
vision is placed at the top.

ment of decision making that then leads to the conservation, so much as a decision which follows an extended period of communicative contact (in the senseof fureru). From this follows the “introduction to the artwork” that leads toconservation, at which point the artwork is treated as an object, which is when
“touch” (in the sense of sawaru) takes over. This is consonant with Takahashi’ssense that having spent a long time reflecting prior to conservation, he stops using his head when he begins the physical conservation work. He suggested that
if you overthink things during the process of conservation, there’s a risk of making decisions based on your own stylistic preferences rather than in response to
the art object. Miyazaki’s suggestion that the process of conservation may haveto be interrupted when there is a moment of doubt about how to proceed, indicates that it is not a simple development from one type of “touch” ( fureru)
to another (sawaru), but that there is an ongoing and complicated relationshipbetween the two.

*8 ― Kaori Taguchi, “Dai 3 sho: Vandalism to Barnett Newman Ronsou [Chapter 3: Bar-

nett Newman and the Vandalism Controversy]”, in Hozon Shufuku no Gihou to Shisou, pp.
126–144. “The Barnett Newman Controversy” in fact showed how two seemingly oppositional impulses — vandalism and restoration — can become in some sense “equal”. We see
something similar in the 1990s “New Cleaning Controversy”. Taguchi, p. 133.
*9 ―Takuya Maeda, Kaigogenba no Shakaigaku: Shintaishogaisha no Jiritsuseikatsu to Kai-

josha no Reality [Social Studies in Long-Term Care: The Lives of Differently-abled Persons
and Caregivers], Seikatsu shoin, 2009, p. 84. Quoted in Ito, Te no Rinri, p. 145.
089

088

Sec. 4

Whether discussing a caregiver or a conservator, when care is understood to beunambiguously one-sided then that person becomes functionalised as a transparent “tool”. This doesn’t mean that care is not considered important, obviously. But considering the caregiver as in some way transparent is problematic,in that care ought to evolve in a “place” where there is a reciprocal or “generativemode” of communication. As Taguchi suggests: “being in a position to touch( fureru) the work” means there is a moment of mutual contact in the act oftouching ( fureru). In this sense, the caregiver is not a transparent means “by”
which care takes place.

The key words in this essay are those of “confirmation” and “exploration”.
The person who sees easily walks along with a sense of security, saying tothemselves “there’s nothing here”, or “it’s all ok”; whereas the person with impaired vision walks along with an unnerving sense of uncertainty and risk,saying to themselves: “perhaps there’s nothing — maybe it will be ok”. The
different ways in which these two people walk along also surely affect theirwhole disposition towards life.*12

Returning to the Exhibition Space

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The key terms of “confirmation” and “exploration” relate back to the terms of“security” and “faith” which Ito suggested were oppositional. “Confirmatory
walking” goes hand in hand with a sense of “security”, where “exploratory walking” requires a leap of “faith” to overcome the uncertainty of things not necessarily turning out ok.
Returning to the matter of the exhibition space: when we appraise works in asuperficial way, we are approaching them in a “confirmatory” manner. Though
we might claim to be looking at the artwork, all we’re actually doing is affirming
something without taking risks. On the other hand, when we approach judgement in an exploratory way, even if we’re still using our visual sense, we open up
to rich and varied forms of encounter. When we approach the exhibition spacewith an awareness of the care that has gone into conservation and the possibility of physically touching a work, when we understand the labour that has truly
gone “into the artwork”, then a new horizon of appreciation opens up. This canbecome an entryway into a new form of communication with the artwork itself.
Yohko Watanabe

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Returning to the exhibition space at this point: is it really the case that vision is
the only sense operative in this space? Certainly, the exhibition space is one inwhich vision takes precedent; and certainly artistic awards are bestowed basedon looking at a distance. But the exhibition space is also a physical space inwhich physical objects are displayed. In this sense, we might talk of exhibitions
and the viewing of artworks as a very much physical and embodied experience.
We certainly have to physically move to go out to an exhibition in a museum,
and we certainly have to physically stand before a work in order to view it. We
cannot eliminate the importance of physically going to where the artwork is in
our appreciation of it. During the pandemic it became impossible to physicallystand before an artwork: our physical movement was limited, we avoided touching things physically, and exhibition spaces were closed. This deprived us of thepossibility of going to exhibitions and temporarily jeopardized the function of
museums. However much we consider exhibitions to be “visual” experiences,
they are evidently dependent on the physical experience of going to a place. Exhibitions rely on the experience of viewing that work in that place. There may
be new experiments with creating virtual artworks for the internet, but the majority of exhibitions are developed with an intense reliance on the possibility ofa physical exhibition space. We observe works under specific conditions which
include: specific lighting, the temperature of the exhibition space, the distanceat which we view the work, and the presence of other viewers. We view an artwork through an embodied encounter with it as a physical thing within a concrete environment. Even when considered from a visual perspective, viewing an
artwork always involves the whole body.

Essay

Last Autumn, during the pandemic, there was an ambitious exhibition heldfrom September 2nd to November 30th (2021) at the National Museum of Ethnology under the title: UNIVERSAL MUSEUM: Exploring the New Field of
Tactile Sensation*11. The exhibition curator, Kojiro Hirose, had this idea of a
“Universal Museum” as a place where people might appreciate works throughtouch. In his catalogue essay, he suggested that to approach exhibitions throughvision alone was a “confirmatory approach”, whereas a more open approach
could be considered “exploratory”. As he put it:decision-making becomes another stroke propelling the artwork towards the
future, which is then woven into the fabric of the artwork itself.*10*11 ―When I actually visited the exhibition, I was especially surprised by the aliveness ofappreciating sculpture through touch, especially sculptures of human forms. This experience of touching awakened such a new sensation, it was even a little confusing. I certainly felt
it changed the way I personally viewed the work from that point on.
*12 ― Kojiro Hirose, “‘Michi no Chi’ ni fureru: Tokyo 2020 Olympic Paralympic no saki

*10 ―Taguchi, Hozon Shufuku no Gihou to Shisou, p. 302. In the symposium, the conserva-

tors expressed similar ideas to the “theory of a caregiver’s hands”.

e [Touching ‘the unknown’: Beyond the Tokyo 2020 Olympics and Paralympics]”, in UNIVERSAL MUSEUM: Exploring the New Field of Tactile Sensation, National Museum of Ethnology, 2021, p. 14.

091

090

Sec. 4

Shiho Hasegawa
Curator and Research Fellow, Keio Museum Commons

Introduction

Knowing the Factors Composing the Artwork, Here, Now

One example is the Miniature Lighthouse, Gifted in Celebration of Fukuzawa Yukichi’s 60th Birthday originating from Yukichi Fukuzawa, an artwork lying dormant in storage for a long time which was rediscovered, given the opportunity
to be presented at an exhibition, and restored to its original appearance. When it
was rediscovered, it was incomplete, with a large part of its upper part missing *4 .
The existence of a monochrome photograph attached to the artwork showing
its appearance at that time and illustrative material giving the names of eachpart, measurements, types of metal alloy used, etc.,*5 (both housed in the Fukuzawa Memorial Center for Modern Japanese Studies, Keio University) helped
achieve the aim of exhibiting it at an exhibition. Conservators and owners wereable to determine how to reconstruct the missing parts, making it possible torestore it to its original appearance.
It is not difficult to imagine how this material from when it was made, and pastmaterial relating to it, were important determinants in deciding on its conservation, involving directly touching the artwork. At the same time, however, theconservation process itself, as well as the discovery, start to accumulate as material relating to the artwork.

*2 ― In the way that conservators are termed doctors of works of art, the resemblance has

been pointed out in how they cure (mend) a bad condition, and prevent worsening of thephysical (artwork’s) condition. For example, Kaori Taguchi’s work compares conservation
action and medical action, and develops an argument quoting from Italian art historian,
Ugo Procacci who used “illness” on the matter of conservation interventions (Kaori Taguchi, Hozon Shufuku no Gihou to Shisou: Kotengeijutsu, Renaissance Kaiga kara Gendai Art
made [Ideas and Techniques of Conservation and Restoration: From Ancient and Renaissance Paintings to Contemporary Art], Heibonsha, 2015, pp. 17–18).
*3 ― On this point, in the symposium, panelist, Yuji Takahashi (Bronze Studio) referred to*1 ― Regarding conservation and interpretation, quoted from Alessandro Conti and Han-

na Jedrzejewska, indicating that conservation work is an extension of interpretation (Alessandro Conti, A History of the Restoration and Conservation of Works of Art [Atsushi Okada,
Akari Kitamura, Chiyori Mizuno, Tadashi Kanai, Tomoo Matsubara trans.], Arina Shobo,
2002, pp. 74–75). Also, in the symposium that took place during the exhibition (refer p. 79–
for details), the site of conservation was discussed as being in the sequence of interpretationand decision. Of course, that includes judgment about procedure as well as practical considerations such as judgments over safety when working.

learning by surveying artwork himself, including reference to associated material and to theperiod of time before commencing conservation work in which he memorises with his own
body the peculiarities of the hand of the artist. That time depends on the artwork, and differsfrom a week to a year.

Shiho Hasegawa

There are multiple processes that go into carrying out artwork conservation,but, often, first to be carried out is a condition survey of the artwork. A con-

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

This paper, handling the period of preparation of the exhibition through to its
closure, is about the accumulation of time and interpretations that are rediscovered through communicating with specialist conservators, and also referring totheir past records. It is, as such, an essay about how surveys and records, given
occasion in artwork conservation and preservation, are research material, too.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

When someone faces an artwork and considers it, one interpretation is born. On
site at conservation, too, when a conservator faces an artwork, is the moment
when another interpretation is born*1. Standing before the existence known as
an artwork, don’t we sometimes feel an eternity, as if time has stopped within it?
However, regarding an artwork as an object, since it was born to the world as aphysical presence, the time it has spent is constantly engraved upon it, according
to every law of nature, up until the moment of “now” “being” “here” “beforeme”. In the sense of interpreting an artwork, those layers also increase over timeand according to the number of people encountering it.

Essay

dition survey, is, literally, knowing the “condition at present” (before the conservator’s eyes) of the artwork itself, and is the first step in determining thenecessary procedure for an aim that presents itself from time to time. For conservators, although “examining” the condition of the actual artwork *2 is, ofcourse, of most importance; knowing basic information about the artwork,its providence, information from related material, too, greatly helps in understanding the artwork*3.

Sedimenting Interpretations:the Layer of Conservation in the Life of an Artwork*4 ― Referred in the 2009 conservation record about the Miniature Lighthouse, Gifted in

Celebration of Fukuzawa Yukichiʼs 60th Birthday by Ujihiro Okuma and Chokichi Suzuki (therecord housed in the Keio University Art Center). An outline is available on the Art Center
website. http://www.art-c.keio.ac.jp/research/collections-research/2010/2009-12-01-okuma/(2021-12-25)*5 ― Featuring on p. 39 of this volume.

093

092

Sec. 4ture, etc., and size, observation and analysis begins to dig deeper. Information
gathered from it is picked up, and points of note in line with specialist fields andinterests of the observers are shared with others, thus sharing that abundant information as well as various viewpoints and interpretations of the object (andlearning their own interests). This carries the merit of encouraging diversity inthe viewing of objects. Doesn’t the eye of the conservator, however, possess anembodied gaze enabling thorough understanding of artwork as an “object”?
They don’t only see an artwork as “artwork”, but also see a conglomeration ofmaterials or parts to analyse. It is the eye making it possible to simulate searching for a layer/adding a layer.

When conservators make an “examination” of the condition of an artwork, asin the survey mentioned above, although it includes tactile exploration, the firststage is judgment relying, to a certain extent, on the conservator’s eye (by eyes
which have amassed varied experience).

*6 ― “Sawaru” and “fureru”, which both mean “touch”, were discussed from the viewpointof “artworks” to suit the theme at the symposium. For details, refer to Asa Ito, Te no Rinri[Ethics of Hands], Kodansha, 2020.
*7 ― An imaging technique involving shining a light at an angle and exposing surface un-

evenness and peeling is called oblique ray photography.

*8 ― For a detailed explanation of OBL, see Helen J. Chatterjee and Leonie Hannan, eds.,
Engaging the Senses: Object-Based Learning in Higher Education, Routledge, 2015. The Keio
Museum Commons is involved in the practice of OBL for university-set lectures as part ofappreciation, understanding, usage and training in works of art and cultural assets.

Let’s look once again at the example of the Miniature Lighthouse, Gifted in Celebration of Fukuzawa Yukichi’s 60th Birthday. Structurally, this artwork was assembled from multiple parts, and in fact, conservation and preservation measures
were carried out while disassembling it. The task of conservation was part ofthe cleaning process following the condition survey, and began by actually disassembling each of the parts. The part expressing raging waves at the bottomof the artwork, the lower part, middle part, upper part of the lighthouse body,each of the lantern room parts… Photographic records of each of the disassembled
parts were left, and observations made of the colour of the back metal that remained out of contact with air and unoxidised on the joint of each part, and so on.
This aspect, too, of the artwork, exposed by physical disassembling, will become
precious material whose discovery was given opportunity by conservation*9.

Survey and Discussion Given Occasion by Artwork Conservation
There are times when information on an artwork is reinvestigated in detail, andsurveys carried out for artwork conservation. Among artworks housed in Keio
University, the conservation of The Maiden Tekona, for example, was completed in 2007. Artwork surveys by conservation specialists and Keio art specialists
had been carried out from before the year 2000, and proposals for its conservation and redisplay issued from the perspective of its value as a work in art history, its ties with the university, envisaged preservation measures and display
plan*10. Also, two artworks conserved in 2014, Return of Commodore Perry, with

Shiho Hasegawa

In recent years, the Object-Based Learning (below OBL) method has been advocated*8 as an approach for first steps to appreciation of cultural assets andtheir research. Rather than beginning art appreciation from the content of its
meaning, and understanding of its commentary, it involves observing it as an
object before the eyes (observing, here, depending on the object of focus, is not
limited to sight, but endorses use of other senses like touch and smell). Startingfrom external elements such as texture and quality, presence of a written signa-

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Before they actually touch an artwork, conservators carry out numerous experiments concerning the materials used and assumed technical methods. In otherwords, they put together a conservation plan through a simulation of the work
process, which can often be completed through investigation based on observation. The viewpoint at that time, rather than “viewing it as an artwork”, is oneof analysing and understanding the parts that compose the artwork and the elements of each one.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

At the exhibition symposium, panelist, Asa Ito made the point that doctors, toa certain extent, observe and touch the human body as a object *6. The way doctors discover illness and treat it by viewing a human as an object and examining
it objectively has much in common with conservators observing the conditionof an artwork objectively. Also, Yasuaki Miyazaki, a conservator, referring tohis own normal appreciation of artwork, said “I often look at artworks froman angle even outside of work”. When checking artwork condition, there is amethod of checking intricate parts by shining light on the artwork at an angle
to expose visible unevenness, flaking, etc., on the surface. Yet Miyazaki’s “Normal viewing of artwork” here might be perceived as an embodiment of this*7.
There could be such a thing as a view of an object, and a direction of eyeline, by
a conservator that is embodied in a certain way.

Essay

The Conservator’s Eye: Ascertaining Scope and Disassembling*9 ―Things revealed when conserving, and things shared in records including work de-tails are put to use in future artwork analysis and the next conservation. Regarding record archiving and sharing, see Yu Homma “On Opening Access to Conservation Documentation”
collected in this volume.
*10 ― Regarding the proposal for conservation and redisplay of The Maiden Tekona, see

Yasuhiro Yanai, “Kitamura Shikai ‘Tekona’ no Shufuku, Saitenji ni kansuru Teigen [Kitamura Shikai’s The Maiden Tekona: proposal for its conservation and redisplay]”, Keio University
Art Center Annual Report No. 7, Keio University Art Center, 2000, pp. 6–17.

095

094

Sec. 4

The artist’s discourse is one important material relating to an artwork, but is
not always sufficient words to argue for the artwork itself. The world woven
together by various discourses — of viewers of the artwork, owners, critics, researchers, hommage-payers — builds the surroundings for the artwork. In thatsense, the number of people who touch the artwork (here, “touch” is not limited to physical contact) create that number of layers of interpretation. Amongthem, how much more unusual is the conservator’s layer of interpretation, there
having been a moment of directly “touching” the artwork. It could even be described as a turning point in the life of the artwork.

In the process of conservation, various investigations and judgments start toamass. There are some stages of the investigation, etc. that will only be simulated in the mind of the conservator, while there are other things that emerge
from dialogue between those involved in the artwork, like owner and artist.
The part we are able to access as the “discourse of the conservator” is represented by the conservation report, worded assuming its role as material as legacy*11 ― Fumi Matsuya, “Keio Gijuku Shozosakuhin Chosa, Hozon Katsudo [Documenta-

Multiple discourses are formulated that emerge through conservation, such as
about the necessary artwork surveys for the conservation, discussions and future developments. By re-perceiving them as the branches and leaves extending
from artwork interpretation and research, could they bring a profound depth(as an aid) to the understanding of an artwork?

Conclusion
In conservation theory *13, the concepts of “reversibility” and “authenticity”
give support to that. However, artworks are emerging, one after another, in newmaterials and mediums, and the social background of artworks and the environment surrounding them are changing every moment. Meanwhile, conservation is a field that is continuing to reform and seek out that general sense.

Shiho Hasegawa

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Interpretation, Judgment and Record

Essay

In contrast, in contemporary art where conservation work is more difficult, consideration of preservation and conservation measures leads to a reconsiderationof the existence and method of expression of the artwork itself. For example, thestart of a conservation and preservation project for the Keio Shiki Senior HighSchool Mural has seen on-site surveys get underway, but not only issues of practical care of materials and supporting structures are being considered. Acts oftouching and intervening in the artwork itself, as are conservation and preservation, function as a clue to fundamental questions involving form of expression
and genre, such as “How do we perceive the preservation of street art?”, and also
to delving into the existence of that expression*12.

Keio Museum Commons

to future generations, recording that the conservation work has been carriedout. The conservator’s report is completed in the form of recording the series of
judgments, regarding various damage to the artwork, made in the conservation
process and the reasons for them, as preventative procedure for concerning conditions in the future. It is written extremely objectively and in clear sentences.
On the other hand, listening to conservators actually talking about their conservation and preservation work, they relate episodes in each job of their attachment to the details of an artwork, interest in the materials used and the trial anderror in experiments when making interventions. So, a huge energy and tireless,inquisitive mind lie behind that objective wording, which can be glimpsed momentarily. That can only be experienced on the site of conservation, but can beunderstood to be deeply interesting if considered as one of the interpretationsof an artwork.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Officers and Squadron, from an Official Visit to the Prince Regent at Shuri, Capital of Lewkyu and Exercise of Troops in a Temple Grounds in the Presence of the Imperial Commissioners; attributed to Peter Bernhard Wilhelm Heine, were part ofa collection of art material long housed in the library, whose existence was notknown about in detail. As well as conservation, artwork surveys were carriedout by the project curators, and their identification as works in art history investigated using scientific surveys like infrared imaging, as well as comparative
studies with similar artworks housed in other institutions*11. It led to its loan tothe exhibition 30th Anniversary of the Yokohama Museum of Art/160th Anniversary of the Opening of Yokohama Port, Following the Path of Commodore
Perry’s Arrival through Images Exhibition at the Yokohama Museum of Art in
2019. That concluded in finding common ground with related artworks outside
the university.

tion and Registration of the Arts Collection of Keio University]”, Keio University Art Center
Annual Report/Bulletin No.24, Keio University Art Center, 2017, pp. 52–59.

*12 ―This point is discussed in Yohko Watanabe, “Oyama Enrico Isamu Sakuhin Hozon
Shufuku Project ni tsuite”, Gendai Bijutsu no Hozon to Shufuku — Sono Rinen, Hoho, Joho
Network Kochiku no tame ni [“Preservation and conservation project for the artwork of Enrico Isamu Oyama”, Conservation and Preservation of Contemporary Art: For the Construction of
Network of Ideas, Methods, and Informations], Research Result Report (2015–2019 Grant-inAid for Scientific Research Basic Research (A) 15H01871), March 2020, pp. 73–84.

*13 ― For basic theory on contemporary conservation, Italy’s “1972 Restoration Charter”,

reflecting the thought of Cesare Brandi, is used as standard and for common recognition.
However, in every actual instance of conservation, individual response is made according to
the artwork and the situation surrounding it.
097

096

Sec. 4

Art Appreciation and “Conservation”:
Workshops with Children Providing Clues

Considering the opportunity of artwork conservation and the record produced
from it as one discourse and one interpretation among those sedimented in the
artwork, does not just remind us that ways of viewing an artwork are multifaceted, but also leads us towards a wide and deep viewpoint that is research in itself. Artworks are born and stay; interpretations of an artwork accumulate only
for the time they are sedimented, and the seeds are sown for research. They are
nurtured, and branches and leaves grow and extend, holding hidden the possibility leading to the great tree of artwork interpretation.

Research Fellow, Keio University Art Center

Essay

At the risk of making a misinterpretation: couldn’t the judgment on any artwork, decided based on the current state of the artwork by conservators or people involved in conservation, be perceived as one interpretation engraved on the
artwork in “this moment” of a macroscopic view? For that reason, it is important that the interpretation of “this moment” leaves a record for judgment ofright or wrong in the future.

Mayu Hashimoto

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

When thinking about the appreciation by children here, firstly I would like torefer to scenarios of art appreciation put into practice with children as focus
at art museums and schools. On these occasions, appreciation is done focusing on content and expression such as title, motif, elements of form, as well as
conversation between featured characters, and season or time expressed in the
artwork. The appreciation method widely adopted involves dialogue. Children
state what they felt or noticed, their guides such as teaching staff or museum
staff hear the children’s statements, allow them to exchange statements withothers, share the content of the statements with everyone participating, and so
deepening the appreciation*1. This method of appreciation enhances the powerof thought through participants’ independent appreciation. There are different
ideas, depending on the aim of the appreciation, as to when to provide partici-

Mayu Hashimoto

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

As the educational programme of this exhibition, we carried out workshops titled, “Why Do We Keep It? How Do We Keep It?: Workshops Thinking about
Conservation with Children”. School children participated from Minato City
Onarimon Junior High School “Art Club” and Keio Yochisha Elementary
School “Fun with Art Club”. We welcomed conservator, Yasuaki Miyazaki as
lecturer, who talked in detail about the actual conservation state of the exhibition artworks and artworks housed in Yochisa School that he had been involvedin conserving. Although there were a few different artworks discussed in eachschool’s workshop, they were both carried out along the common themes of“Appreciating the artwork”, “Hearing explanation about its conservation” and“Once more appreciating the artwork”. In this paper, I raise, in particular, theissue of art appreciation from the workshops, and consider what appreciation isthat incorporates the viewpoint of conservation.

*1 ―The way of thinking and method of “Visual Thinking Strategies” (VTS) is widely ad-

opted in art museums and schools, and also features in conservation dialogue. Philip Yenawine, Visual Thinking Strategies: Using Art to Deepen Learning Across School Disciplines, Harvard Education Press, 2013.
099

098

Sec. 4

sensed the physical nature of the artwork.
Reminding us of this physical nature of paintings are, for example, the artworksof Kazuo Shiraga (1924–2008) that fix the power of the paint along with tracesof his body movements on the canvas*2, and artworks from the “Spatial Concept” series by Lucio Fontana (1899–1968) that involved cutting through thecanvas. These artworks are all manifestations of the artists’ expressions as physical nature. On the other hand, artworks exhibited at the exhibition expose their
physical nature in a condition unintended by the artist. It means that the appreciator, too, unintentionally confronts the artwork from the aspect of it as an
object. By confronting the physical nature of artwork from the perspective ofconservation, have the children realised that works of art are physical presencesthat rip and deteriorate in the same way as various everyday objects?

How, then, was their appreciation of flat-surfaced artworks? Shown examples
displayed in the art space of Untitled by Junzaburo Nishiwaki and Danshi sokatarogu (General Catalogue of Males), 1963 by Natsuyuki Nakanishi, the children immediately spotted, in the former, the still peeling pigment about to fall
off that is hardly fixed on the canvas, and in the latter, the repairs to tears in thebacking, tape marks, etc. Neither artwork was in any way in good condition,
but since the exhibition had the theme of conservation, they were displayed intheir peeling condition and without being put in display cases. By immediately
catching sight of the tears in the artwork, the children appear to have strongly

I would also like to consider another type of appreciation; that is, the relationship between artwork interpretation and conservation. One junior high school
student said, “All the artworks look very clean, and I was surprised to hear they
have been conserved”. These words tell us that although all the artworks displayed had gone through conservation, as far as appreciation goes, it was difficult to pick out the conserved areas. In such an instance, we tried to contributeto the children’s understanding by showing photographs of the artwork before
conservation, and material referred to during conservation. One of those artworks was Flower: Grand Swing by Kozo Inoue. Before conservation of thisartwork, soiling was visible on its lower section. Since filling and careful supplementary colouring were carried out, the conserved areas are not noticeable
enough to find. However, re-viewing the artwork from the perspective of “aconserved artwork” following Mr. Miyazaki’s slideshow, served to resurrect thetime that had passed since it left the artist’s hands. The soiling had been due toname graffiti by a student of Hiyoshi Campus, and a memo thought to be recording a place for a meeting, which conveys to us that the artwork had been
positioned within reach and had melted into the everyday lives of students. By
knowing the conservation process of artworks, helps us sense the depth of thetime encompassed by the artwork in front of us.

Mayu Hashimoto

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

I will first raise the example of Miniature Lighthouse, Gifted in Celebration of
Fukuzawa Yukichi’s 60th Birthday by Ujihiro Okuma and Chokichi Suzuki.
This work was displayed in a way to allow a method of direct artwork appreciation, rather than through a glass case, so that the children had the means toappreciate the artwork at close proximity. When asked, “Where do you thinkhas been conserved?” children indicated the intricate parts such as the ladderor clock hands, and also the parts attached to the main body. Another workof sculpture, Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi by Kaheiji Wada, although displayed in a case, they were able to appreciate it by walking around it. Viewing
the back of the figure carefully, too, they perceived the bust as a human body,telling us, “Aren’t the ears, nose and arms easily broken?” It is clear that the children sensed the skill in the artwork of the projecting parts and intricate expression, at the same time as its fragility as an object.

Keio Museum Commons

Touching on the Physical Nature of Artworks

The Story of Conservation

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Based on a similar method of appreciation, these workshops were on the themeof “Thinking about conservation”, so questions were set by staff such as, “Where
do you think has been conserved on this artwork?” and “Where do you think
were parts in bad condition?”. The latter was introduced using the expression,“parts in bad condition”, because at the beginning of the workshop, an artwork
was compared to a human body. Artwork conservation is like our bodies; theareas of bad condition are healed by a conservator who is a doctor for artworks.
By incorporating the viewpoint of “conservation”, children carry out their appreciation while noticing the materials and physical nature of the artwork. For amoment, they part from the world of the artwork’s content — its title and story— and appreciate the artwork with attention on its aspect as an object; but whatkind of appreciation does that lead to? Below, I refer to actual scenarios withchildren, and consider them from the two perspectives of “an artwork’s physicalnature” and “its conservation story”.

Essay

pants with knowledge and information about the artist and artwork, or whether to let the appreciation progress without providing any such information.

The Maiden Tekona by Shikai Kitamura was mentioned by several children
from both schools as the artwork that left an impression on them. It is an example, which I shall raise here, of a deeper blending of the two viewpoints of*2 ― Known for his examples of foot painting involving holding onto a rope suspended
from the ceiling and painting dynamically using his feet.

101

100

Sec. 4Furthermore, as items permitting touching in the exhibition, there was a display of the tools used by conservators, and at the workshop, Mr. Miyazaki introduced the tools that he usually works with. The children were very interested
in these tools. They picked up the various tools, arranged by use, and it was impressive to see them enjoying testing their feel. The children who were involvedin producing artwork on a daily basis in extracurricular and club activities appeared to be sensing something of the work of conservation, tied to their own
experience, as they held and moved the tools in their hands. In this exhibition,
tools were treated as an important motif mediating between conservator andartwork, but also served the role of linking appreciator and conservator.
By blending the two perspectives of “an artwork’s physical nature” and “its conservation story” further with the bodily experience of “Tracing the movementsof the conservator’s hands” as seen so far, I think we can capture the nature ofartwork appreciation carried out from the perspective of conservation in theseworkshops.

Mayu Hashimoto

These sentences convey that the children understood deeply the conservation
strategy of maintaining the state that stopped at the memory of the devastationof war, and thus the lost arms were not reconstructed. At the same time, the story of its conservation reinforced the artwork’s original story, and we can detectthat bringing appreciation in many layers among the children. By incorporating
the perspective of conservation, an appreciation that includes a different story
to what the artist intended manifests itself, in accord with the physical natureof the artwork.

Essay

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

By not restoring all the missing parts, the hands that separated from the bodyand the sections that turned black like the background complement the sad
expression of the girl. I understood well how the times progressed from 1945 to
the present day, and what the story was up until the making of this sculpture.

Keio Museum Commons

The artwork, The Maiden Tekona was a normal statue of a woman before conservation. Despite losing both arms in the war, the arms were never restored.
When we asked why the arms were never restored, we were told it was to convey the horror and ugliness of war to future generations. Hearing that, I knew
better than before what conservation is.

As related above, these workshops have facilitated an appreciation treating
physical damage, either suffered or imposed after completion of the artwork, as
the individual value of an artwork. Furthermore, the newly added stories about
its conservation connect deeply with people, history and time. An appreciation
incorporating the perspective of conservation is one that includes the process of
the artwork’s socialization, having left the hands of the artist. Indeed, the factof stories attaching to an artwork that were unintended by the artist, suggests
various events such as reevaluation and changes in ownership after their death.
However, conservation has, more than anything, the physical condition of theartwork as prerequisite. As it is necessarily connected to the needs of the artwork as object, it ties directly to appreciation.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

artwork appreciation combining the perspective of conservation already discussed, namely, “Touching on physical nature” and “Knowing the road trodden by the artwork through conservation”. The work is a marble sculpture by
Shikai Kitamura who was active from Meiji into the Taisho Period, and is a precious example of an extant work. Conservation of this work, damaged in theBombing of Tokyo in 1945, raised issues such as how far to reconstruct the missing sections of the artwork, and to what extent to remove soiling. Since theselinked directly to the artwork’s expression, there was serious discussion among
specialists before deciding on a conservation strategy *3. When the children wereasked for their impression of the artwork, before anything else, they pointed
out that it had no arms. Responding to the children’s reaction, we explained thethinking behind the conservation. At the viewing by junior high school children, they were also told about the legend of the “Girl from Mama”, the subjectof the artwork. With the elementary school children, the subject matter was not
explained, but they were given extra information about the weight of the artwork, and the era in which it was produced. In their reflections afterwards, anelementary child and junior high school child each wrote the following.

*3 ―The following gives details of the way of thinking regarding conservation of thiswork. Yasuhiro Yanai, “Kitamura Shikai ‘Tekona’ no Shufuku, Saitenji ni kansuru Teigen[Kitamura Shikai’s The Maiden Tekona: proposal for its conservation and redisplay]”, Keio
University Art Center Annual Report No. 7, Keio University Art Center, 2000, pp. 6–17.
Also, the Conservation Record (work record dated 5/7/2007) by Hirotake Kurokawa and Yuji
Takahashi (Bronze Studio) records the basic policy and conservation history in detail.
103

102

Sec. 4

Nodoka Shimada
Assistant Curatorial Staff, Keio Museum Commons“Conservation” and “Restoration”

The preservation treatment of works of art or cultural assets is, indeed, called“conservation”. The difference between it and the “restore to working order/
repair” when, say, an electrical appliance is broken, is a comparison often used
to explain it. However, in the field of Japanese Buddhist sculpture, the term “restore” is not uncommon. The Bijutsu-in Restoration Studio, which leads muchof the conservation of the Buddhist statues, etc. designated national treasuresand important cultural assets in Japan, uses the word “restore” exclusively, and

The terms “Excavated ancient artifacts” and “Inherited ancient artifacts” areused to describe the status of cultural assets. “Excavated ancient artifacts” arehistorical cultural assets buried in the earth, while, in contrast, “Inherited ancient artifacts” are historical cultural assets handed down through people. Forgotten objects are excavated from the earth or the bottom of the sea, and draw
renewed interest. The majority of ancient artifacts of China and Central Asia,
Greece, Rome, Egypt, etc., came via this route, and are now exhibited in museums. In contrast, Buddhist statues and the like, dedicated in the main building of Japanese temples and carefully guarded by one generation after anotherof chief priests, are “Inherited ancient artifacts”. Japan has an overwhelmingly
large number of “Inherited ancient artifacts” compared with other regions, andconsequently the view of artifacts is not always one of archaeological interest.
The characteristic of “Inherited ancient artifacts” is the memories of old from aplace, and the religious element that they hold.
The concept of present-day conservation is fostered in the cultural realm of“Excavated ancient artifacts”, and that way of thinking is also applied to theconservation of ancient cultural assets in Japan. Satoshi Yabuuchi argues thegreatest concept in conservation of cultural assets is prioritizing authenticity, ororiginality, and also explains the following about the principles that should be
guarded to maintain authenticity in the repair of Buddhist statues.
1 Top priority of original parts
Preservation is prioritised of parts originating in the time of the creation of
the Buddhist statue. It is strictly prohibited to shave these parts, or conceal
them with irremovable material.

Nodoka Shimada

The reason for this issue was the use of words in the commentary texts. I led thewriting of commentaries for the sculpture works, and inadvertently used theword “restore” in my drafts. However, on this point, I was corrected by the factthat works of art are “conserved”, not “restored”, which made me think of how
many people in the field of Japanese art use the word “restore”.

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

In this exhibition, I was involved in displays and events under the title “Tangite me”, from its preparation period to final closure. There were various perspectives and realizations in coming into contact with cultural assets, and I also
made many discoveries by listening to the opinions, impressions and words emanating from each different viewpoint. I study the history of Japanese Buddhist
sculpture. Based on what I have noticed through my involvement in the exhibition, here I would like to investigate the meaning of the artworks — especiallyworks of modern Japanese sculpture — which exist alongside the university, being offered for display, and being passed down from person to person.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The artworks were lined up in the exhibition venue, their vying for public viewleaving a deep impression. One exhibit at this exhibition, Injo by Eisaku Hasegawa, stood right at the back of the display room with a light shining upon it, andthe emotion I felt when I saw it is hard to forget, as its expression looked different to normal times when it was stored in the corner of the repository.

Essay

has the Japanese word for “restore” in its official title. In reports about Buddhist
statues that have been conserved, we find both “conservation” and “restoration”
used to describe the projects. The Association for Conservation of National
Treasures, which leads the conservation of paintings, etc. among the ancient
cultural assets of Japan, also uses the word “restore”, so it is clear the issue is not
one of being three or two-dimensional. Does that mean that the restore of Buddhist statues and the conservation of modern sculpture are different activities? I
surmise that the clue lies not in the content of the activity, but the status of theartwork in question.

The University’s “Excavated Ancient Artifacts”
and “Inherited Ancient Artifacts”

2 Maintaining present state
The present state of a Buddhist statue has its historical journey engraved uponit, so it should not be simply removed. Restores of around 30 years ago involved removing all later elements added over the following generations, but
now they are largely left in their present state.

105

104

Sec. 4

Despite what might be seen as the best conservation material and technology
in the present day, in some decades’ time, better material may emerge. Or perhaps another conservation concept will prevail. For those times, we must perform a conservation of elements so that it can be returned to its former state.

The story of “Excavated ancient artifacts”, “Inherited ancient artifacts”, etc. is
one of several thousand years, but learning that these matters are surprisingly
close to hand was one of the discoveries I made through the exhibition. I am
sure there are many people with experiences like not wanting to throw away a
strange object that your grandmother bought in a foreign country, or discovering during spring-cleaning a record you had even forgotten existed. Broadly
speaking, these too are the beginnings of “Excavated ancient artifacts” and “Inherited ancient artifacts”.

However, in the conservation of Buddhist statues which still continue today tohold a function as objects of worship, it is often necessary to give priority overthese principles to the finishing touches that retain the image of the “Revered
Buddha”, such as making pitiful cracks on the face less noticeable. It is virtually impossible to satisfy all of the above three concepts at the same time, andYabuuchi tells of these usual contradictions and conflicts in cultural asset conservation*1.

Keio Museum CommonsAmong the exhibits in the exhibition, The Maiden Tekona by Shikai Kitamura had surely gone through the most turbulent times before being conserved.
The work received high praise in the 3rd Bunten Exhibition (a Japanese annualarts exhibition sponsored by the Ministry of Education) of 1909, and later was
donated to Keio University Library (present-day the Old Library) completed
in 1912, where it decorated the entrance hall*2. However, it was damaged in theBombing of Tokyo in 1945, and lost extensive parts in the confusion after thewar. Its following whereabouts cannot be traced by any record, and we can deduce from past surveys by Art Center curators that it had been recognised as
lost for a long time. Its rediscovery was due to contact from a caretaker who
was sorting the basement storeroom for refurbishment. Its conservation began
properly in 2005, 60 years after being damaged.
Said to have adorned Fujiyama Memorial Hiyoshi Library (present-day Fujiyama Memorial Hall), Injo and Flower: Grand Swing by Kozo Inoue, are works
of art that have lived through many changes in environment as the function of
the facility shifted. Flower: Grand Swing is a set of five artworks, experiencing
a time when just three of them were displayed, and after going missing, werediscovered separately. When conservation started, Injo had noticeable staining
and discolouration from lines likely caused by dripping water, suggesting thatthe storage over many years of the artwork was under conditions far from ideal

Nodoka Shimada

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Seen in this way, in the transmission of objects that are “Inherited ancient artifacts”, we can understand that it is not just the object that continues to be inherited, but also a coexistence with the knowledge and technology of the groupsurrounding it. The field of Japanese art that is the cultural realm of “Inheritedancient artifacts” frequently uses the word “restore”. Isn’t this because there isan established understanding of the contemporary conservation of cultural assets based on its meaning as technology supporting the transmission of cultural
assets, and also as future bearer of cultural assets? Depending on the nature of
the object — how the focus of conservation came to be here now: is it an “Excavated ancient artifact” or “Inherited ancient artifact”? — there are changes in
the concept of conservation priorities and the way of considering preservation.

Similarly, the works of art in the university are not necessarily stored in the ideal environment, or always placed for people to appreciate. Even among the artworks exhibited on this occasion were several that ended up being conserved
following contact from storeroom caretakers or students, not usually connectedwith artwork.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

On the other hand, Buddhist statues had been inherited from ancient times
through “restoration” by Buddhist sculptors, which differs from the concept ofcultural asset conservation in the present day. For example, the Great Buddha
of Todaiji Temple in Nara, soon after its consecration in the year 752, met withthe catastrophe of a fallen head in 855 (Veritable Records of Emperor Montoku ofJapan). Imperial Prince Shinnyo, who led the restoration of the Great Buddha
at this time, took up the position of “Government office supervisor of temple
affairs to restore the Great Buddha of Todaiji Temple”. Also, construction forrestoration of state-sponsored temples was borne by the government position
called “Office of restore” established in 818. Buddhist statues, then, were protected and inherited from one person to another based on the act of “restore” asone element comprising a Buddhist temple complex.

Essay

The University’s “Excavated Ancient Artifacts”
and “Inherited Ancient Artifacts”

3 Reversibility*2 ― Regarding The Maiden Tekona, refer chiefly to Yasuhiro Yanai, “Kitamura Shikai ‘Te*1 ― Satoshi Yabuuchi, Kowareta Butsuzo no Koe wo kiku [Listening to the Voices of Bro-ken Buddhist Statues: Cultural Asset Preservation and Conservation], KADOKAWA, 2015.

kona’ no Shufuku, Saitenji ni kansuru Teigen [Kitamura Shikai’s The Maiden Tekona: proposal for its conservation and redisplay]”, Keio University Art Center Annual Report No. 7,
Keio University Art Center, 2000.
107

106

Sec. 4we were able to witness in the display room, the soul of the Bunten Exhibition
specially selected, top award-winning work, set free by the revived surface ofthe sculpture*4 .

Injo, on the other hand, despite a similar “Excavated ancient artifact”— likeroute, top priority of original parts has come before maintaining present state,since as much as possible of the visible streaking all over the statue has been
removed. As preparation for the actual task of supplementing colour, careful
investigation was carried out which included research of Hasegawa’s production method, collection of photographic material from the time of its originalcompletion, and analysis of the traces of colouring on its surface. In this way,

*3 ― Masahiro and Kiyomi Wada, Kotei wa Shunsui no gotoku: Wada Kaheiji no Chokoku
Sakuhin Chosa Kiroku [A Creative Process Like a Snow-fed Stream: Investigation Report ofKaheiji Wada’s Sculpture], Masahiro Wada, 2019.

Thus, the principles and concepts given importance at the time of conservation differ according to the artwork, and we might even say the three had theirown three ways. “Excavated ancient artifacts” and “Inherited ancient artifacts”
raised here is merely one way of looking at things, while the main matters formaking judgments in conservation are, rather, the condition, original material
and technique of the artwork. However, learning conservation together withthe history surrounding the artwork, I believe, will, from now on, prove closely
connected to consideration of how an artwork should be.

Touching People’s Attention
Universities and schools are not facilities with the main aim of exhibiting. The
cases of the artworks mentioned above, I think, tell of the difficulty of keeping
works of art alive in these places. I heard words of sympathy from a former curator who had viewed the exhibition: “Even though at the time when the artwork
is displayed in an office or factory it is appreciated with enthusiasm by thoseconcerned, once several decades pass, and the person in charge is gone, it becomes something difficult to deal with”. Nevertheless, the purpose of works ofart is not just to place them in a display room. Neither do they exist to be kept

Nodoka Shimada

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic“Excavated ancient artifact”— like The Maiden Tekona had both arms largely
missing, but conservation was completed without replacing them, and leaving
the soot on its surface without returning it to the original white of the marble.
The fractures to its back and front are still checked on clearly, and minimal measures have been undertaken to enable its redisplay. We know that one principleof conservation is to prioritise maintaining the present state. Yet in view of theprinciple of top priority of original parts, there must have been an option tocompletely remove the soot from the surface. What determined the judgment
here is no doubt the history that The Maiden Tekona itself had experienced, incurring soiling and loss as a result of the war.

Keio Museum Commons

Based on the perspectives of “Excavated ancient artifacts” and “Inherited ancient artifacts”, let’s look here at how the above artworks have been conserved.

The Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi, which reaches us today amid a connection of people in the way of an “Inherited ancient artifact”, saw a complementof missing parts that is generally not carried out in the conservation of cultural
assets. Relying on old photographs of the bronze figure in the Fukuzawa Memorial Hall that was lost at metal contribution during World War II, and themolding of the second Fukuzawa Memorial Hall statue reconstructed by Wada,
it was returned to its original appearance at the time of production, with nocracks or omissions. Therefore, this plaster master is also a material for remembering the first bronze figure. By adding new plaster to the original parts of theplaster, and giving the whole figure a sympathetic coloured finish, it could besaid to have lost its reversibility. It has also parted from both concepts of top priority of original parts and maintaining the present state. However, through thisconservation, the Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi has enhanced its appearance
as a portrait sculpture.
Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

These artworks were, for a time, forgotten within the university, but due totheir rediscovery, have undergone conservation and helped realise the exhibition. This route has almost been like that of “Excavated ancient artifacts”. In
contrast, with a “Inherited ancient artifact”— like route has been the Bust Figure of Fukuzawa Yukichi by Kaheiji Wada. This work sat in the canteen of a boat
training camp in Toda City, Saitama Prefecture. The reason for its conservation
was a report from a student about its damage. It was an important discovery because the plaster master for bronze sculpture is valuable material in the historyof art, too. Also, an investigation by surviving family revealed that, during thewar, it had been evacuated to that city by the artist himself *3. It escaped war
damage due to its evacuation, and was not forgotten, but displayed as a portrait
sculpture, with material available thanks to the investigation by surviving family. It is as if the artwork has been passed down within a connection with people. We can imagine that many of the artworks existing in the various facilities
and environments encompassed by the institution of the university have manyother pasts to tell.

Essay

for wood carving.

*4 ― Regarding Injo, refer chiefly to Yuji Sakouchi (Commentary) “V-7 Injo” (Shuji Tana-ka, ed., Kindai Nihon Chokoku Shusei, Dai 2 kan, Meiji-koki, Taisho hen [Collection of Modern Japanese Sculpture Vol. 2: Late Meiji-Taisho], Kokshokankokai, 2012).
109

108

Sec. 4

Imitate to Copy: Thinking about Conservationby Making Art Education at Keio University
as a Clue

The act of viewing artworks from the perspective of conservation as put into
practice in this exhibition was, in fact, a look back on the time the artwork has
traced, and on history. Also, it was a great delight to be able to touch with the
fervor of the people involved in the artworks through reports and investigation
documents brought together on the occasion of conservation. Times when conservation and exhibition are perceived as a part of the never-ending relationship between people and artwork, are, I believe, moments of “touching” theartwork.

Essay

in a storeroom equipped with the ideal environment. Isn’t an artwork-like existence one where, in a location where many different people come and mix, it isbrought to life forever as it is handed down from person to person involved in
it? I sense that the artworks within the university are concealing considerable
potential of this kind.

Katsurako Yamada
Assistant Curatorial Staff, Keio University Art Center

At the Beginning

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Such a tradition of Keio schools’ education is supposed to have started when
Michisei Kono and Hitoshi Seimiya were employed as the art teachers in Yochisha Elementary School, and it was not unrelated to these historical facts that theworks above stated were brought to Keio University. Kogoro Yoshida said about
those days as following.
When Sumie Kobayashi became the chief of Yochisha Elementary School,
there came a number of excellent teachers like Chiyu Kikuchi, Zenzo Oikawa, Seichiro Samezima, Hitoshi Seimiya, Michisei Kono, and Hitoo Yokota. Kobayashi attached importance to subjects of self-expression as soon as heassumed the post, and by paying his particular attention to such subjects ofcomposition, art, handicraft and so on., he invited the teachers above named

Katsurako Yamada

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Ashinoko Lake Scene, Hakone which is hung in a room in Keio Yochisha Elementary School, is a work by Michisei Kono who was a member of an art group, Sodosha and is now evaluated highly as a painter of Taisho realism. In addition, Sadao Tsubaki’s Mt. Fuji (Lake Kawaguchi) is hung in another room of the sameschool building. They are common not only in that they were the members of
Sodosha, but also in the fact that they were art teachers at this Keio Yochisha
Elementary School. The same thing is also true for Hisashi Suda who painted
Duck. He also taught as an art teacher of Keio Chutobu Junior High School,
and was involved in the education of Keio University. At Keio Schools, thisprinciple of attaching importance to art education has been inherited as a long
tradition. Besides the above, there are Takehiko Mohri who taught at SeniorHigh School, Kinpei Senba at Keio Futsubu School and others*1.

*1 ― Keio Museum Commons (ed.), One Hundred Treasures of the Keio Collections, Keio

Museum Commons, 2020, pp. 149–172.

111

110

Sec. 4for Kishida’s view of art, proposed to invite Ryusei Kishida as an art teacher *5.
Regrettably, Kishida did not accept this request, and it was Hitoshi Seimiya andKono Michisei who took charge of the painting department of Yochisha Elementary School at the recommendation of Kishida and instead of him.

Since then, Keio schools have inherited their own education that values art tothe present day.
In this paper, I overview the relationship between Keio Yochisha Elementary
School and Sodosha first, and then, by incorporating the viewpoint of conservation along with the word “copying” as a keyword, think about the problem of
the appreciation and preservation of works at educational institutions.

Characteristics of Sodosha� s Art Education
With this personal affairs as a trigger, Yochisha Elementary School after that
became a place for practicing Sodosha’s own art education. For example, in August 1924, a lecture-meeting for elementary and junior high school teachers,“Art Workshop/For Educational Practitioners and Art Researchers,” was organised by Yochisha Elementary School, in which not only Seimiya and Kono,
but also Ryusei Kishida, Shohachi Kimura, Kazumasa Nakagawa participated.
All of them were painters related to Sodosha*6.

Keio Yochisha Elementary School and Sodosha

The characteristic of Kishida’s those days’ insistence was in his thought that the
primary purpose of art education was “tokuiku (moral education)”, and that headopted the appreciation education and “jiyu ringaho (free copying method)”as the core for this. Based on such Kishida’s thought, Yashiro pays his attention
to that Kishida’s educational theory not only recommends to appreciate a lot ofmasterpieces from the past to the present, but also its important point was puton the positive copying of them*7.
This characteristic was also inherited by the educational methods of Seimiya,Kono, and Tsubaki, who conducted education based on those Kishida’s ideas.
For example, Kishida says about Kono’s teaching method in his text “Art Education at Keio Yochisha Elementary School”, as following.
Mr. Kono also says that children cannot know the beauty if free to leave.
Therefore, at the class of sketching, he kept in mind to show the beauty ofmaterial one by one, and he himself sometimes drew its beauty on the blackboard. Also, he says that he respected a kind of free painting, and in case there
was no model for it, he drew still life and other things on the blackboard actually, let children copy and colour these freely, and he showed various beautiful
painting and let them copy freely, too.*8

Katsurako Yamada

In Yochisha Elementary School around the same time, the chief, Sumie Kobayashi, took the lead in introducing and practicing new educational methods,
and various reforms were carried out *4 . Kanae Yamamoto was also invited togive a lecture at Yochisha Elementary School around this time, and by such afact, it proves that Yochisha Elementary School itself has been interested in free
painting as art education. Under these circumstances, Zenzo Oikawa, one of theteachers at Yochisha Elementary School at the time, who had a strong sympathy

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Ryusei Kishida who was a main figure in Sodosha and held his own view of art,
took a critical position against free painting education, and therefore developed
a different educational theory from Yamamoto’s and made also such statements.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Behind the invitation of Kono to Keio Yochisha Elementary School as an art
teacher, there was the growing social interest in art education centred on thefree painting movement of Kanae Yamamoto*3. Yamamoto was once impressedby children’s free paintings which he saw during his stay in Moscow, and has
been actively working after returning to Japan to spread them in Japan. Then,
what Yamamoto criticised in particular, was the way of art education like ingovernment-published textbook at that time, in which teachers taught pupils
to paint pictures by referring to existing ones, and in contrast, in the free painting education that Yamamoto preached, it was encouraged to free the children
from the restraint of tracing such examples and to freely paint their original
pictures that express the natural shapes and colours they perceive. Yamamoto’s
insistence spread all over the country soon through his lectures and exhibitions,and caused controversy over the pros and cons.

Essay

in particular.*2*5 ― Naoko Kikuchi, “Tracing the History of the Homespun Works of Oikawa Zenzo,”

Bulletin of Morioka Junior College Iwate Prefectural University, Vol.23, 2021, pp. 1–14.

*2 ― Kohon Keio Gijuku Yochisha shi [A Variorum of History of Keio Yochisha Elementary*6 ― Kohon Keio Gijuku Yochisha shi [A Variorum of History of Keio Yochisha Elementary

School], Keio Yochisha Elementary School, 1965, p. 448.

School], Keio Yochisha Elementary School, 1965, pp. 485–487.

*3 ― Shuji Yashiro, Art education by Sodosha group, Mita Tetsugakukai, 1989, pp. 105–131.

*7 ― Shuji Yashiro, ibid., 1989, pp. 123–124.

*4 ― Kohon Keio Gijuku Yochisha shi [A Variorum of History of Keio Yochisha Elementary*8 ― Ryusei Kishida, Zuga Kyoiku Ron [Theory of Drawing Education], Kaizosha, 1925,

School], Keio Yochisha Elementary School, 1965, pp. 95–96.

p. 121.

113

112

Sec. 4serve the work with his/her own eyes first and understand it. For that end, it
is requested to be familiar with the techniques and materials of the painted
works very well. Because the appropriate treatment for restoration is carriedout by this, it is very natural that restorers are very particular about painting
techniques and materials. For restorers, copying is one of the important actsin order to understand the work to be restored and, at the same time, to restore
it appropriately. *12

In this time’s exhibition, tools related to restoration were especially exhibited.
Most of them are based on commercially available tools and materials, and they
have been used properly to the needs on the time and case, and if necessary,
added ingenuity to themselves. It reflects the restorers’ concerns caused by eachwork and based on their judgment of each time. Kijima also says an interesting
viewpoint about the experience acquired by copying.

What is Acquired by Copying*9 ― It can be read from the past descriptions that both Seimiya and Tsubaki drew pic-tures on the blackboard as samples for the pupils. Shuji Yashiro, ibid., 1989. See Note 9. In
addition, Yoshida looks back on that time and writes as following. “Maybe it was a rare casein Japan for elementary school pupils to paint oil paintings in art class. Every week, Pupils
often sketched the flowers from flower shop and fruits from fruit shop.” Kogoro Yoshida,ibid., 1984, pp. 95–96.

They may say that knowledge of old painting techniques and materials is notnecessary for appreciating paintings, and even if anyone is interested in it, it
is too specialised and difficult to approach. However, the work of copying
makes it possible for the person who copies practically to capture elementsthat cannot be understood by just looking and observing, and, at the sametime, that cannot be understood without copying. […] The act of copying isa work of verifying through copying, what kind of material the painter used
for his painting and how he painted it. It contains an element of research. […]Then, what can we make clear by copying? […] For example, we can indicate
the pigments’ overlapping, thickness, mixture, kind or type, transparency
and opacity, hardness and stickiness, brushwork, painting procedure and soon. They are delicate elements that are only understood by painting it practically, and therefore, the real pleasure of copying is just in the concrete experience of such delicate feelings.*13

What is understood from this is that, even if standing actually in front of a workand looking at it, there is a rich world that cannot be touched without moving
hands. Kijima says that, when copying by trial and error, it is surely importantto read past technique books well, but further, he says “Those who copies, findinnumerable elements not described in the technique book, and by them, canget closer to the charm of the original work”*14 . While the act of copying includes elements of research and learning, it certainly makes clear a new aspect of
the original work which cannot be known only by standing in front of it and looking at closely, but can be glimpsed only through the experience of moving hands.

*10 ― Ex. cat. Michisei Kono [A rare Genius of Taisho, Michisei Kono, Focusing on New*12 ―Takayasu Kijima, “The Beginning of the Classical Painting Technique Study Group”
in ex.cat. An Exhibition of Copies, Okawa Museum of Art, 2018. p. 14.

Discoveries], The Japan Association of Art Museums, 2008.

*13 ―Takayasu Kijima, ibid., 2018, pp. 12–14.

*11 ― Complete Works of Ryusei Kishida, Iwanami Shoten, 1979.

*14 ―Takayasu Kijima, ibid., 2018, p. 14.

Katsurako Yamada

You might have noticed that this exhibition An Exhibition of Copies includes
many restorers’. There is a reason for that. Restoration is a job where people
can touch the original works daily. What is important for a restorer is to ob-

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Takayasu Kijima, a restorer and professor of the Department of Cultural Properties, Graduate School of Fine Arts, Tokyo University of the Arts, says about
the relationship between the act of copying classical paintings and the one ofrestoration as following.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

And further, when Kishida talks about the driving force of art production, heemphasised the influence of established works. If following his opinion, someone who learns a new way of looking at by established works, is inclined to review nature with his/her own hands and eyes, and the moment, the imitation
instinct is demonstrated in him/her *11. For this reason, he believed in children’sability to observe and express, and tried to develop it.

The act of copying benefits only those who produce art, and it seems a uselessact for others particularly. But it doesn’t necessarily seem true. Let’s take a lookat the exhibition An Exhibition of Copies held at the Okawa Museum in 2018. In
this exhibition, copied reproductions of classical paintings by painters and restores who participated in the “Koten Kaiga Giho Kenkyukai (The Society for
Research on Old Master Painting Techniques)” were exhibited.

Essay

Although there are small differences among Kono, Seimiya and Tsubaki’s teaching methods, they are common in that they sometimes drew their own examples on the blackboard and let the children learn the pictures based on them*9.
Their emphasis on copying nature and high-quality paintings might has been aconsequence of the fact that Kishida and Kono were inspired by painters suchas Cezanne, Van Gogh, and Dürer, and enthusiastically absorbed and learned
Western painting techniques on their own. Kono has been also influenced byhis father and an art teacher, Jiro Kono, and familiar with a large number of art
books from his early age*10.

115

114

Sec. 4At the End

As examined in the previous section, Kijima touched the popular opinion thatthe knowledge necessary for copying and the experience gained by copying areso specialised and high-level that they are not always necessary for appreciating the work, and then, suggested that such a prejudice has kept people awayfrom their interest in copying. Truly, the elements such as “paints’ overlapping,thickness” and “paints’ [...] transparency and opacity” are those ones confirmed
visually, and therefore, they seem what can be viewed without the act of copying. Then, is it true that features and charms of these works cannot be known
only by looking at them?

In Mita Campus, there are other paintings that can be viewed at close range incrowded places. One of them is Keiji Usami’s Eventually They All Come into a
Circle No.1. This mural work was produced by Usami requested from the architect, Fumihiko Maki when building a new library in Mita Campus. As the installation place for this work has been specified in advance, Usami determined
this work’s composition according to the nature of the place of entrance lobby
with the flow of people coming and going *15. However, in spite of the bad condition of installation location, as the protection by acrylic plates and so on, was
not done by the artist’s intention, a lot of damages caused by people were foundin the process of the observation of recent restoration.

Keio Museum Commons

In this way, many works are left at Keio University, and among them, even theworks that many people can usually see, are not a little in danger of being damaged or lost. One of the reasons may be that, because the installation place is
not one like exhibition room that presupposes appreciation, people do not havetheir intention to pay attention to it, and another reason may be that, before
that, because it is difficult to recognise those works as art works, they don’tknow how to appreciate them. However, as discussed in this paper, the way toappreciate art works is not only to look at them and pay their attention to theirbeauty. Even if the art historical value of the work is not known at that time, theelements that seem simple and trivial are linked to a certain aspect of the work.
At Keio Yochisha Elementary School, while inheriting the prewar education,
efforts to clean the outdoor sculptures in the school have been made together
with the pupils in recent years*16. In addition to production and appreciation,by bringing the perspective of the relationship with works, works and memories are inherited, and new relationships are formed with the times, so I believe.

Katsurako Yamada

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Next, when someone attempts to get information about a work, there are sometimes such cases as being unable to look at the work itself sufficiently. I recall
that Kijima said that, when copying, it is important not only to observe closely,
but also to refer to technique books. The same is true for actual cases of restoration. For example, Genichiro Inokuma’s Democracy is a mural painting on
wooden panel which now decorates the east and west of the university cafeteria.
Looking at the whole, the upper part of this work is in the shape of a triangle,
and the left and right sides of the lower part are cut out diagonally or in the
shape of overlapped rectangles respectively. This is because the shape of mural
was determined to fit the building of the “Student Hall” which was the original
exhibition place, namely along the shape of the roof at the top, along the railing of the stairs at the bottom left, and along the railing of the balustrade at thebottom right. Mr. Miyazaki, who was in charge of the restoration of this work,says while recalling that time, “There were few materials to refer at that time.
Therefore, why the shape of the mural was like this, was not understood only
by looking at the picture of the work.” And further, he says that, when looking
at the pictures of the student hall, it became clear not only that it was made according to the shape of the architecture, but also that the dirt seen at the bottom
was caused by its installation location. In this way, each piece of informationthat is easily overlooked, gradually becomes an important and precious material
to think about the work, by actually moving hands, going to check or listening
to various stories.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The first thing to notice is that the information obtained by standing in frontof the work and relying solely on vision is too limited. Needless to say, this will
be an obvious fact. For example, the information obtained from the weight andfeeling of the work on holding it, is a basic and important factor that makes up
the work, but many people cannot have the opportunities to touch such feelings. Even if there were, it is prohibited to touch it innocently, accordingly theact of copying is required. These acts should be allowed without extraordinaryinterests in the object, whether it is of materials, of techniques or of the beautyof the work,

Essay

Can� t Know Only by Looking at*15 ― Ex. cat. Keiji Usami Retrospective Exhibition, Sezon Museum of Art, 1992, p. 163.
*16 ― In Keio Yochisha Elementary School, the prewar departments of “art” and "handi-

craft" remains in the today’s education system the traces of which are confirmed in that “artdepartment painting room” and “art department workshop” are established, and full-timeteachers have been assigned to both of art class and handicraft class respectively. Ken Iwata,“Sengo no Zuga Kosaku [Postwar Art and Handicraft]” in Kohon Keio Gijuku Yochisha shi[A Variorum of History of Keio Yochisha Elementary School], Keio Yochisha Elementary
School, 1965, pp. 490–496.
117

116

Sec. 4

Yu Homma

Importance of Conservation Documentation

Senior Assistant Professor, Keio Museum Commons
Research Fellow, Keio University Art Center

Key points regarding the importance of collecting, recording and maintaining arecord of the information gained in the course of conservation and restoration activities are shared among national and international experts*3. Conservation documentation is an inseparable part of artwork, as it “preserves a record of everything that could be lost *4” in a potentially irreversible restoration process, andas a guarantee of the integrity of the artwork*5, it must always exist with the artwork and last as long as the artworks themselves. For restoration professionals, it isalso a practical resource that enables them to verify restoration work carried out inthe past and serves as a basis for the transmission and development of techniques.

Introduction

Therefore, I would like to consider the records of restoration — conservation*1 ―Transcribed from the symposium video recordings and edited by the author. The re-cording can be viewed at the following link. Symposium “Tangite me: Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic”, Part 3. 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFwce_
gEZ14 (accessed: 2022-01-11)

Therefore, the creation and management of conservation documentation are required procedures in the ethical code of professional restoration organisations
in Europe and U.S.A., such as E.C.C.O. (European Confederation of Conservator-Restorers Organisations), and AIC (American Institute for Conservation)*6. In Japan, the Japan Society for Conservation and Restoration of Cultural
Property has the following code of conduct. “[...] To ensure the reliability of investigation, research, conservation and restoration procedures, appropriate re-*2 ― Michelle Moore, “Conservation Documentation and the Implications of Digitisation”,
Journal of Conservation and Museum Studies, Issue 7, 2001, pp. 1–2.
*3 ― Kaori Taguchi, “Documentation in the Field of Restoration-Conservation: Focusing

on the Cases in Italy” [in Japanese], The Bulletin of Japan Art Documentation Society, Issue
20, 2013, p. 4.

*4 ― Alessandro Conti, Manuale di restauro, Einaudi, 1996, p. 63.
*5 ― Moore 2001, p. 8. In his discussion, Moore describes ‘integrity’ as a state in which thephysical, functional, and semantic qualities of a work are preserved. Integrity has recently
been treated as an important concept along with authenticity in the field of cultural heritage
conservation, but its specific meaning remains under discussion. KYOTO Design Lab Conservation and Revitalization Research Group. Bunkaisan ni okeru Authenticity to Integrity
no Honsitsu wo kangaeru [Considering the Essence of Authenticity and Integrity in Cultural
Heritage]. 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGjZD9PLX2g (accessed: 2022-01-09)

Yu Homma

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

During a discussion at a symposium held in November, Yasuaki Miyazaki fromthe Art Restoration Studio 21 and Yuji Takahashi from Bronze Studio each
spoke about how important it is to create research and work records and toshare these records in conservation and restoration. In retrospect, the exhibition Tangite me: Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic was itself an
exhibition with an emphasis on documentation. Next to each restored work wasplaced a reconstructed commentary based on the photographs and descriptionsin the restoration report. On the shelves lined with restoration tools, restoration
reports and publications summarising the activities of the restoration studio,
which have been kept by the Keio University Art Center, were presented.

Keio Museum Commons

I believe that reports prepared after thorough research are documents to bepassed on to the next generation. [...] I disclose all the materials and chemicals
that I use. I think that openness makes our hard work worthwhile.
(Yuji Takahashi)*1

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The world is changing, so it is natural that opinions on documentation are
different now than they were 30 years ago, but it is very important to createa place where it can be discussed. [...] I think it’s essential to keep a record ofwhat you’ve done, honestly and truthfully, so that everyone can view it.
(Yasuaki Miyazaki)

Essay

documentation*2, with a particular focus on the sharing of documentation.
First, the current status and issues surrounding the sharing of conservation documentation is reviewed, and a provisional proposal for the steady promotion of
sharing is presented.

On Opening Access to Conservation
Documentation*6 ― “European Confederation of Conservator-Restorers Organisations”. https://www.

ecco-eu.org (accessed: 2022-01-12) “American Institute for Conservation & Foundation for
Advancement in Conservation”. https://www.culturalheritage.org/ (accessed: 2022-01-12)
For codes of ethics in professional organisations in different countries, see Laura McCann,“Conservation Documentation in Research Libraries”, Library Resources & Technical Services,
vol. 57, no. 1, 2013, p. 30.

119

118

Sec. 4Documentation Standards, Terminology, and the Scope of Information
to be Shared

While there is a certain uniformity in national codes of ethics, which could be
described as international standards, there is a wide range of record formats;published as articles in academic journals and reports. Some are not released tothe public and are kept with the work as archive files, and others are just photographs and data from individual investigations and procedures.

Currently, no internationally shared documentation standards exist in the fieldof conservation documentation*10. Metadata standards such as CDWA (Categories for the Description of Works of Art), which are often used in museums,
provide a section for collecting restoration and treatment histories. However,it assumed that the section is designed to only accommodate a history and abrief description of restoration. As methods of restoration and treatment vary
greatly depending on the production period and medium of the target culturalproperty, there is a danger that the use of overly generic standards may interrupt
the creation of records on site and cause lack of documentation*11. For this reason, documentation is currently carried out by reference to guidelines for individual areas and sites, rather than setting international documentation standards. Such documentation is ensured to be interoperable through mapping toa shared ontology in the cultural property domain, such as the CIDOC-CRM(CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model)*12.

Discussion on Sharing of Conservation Documentation*8 ―Y. Morita and H. Toriumi (Otake), “Honyaku ‘1972 Shufuku Kensho’ [Translation of the‘1972 Restoration Charter’]”, Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties. https://www.tobunken.go.jp/japanese/publication/italy/jatrns_carta1972.pdf (accessed: 2022-01-10)
For more information on the “1972 Restoration Charter”, see Hidemi Toriumi, “Itaria no ‘1972
Shufuku Kensho’ [On the Italian ‘1972 Restoration Charter’]”, Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties. https://www.tobunken.go.jp/japanese/publication/italy/es
say_carta1972.pdf (accessed: 2022-01-10)*9 ― For an overview of the conference, see A. Rudenstine and T. Whalen, “Conservation

Documentation in Digital Form: A Dialogue about the Issues”. https://www.getty.edu/con
servation/publications_resources/newsletters/21_2/news_in_cons.html (accessed: 2022-01-10)

Terminology for restoration of cultural properties has been debated since the1980s, but a broad consensus has not yet been reached*13 . In recent years, Linked
Conservation Data, a project that attempts to convert conservation documentation into LOD (Linked Open Data), has been working to unify terminology.
It involves international restoration organisations such as ICON (The Instituteof Conservation) and IIC (The International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works)*14 .
The scope of information to be shared, namely the decision on what to shareand what not to share out of the conservation documentation, is the most sen-

*10 ― D. Kouis and G. Giannakopoulos, “Incorporate Cultural Artifacts Conservation
Documentation to Information Exchange Standards — The DOC-CULTURE Case”, Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 147, 2014, p. 495.

Kazuko Fukuyama, “A Study of the Documentation of Treatment for Conservation of Dyed
Textile Cultural Goods: The Record of Treatment for Dyed Textile Cultural Goods of theTokyo National Museum”, Hokusei Review, no. 1, 2014, p. 27.
*11 ― D. Green and R. Mustalish. Digital Technologies and the Management of Conserva-

tion Documentation: A Survey Commissioned by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. 2009.
p. 11. http://mac.mellon.org/mac-files/Mellon%20Conservation%20Survey.pdf (accessed:
2022-01-05)

Yu Homma

Persons Engaged in the Conservation of Cultural Property]”, The Japan Society for the Conservation of Cultural Property, https://jsccp.or.jp/abstract/regulate_08.html (accessed: 2022-01-09)

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic*7 ― “Bunkazai no Hozon ni tazusawaru Hito no tame no Kodo Kihan [Code of Conduct for

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The need for conservation documentation to be shared among a wide rangeof professionals or with the wider society, rather than being kept in the handsof the stakeholders such as owners and conservators, has been discussed fromearly on. The 1972 Restoration Charter, which strongly reflects the ideas of Cesare Brandi (1906–1988), who laid the foundations of modern restoration theory, states that records of restoration “shall be kept partly in the archives of thecompetent Superintendence of Cultural Property and partly sent to the Central
Restoration Institute*8”.
The debate on sharing documentation has been active in recent years following
rapid advances in digital technology. A precursor to this were the conferences
held by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation between 2006 and 2007, entitled“the Issues in Conservation Documentation: Digital Formats, Institutional Priorities, and Public Access*9”. The conferences were attended by restorers andmuseum professionals and discussed the digitization of accumulated conservation documentation and the support of digitally based documentation which
rapidly develops in future. According to the conference report, while the valueof documentation sharing was commonly recognised, concerns about various
challenges were also expressed. Among the challenges, documentation standards and terminology, and scope of information to be shared were considered
to be the most important.

Essay

cords and reports are prepared, properly preserved, managed and published*7.”*12 ― Kouis 2014, p. 499. Athanasios Velios, “Towards an Open Conservation Documen-

tation Service”, Journal of the Institute of Conservation, vol. 44, no. 1, 2021, pp. 74‒75.
*13 ― Moore 2001, p. 14.

*14 ― “Linked Conservation Data”. https://www.ligatus.org.uk/lcd/ (accessed: 2022-01-

10) Proposals on terminology are available on Github: Conservation Vocabularies. Linked
Conservation Data consortium. 2021. https://github.com/linked-conservation-data/conser
vation-vocabularies/tree/master/vocabs (accessed: 2022-01-10)
121

120

Sec. 4

How Can We Further Promote the Sharing of Conservation
Documentation?
Considering the current situation of conservation documentation, to steadily
promote its sharing, establishing a mechanism for smoother publication of the
documentation is important starting point. Only a small percentage of conservation documentation currently produced is available in the form of academic
journals or published reports in Japan. Most of the documentation is probably
housed in internal, non-published material at various institutions.

Examples of the Sharing Conservation Documentation*15 ― Marija Radin, “Management of Conservation Documentation”, 2011, p. 2. https://cidoc.mini.icom.museum/archive/past-conferences/2011-sibiu/ (accessed: 2022-01-11)

In order to open access to unpublished material, it is necessary to establish areading system equivalent to Archives. However, this would place a very heavy
burden on documentation management institutes such as museums and restoration studios. On the other hand, publishing conservation documentation as
papers takes a long time and requires a large amount of effort. Based on this, one
effective way to increase the number of published documentations would be
to take an intermediate form between articles and non-published materials, byviewing conservation documentation as research data, and establishing a mechanism for its publication*20.
Research data refers to data generated in the course of research and development. From the perspective of open science and research fairness, which havemade remarkable progress in recent years, the disclosure and management ofresearch data are being discussed*21. In the area of humanities and social sciences, the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) published “A Guidefor Data Sharing in the Humanities and Social Sciences: Toward Building a
Humanities and Social Sciences Data Infrastructure*22”. In this guide, the key
points related to the sharing and utilization of research data are extensively explained, including the significance and technology of data sharing as well as the*19 ― “RKDtechnical”. RKD Explore. https://rkd.nl/en/explore/technical (accessed: 2022-

01-11)*20 ―The aforementioned ‘Linked Conservation Data’ attempts to position conservation*16 ― McCann 2013, p. 32.

documentation as research data and to further share it in the context of open research data.

*17 ― “Finding Restoration Reports on Cultural Property [Bunkazai no Shurihokokusho*21 ―Y. Kumazaki, Y. Minamiyama et al., “Development of Guideline for Specifying Con-

*18 ― “Treatment; 14 Sep 2012; Remove front to gain access to the interior; Metals; Or-*22 ― JSPS Program for Constructing Data Infrastructure for the Humanities and Social
Sciences, “A Guide to Data Sharing in the Humanities and Social Sciences” [in Japanese],
2021. https://www.jsps.go.jp/j-di/data/guide/tebiki_p.pdf (accessed: 2022-01-11)

wo sagasu]”, National Diet Library, RESEARCH NAVI. https://rnavi.ndl.go.jp/research_guide/entry/heritage-report.php (accessed: 2022-01-11)

ganics”. The British Museum. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search (accessed:
2022-01-11)

Yu Homma

Although there are only a few cases of digital data being made available to the
public, here are some examples. The British Museum provides textual descriptions of restoration histories and summaries of treatments accompanying information on works*18. The Netherlands Institute for Art History (RKD)

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

In the case of Japan, the most comprehensive guide to finding conservation documentation is the National Diet Library’s research navigation “Bunkazai no
Shurihoukokusho wo sagasu [Finding Restoration Reports on Cultural Properties]”*17. In addition, conservation documentation is published in the form ofarticles and reports in specialised academic journals such as the journal of theJapan Society for the Conservation of Cultural Property (JSCCP) and “Science
for Conservation” by the Center for Conservation Science of the National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Tokyo, as well as in the publications ofrestoration workshops.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

For documentation sharing, as explained earlier, the discussion extends to highly open forms of sharing, such as the LOD project. On the other hand, the actual sharing is mainly provided through “mediated access,” such as publication ofacademic papers or restoration reports edited by documentation management
organisations.

Essay

provides data on scientific research to the public, through RKDtechnical*19, a
database of technical records held by RKD and other cultural institutions, including records of treatments, infrared and micrographic photographs.

sitive factor when promoting sharing, and potentially the issue that can be amajor barrier to sharing. At the aforementioned conferences of the Andrew
Mellon Foundation, many experts expressed concern about the possibility for
restorations to be misinterpreted or inappropriately followed due to the sharingof raw data, which is information that remains unprocessed. Information to beshared may also be limited for simpler and more practical reasons. For example,
information relating to locations, monetary values or the names of individual
staff members cannot be shared for security or privacy reasons*15. Therefore,
at the conferences, while assuming that data openness is important, it was recognised that the first stage of sharing should be “mediated access”, where the documentation is judged and edited by the governing body *16.

ditions of Use in Research Data Publishing” [in Japanese], Preprints of the Information Professional Symposium 2020, p. 60.

123

122

Sec. 4Conservation and Communication:
Collection Care in Universities and Schools

The discussion on research data has several points in common with the discussion on sharing conservation documentation. In 2017, the “Survey on Research
Data Disclosure and Open Access to Research Papers” published by the National Institute of Science and Technology Policy (MEXT) identified the following barriers to data disclosure. Career risk (possibility of being used withoutcitation), lack of incentives, legal issues (intellectual property rights), ethical issues (confidentiality, etc.), and concerns about misunderstanding, misuse, andabuse*23. These barriers have much in common with concerns on conservation
documentation sharing. Therefore, if we regard conservation documentation
as research data, then it would be possible to gain insights from practices in thearea of research data, which are currently being actively discussed.

Miho Kirishima
Curator, Keio University Art Center

Introduction

Keio Museum Commons

When checking the conditions of a piece of art, curators make observations akinto listening to the voices of the artwork. If the work seems different from usual,and if the message coming from it is something that should not be missed, thenthe curators contact conservators. However, the situation is a little different regarding artworks casually located on school grounds as part of the environmentor held in warehouses forgotten by everyone; to begin with, these compositions
should be perceived as art. In such cases, not only curators but also every person
who spends time on school grounds must be involved with these compositions
and listen to the voices of the works. This includes awareness and understanding of their existence throughout the schools.
This paper discusses the preservation and management methods of the Keio
Collections performed by Keio University Art Center by looking back at theefforts of the university to preserve its collections and examine the Tangite me:
Reconsidering Conversation during the Pandemic exhibition.

Displaying Restored Artworks
Natsuyuki Nakanishi, Michisei Kono, Isamu Noguchi, Ujihiro Okuma, Chokichi Suzuki... The works of these artists who would not typically be put in thesame room are now gathered together in the same exhibition space. Every one ofthese works has been preserved and restored at Keio University, and the theme
for the exhibition is conservation. As many as two hundred art pieces have beenpreserved and restored at Keio University *1. Many of these works were damaged
due to their long history or location on the university campuses. For example,
the murals which were relocated to the cafeteria where they are still displayed,*23 ― U. Ikeuchi, K. Hayashi and S. Akaike, “A Survey on Open Research Data and Open
Access” [in Japanese], Science and Technology Foresight Center, National Institute of Science and Technology Policy (NISTEP), MEXT, 2018, vol. 268, p. 55, table 8. http://doi.org/
10.15108/rm268 (accessed: 2022-01-11)

Miho Kirishima

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

In this article, based on the current status and challenges of sharing conservation documentation in Japan, I proposed to regard conservation documentation as research data and to adapts discussions over research data management.
In the future, by taking advantage of the two university museums, the Keio
University Art Center and the Keio Museum Commons, I would like to connect our activities and the practice of other institutions, while advancing studies related to research data.

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

Conclusion
Not only in the area of restoration, but also in general activities related to cultural properties, individualised measures must be taken in accordance with eachobject. Therefore, rather than conceiving a generic model that can be adapted
to any object, it is important to start gathering specific practices in each area inorder to share conservation documentation. University museums, with researchand learning at their core, are very compatible with “starting anyway”.

Essay

legal issues involved.

*1 ― Includes the number of regular maintenance.

125

124

Sec. 4

*2 ― Kono also taught art at Keio Yochisha Elementary School.

With the situation at hand, it is necessary to heighten the awareness regarding the artworks kept at school. Throughout the university, it should be understood that art should be taken care of. Keio Art Committee (referred to as“Committee” below) is in charge of managing and operating the art kept onschool grounds. The preservation and restoration of these art compositions arealso the responsibility of the Committee*3. The Committee was established in
2002 to manage and operate the artworks preserved and owned by Keio. The
Keio University Art Center and the trust fund united their efforts to act as theexecutive office of the Keio Committee. The Committee’s responsibility is to*3 ― For further information on Keio University’s efforts towards art preservation and res-toration as well as the Keio Art Committee, see Yohko Watanabe, “Daigaku no Collection —Igi no Hakkutsu”, Kyushu Daigaku P&P Daigaku to Art — ‘Kokyosei’ no Shiten kara, Kenkyu
Seika Hokokusho [“University collections — finding significance”, Kyushu University P&P
University and Art: from the perspective of ‘publicness’ Research Report]. Kyushu University
Research and Education Program/Research Center Project, March 2008, pp. 50‒64; Yohko
Watanabe, “Oyama Enrico Isamu Sakuhin Hozon Shufuku Project ni tsuite”, Gendai Bijutsu
no Hozon to Shufuku — Sono Rinen, Hoho, Joho Network Kochiku no tame ni [“Preservation andconservation project for the artwork of Enrico Isamu Oyama”, Conservation and Preservationof Contemporary Art: For the Construction of Network of Ideas, Methods, and Informations].
Research Result Report (2015–2019 Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research Basic Research (A)15H01871), March 2020, pp. 73-84; Miho Kirishima, “Daigaku no Korekushon wo Tsunagu — Keio Gijuku no Bijutsuhin Kanri Unyo Iinkai no Torikumi”, Mita Hyoron Tokushu
Daigaku no Museum [“Connecting University Collections: Efforts of Keio Art Committee”,
Mita Review Special Feature : University Museums], no. 1254, March 2021, pp. 42–45.

Miho Kirishima

Unlike museums and galleries, schools do not act as facilities equipped with theappropriate means of taking care of artworks. Moreover, these works are always
at the risk of being discarded. Let us discuss one example from this exhibition:
Flower: Grand Swing, which consists of five paintings that originally decorated the walls of Fujiyama Memorial Library (now known as Fujiyama MemorialHall) on the Hiyoshi Campus. However, as the New Library was built, out offive paintings, only three were left, and eventually, three of the pieces were sep-

Keio Museum CommonsTangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

The Dangers of Art Preservation on University/School Grounds

Efforts of the Keio Art Committee
Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

The Keio Collections is quite diverse and is composed of various works thathave been collected through the years because of the connections they might
have had with the university itself. These include paintings, sculptures, murals,
and even architectural spaces. For example, Shikai Kitamura’s marble sculpture The Maiden Tekona was donated to the school by the sculptor himself asa celebration gift for the construction of the school library (now known as the
Old Library), Genichiro Inokuma’s mural Democracy which was displayed in
the student hall designed by Yoshiro Taniguchi, or Michisei Kono’s oil painting
Ashinoko Lake Scene, Hakone, located at Keio Yochisha Elementary School*2. The
lounge, known as the Noguchi Room, was created through the collaborationof Yoshiro Taniguchi and Isamu Noguchi; it is a piece of modernist architecture of the post-war era, which after having been partially relocated is still preserved on campus grounds in a modified state and is currently referred to as the
Ex-Noguchi Room. These works of art are a message directed at Keio University students; they represent the deep connection between the university andthese artists and are essential art resources that have spent a long time alongside
the university. However, many of these works are placed in an environment
unique to schools and universities. As a result, they have not been treated appropriately, and their value and significance have gradually been forgotten. This
exhibition has in some sense exposed the art situation at Keio, which provided a
new perspective regarding the existing issues. This paper will discuss the conditions of art preservation at Keio University.

arated from the other two. One day, Keio University Art Center was contacted
by a warehouse in Hiyoshi inquiring about two large paintings. The warehouse
wanted to know if they could throw these away as they looked old. When the
Art Center staff inspected the paintings, it became clear that these were a partof the five-piece Flower: Grand Swing. While these pieces narrowly escaped thefate of being disposed of, it is not uncommon for many compositions to getlost, forgotten, and eventually thrown away when kept on school grounds. In
schools and universities, the artwork is usually scattered and stored in various
places, and it is tricky to identify who is responsible for their management andcare. Thus, it is not easy to talk of the existence or value of art kept on school
grounds. Flower: Grand Swing was an accompanying piece for the architecture
it was placed in; its pieces eventually were separated from each other. When abuilding is demolished or renovated, many art compositions initially positioned
there are misplaced or discarded. The Fujiyama Memorial Library was not demolished, but Flower: Grand Swing was split into pieces and misplaced as thebuilding lost its functions as a library.

Essayor the library sculptures damaged during the bombing of Tokyo that were heldin warehouses for several decades. This exhibition discussed thirteen of theseworks and the different issues they present. A discussion like this and bringing
up the examples of preservation and restoration raises awareness of various trials rather than simply showing the final restoration results. These compositions
tell how Keio University and Keio schools have tried to preserve and maintainthe art entrusted to them.

127

126

Sec. 4Essay

error, the high quality of the educational field that allows flexibility is also utilised. A collaboration of this kind creates a connection between the people ofdifferent generations. They get to touch, repair, and pass on the furniture andthe interior designed by Isamu Noguchi.
The conservators submit detailed reports on the maintenance and restoration
processes held at and utilised by the Art Center as valuable materials related tothe compositions*5. In addition, these reports are presented in annual reports
and uploaded to the official website of the Art Center *6. It is common for reports regarding restorations and repairs to be kept only by the art owners andthe conservators; however, their disclosure ensures transparency about the performed repairs and at the same time contributes to the exchange of helpful information inside and outside the university. Keio University is an educationaland research institution. Thus, the accumulation and the circulation of this information is promoted.

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

sustain art preservation and act as the manager for the assets kept on school
grounds. The Keio Committee is a cross-sectional organisation which includes
the departments concerned with artworks at the university and those in chargeof Keio Schools. The Committee secures the budget for art preservation andrestoration every year; biannual meetings are held where the information regarding the art collections is shared, preservation and restoration issues are conferred, and exhibition methods are discussed. The information exchange does
not occur only at these biannual meetings, and if deemed necessary, the Art
Center may contact conservators to request a thorough inspection. Then therestoration process will begin. The process of art preservation is not accomplished only through the Committee members. The Committee acts as a consultation desk regarding the preservation and restoration of art throughout allof Keio. As observed in the case of the above-mentioned Flower: Grand Swing,
the Art Center is contacted before the people in charge make decisions regarding the value or further fate of artworks. This case alone proves that the Committee is perceived as a consultation desk. The university consists of a multitudeof departments. Thus, understanding all of the works preserved and owned bythese departments alone is not an easy feat. Therefore, it is essential to have aspace where the information regarding the art held on school grounds can beexchanged, where artwork can be rediscovered, and solutions for how to treat
art can be discussed. The ability to care for art spreads throughout the schooland seizes being solely the responsibility of the curators thanks to maintaining
a connection and solid communication on school grounds.

Moreover, the interactions with the university’s faculty and staff frequently
present opportunities for revisiting and reviewing the Keio Collections. The
workshop held at this exhibition was attended by many children and studentsof Minato City Onarimon Junior High School and Keio Yochisha Elementary
School*7. But this workshop also created a perfect chance to organise meetings
with the teachers of both schools and set up guidelines. The workshop’s stanceand the focus of the art appreciation were decided through a consultation withthe teachers, where they presented their observations of the students and theirdemeanour. What could contribute and be beneficial for the students’ growth

The Ex-Noguchi Room and the outdoor sculptures are maintained on the Keio
Art Committee budget. Let us discuss the case of the Ex-Noguchi Room. The
furniture and the interior of the Ex-Noguchi Room displayed some damage, so
after being carefully assessed by conservators in 2007–08, the restoration works
began. A full restoration was performed, and materials closest to those usedoriginally were acquired and utilised in the restoration. Currently, the Ex-Noguchi Room is usually closed to the public. However, classes and tours are held
here from time to time, allowing the students and the general public to visit
this unique space. Conservators carry out annual maintenance. The Committee also functions in a way that enables the creation of sustainable and lasting
connections with the conservators. According to one of the conservators who
has worked with Keio for a long time, the Ex-Noguchi Room is “a prime example of how good conditions have been maintained thanks to the [many repair requests] University made immediately and consistently *4” The improved
conditions were achieved by continuing communication between the curatorsand the conservators, even after completing the restorations. Through trial and*4 ― For example, after getting confirmation that the deterioration of furniture had accel-

erated due to the influence of direct sunlight, an ultraviolet protection film was attached tothe areas from where the light penetrates the room as well as a special light-shielding covers
were made to match the shape of each piece of furniture. Covering the furniture when it is
not used has significantly improved the preservation efforts. In addition, as the conservators
confirmed damage due to improper handling of Isamu Noguchi’s “Stool” in the Ex-Noguchi Room, the Art Center compiled a manual that summarises the precautions when using
the Ex-Noguchi Room. The conservators’ advice is at the core of the efforts to preserve theunique space created by Noguchi. Furthermore, an online course on the “FutureLearn” platform was also created. See, “Invitation to Ex-Noguchi Room: Preservation and Utilization ofCultural Properties in Universities”.: https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/invitation-toex-noguchi-room-eMiho Kirishima

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Collaborations with Conservators and Faculty Members*5 ― For detailed information on the restoration and utilisation of the Ex-Noguchi Room,

see Yohko Watanabe, “Kioku kara Sozo e — Noguchi Room no Shufuku wo toshite”, Digital
Archive — Sono Keisho to Tenkai [“From memory to creation: through the restoration of theNoguchi Room”, Digital archive: its inheritance and development], Keio University Digital
Archive Research Center Report (2006–09), 31 March 2009, pp. 181–86.

*6 ― See, Keio University Art Center’s website, regarding “Collections Research”.: http://

www.art-c.keio.ac.jp/research/collections-research/*7 ― For information on the workshop, see pp. 66–71 of this record book.

129

128

Sec. 4

While it might seem surprising, it is challenging to be aware of the artwork we encounter in our daily lives and in places where we usually spend our time. However,whenever we get involved with the art around us, the picture around us may change
drastically regardless of what may have triggered this involvement. Above all, in places like schools and universities, where people study and are met with different incentives and motivations daily, the “relationship” with the works of art placed on campus can only enrich one’s experiences as a student. These works of art are messages
directed at the students by artists such as Isamu Noguchi or Genichiro Inokuma. It
is a given that each person’s outlook and care of the artwork placed around them carries great energy and serves as a straightforward answer to such questions as “what is
the reason for preserving art on school grounds” or “how should it be kept.”

The Eyes that Imagine the “Care”

Keio Museum Commons

Keio University Art Center

我に触れよ（Tangite me）：コロナ時代に修復を考える

This exhibition tried to convey the art restoration and repairs process by discussing the basics of the preservation and restoration of on-campus art, conducting interviews with the conservators regarding their work, and conveying
ideas, explorations, and readiness through the exhibits. The students had theopportunity to visit the exhibition as a part of their classes or through participation in the workshops; however, many of the students were unaware of the existence of the artwork displayed on the school grounds. They were surprised andshowed great interest when they learnt that their schools, where they usuallyspend their time, hold many works of art and that restoration was being carriedout. Some of the students’ impressions even captured the essence of the exhibition. As they voiced their newly gained viewpoint, they came to think not only
about the restoration process but also considered the significance of conveying
these works of art to future generations. The students also expressed uniqueand compelling opinions. One of them said:

Essay

Conclusion

was also discussed. The curators use this sort of communication to develop
ideas on the perspective of introducing the compositions or even notice new
aspects of those works. Thanks to the exchange, the Keio Collections was givena unique outlook through the communication mentioned above. Incorporating the ideas of the teachers who have a deeper understanding of the students
alongside the content proposed by the curators bring up the advantages of theeducational system.

This exhibition created an opportunity to open people’s eyes to how they deal withfamiliar works of art placed on school grounds by viewing them from the perspectiveof restoration. Keio University is hoping to increase the opportunities for people tointeract with artwork through exhibitions, outdoor sculpture maintenance efforts,
and distribution of restoration records and collection databases. Creating a systemthat provides a variety of communication methods throughout the school networkand the Keio Committee will simplify the accomplishment of this goal. Universities
make it possible to utilise art while developing connections with a wide range ofdifferent fields. Finally, keeping continuous communication and regularly reviewing the art entrusted to the university will only further enrich the Keio Collections.
Now then, let us hear the voice of art.

Learning about the restoration process and raising awareness about the historyof art led this student to regard the compositions as individual entities and deepen their respect for the works themselves. It can be concluded that the individuality of each piece of artwork grew as the students concentrated on the work
itself instead of the information about the creator or the meaning expressed by
the artwork. Looking at art from a new layer of perspective must have made anovel impression on the students’ minds. One of the most important first steps
in art preservation is becoming familiar with each of the compositions displayedin our proximity. This student became conscious of the efforts of a conservatorand became aware of the care that goes into preserving art; we could say thatthey acquired “the eyes that imagine the ‘care’” when looking at works of art.

Miho Kirishima

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic

Having learnt that the works of art do not exist eternally in their original formand have to be maintained and repaired from time to time, I came to feel as if
art is a breathing and living entity. I was given a chance to reaffirm my appreciation of art.

131

130

[Exhibition Record Book]

Tangite me : Reconsidering Conservation during the Pandemic
10 March 2022
Organized, Edited and Text by
Yohko Watanabe(Professor & Curator, KUAC/Vice Director, KeMCo)

Mayu Hashimoto(Research Fellow, KUAC)
Miho Kirishima [MK](Curator, KUAC)
Katsurako Yamada [KY](Assistant Curatorial Staff, KUAC)

Yu Homma(Senior Assistant Professor, KeMCo/Research Fellow, KUAC)
Shiho Hasegawa [SH](Curator & Research Fellow, KeMCo)
Nodoka Shimada [NS](Assistant Curatorial Staff, KeMCo)

Translated by

Description of Works: Kanako Gyotoku, Kaho Kobayashi, Ruka Ogose (KeMCoM)

Lilith Ayvazyan
Barbara Cross
Rosa van Hensbergen
Designed by
Hisaki Matsumoto(MATSUMOTOKOBO Ltd.)

Published by
Keio University Art Center

2-15-45 Mita Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-8345, Japan
Tel: 03-5427-1621 / Fax: 03-5427-1620
http://www.art-c.keio.ac.jp/

Keio Museum Commons

2-15-45 Mita Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-8345, Japan
Tel: 03-5427-2021 / Fax: 03-5427-2022
https://kemco.keio.ac.jp/©2022, Keio University Art Center©2022, Keio Museum Commons
KUAC-C46/KeMCo Exh.3*This PDF English version belongs to the original Japanese book.