ICOMOS Cuba

Prepared by Isabel Rigol

Between the romantic extreme of Ruskin's "stained truth" and Umberto Eco's Eurocentric views on "forged masterpieces" and "immortality as a duplicate," the authenticity debate has occupied many for a long time and is approached in multiple fora. It seems that there is agreement on the importance of the concept and the necessity for flexibility on its approach.

What is authentic is not inevitably the pure or the untouched. It can be the exact opposite. It is really the reflection of a total, of a dialectic. Perhaps it could be best described by one of Gabriel Garcia Marquez' most imaginative descriptions: "What has always fascinated me about Cartagena is that; the rara destiny of its houses and objects, all seem to have a life of their own, especially the more dead they seem and as they change in form and use through time, changing place and purpose, while Their owners live out their lives without too much noise." Cartagena is but one example of that authentic heritage of the American continent that expresses a multifaceted, turbulent and universally transcendent historic development, a segment of the impressively extensive and pluralistic legacy that authentically carries infinite messages. Within this context, the Caribbean is a clear exponent of cultural richness, as described by James Michener, "one of the most dazzling bodies of water in the world, a rare gem amid the oceans, defined by islands that form a chain of beautiful beaches to the north and east."

Among these islands, Cuba, the largest in this crucible of cultures, is a faithful witness of the heterogeneity created by the mixture of the Spanish with prehispanic remnants and the African, fed later by other influences, such as the Chinese, the Franco-Haitian and - why not-- the North American. To a lesser degree, and only in some places, the ephemeral Jewish presence also left its mark. But best of all is the strength of this legacy whose integrity neither time nor material hardship have managed to destroy.

In spite of lamentable losses, such as the ancient Convent of Santo Domingo, the Hospital de Paula or the Casa de Beneficencia in Havana, the historic centers of Cuba have remained whole. Between the decades of the 20s and the 60s, in one way or another, there were in our capital city narrow-focused but relevant rescue projects. These include the Plaza de Armas (1926), the Plaza de la Catedral (1936), the Cathedral proper (1950), and the Castillo de la Fuerza (1960), among others. It is during the 60s that a national effort to protect these resources began, along with the establishment of specialized institutions for this purpose.

The most productive years in architectural preservation were the 70s and the 80s. The 70s because it was then that the legal, institutional and conceptual foundations were established assimilating the most advanced tenets in international practice (Cuba had been present in Venice in 1964). The 80s because during that decade the first 5-year plans were put into effect with the largest budgets ever, and innumerable rehabilitation projects were completed in many areas of Havana, Trinidad, Santiago de Cuba, Cienfuegos, Camagüey and otehr historic districts in the country.

The 90s, which for obvious reasons could constitute the lost decade, has served the good purpose to allow for reflection. It has not been an unproductive period and it has generated the conservation of many buildings and districts of great significance. Of course, the decay continues to generate anguish and requires urgent actions.

Going deeper into the history of the preservation of the Cuban nation's monumental values, it is convenient to clarify that the polemic regarding the principles and limitations of interventions and their effect on the integrity of historic buildings has been a constant feature during the last seventy years of preservation practice in Cuba. If we study the 1926 work of Evelio Govantes in the Palacio de los Capitanes Generales, we will notice how unsuccessful was the insertion of the new pseudocolonial courtyard with which he "completed" this major monument of 18th century Cuban Architecture. Seven decades later, the only reasonable alternative is to appreciate this example of authentic Cuban Baroque together with its perfect and confused addition, which authentically expresses the restoration philosophy of its time.

If we go back to Luis Bay Sevilla's 1936 work in the Plaza de la Catedral, we can see how the image of the place was transformed when in defending his "aesthetic truth at all cost", he removed the exterior plaster of the colonial palaces in appreciation for the bare stone. Bay Sevilla did not allow later generation to know the Plaza colored in the ochres and yellows described by Pogoloti in his "Del Barro y las Voces."

With today's perspective, it is valid to ask which is the authentic image of the Plaza de la Catedral? The one from before or the one we have now? The polychrome one or the stone one? Or both, each in its own time? The truth is that the image that Bay Sevilla gave to the Plaza is the one that our parents knew, that we have enjoyed since our childhood, the one that our children appreciate, and that already our grandchildren are beginning to distinguish. It is the image that has circulated the world over and appeared in countless books and magazines in all the planet. This is the authentic image of the Plaza, the one that resulted from time and changes that we cannot deny.

In the past years, the debate has been particularly rich. The positions have taken many routes, from those who, like Bay Sevilla, still look for truths that are more aesthetic than historic, to those obsessed with freezing history at a given moment and who refuse to recognize the passage of later time; to those who have wished to leave their contemporary seal in some monuments. All these, of course, consider themselves defenders of our heritage. On the other hand, there were also the destroyers, those "horses of Attila" whose efforts have been unsuccessful. An example of this tendency was the unsuccessful attempt in the 1980s to tear down the old Hotel Trocha, a dignified vestige of the 19th Century Vedado, to replace it with high-rise apartments. But this cannot compare to the destructive proposal in the 1950s by Wiener, Sert & Schultz for Havana. What could have been the beginnings of a nefarious trend was fortunately stopped in time by those in charge of the protection of the cultural patrimony and urban planning. Attitudes such as these have found no means to develop because in general, our definitions have been clear and sustained by our legislation, such as Law No.1, on the Nation's Cultural Heritage, and No. 2, on Colonial and Local Monuments.

Experts such as Michel Parent in 1982 and others after him have confirmed it during their process of inscription and monitoring. Along other lines, in other cities in Cuba that are not subject to international controls, we have also been successful in avoiding damage to heritage resources and parts of their traditional urban fabric have been restored. One significant example is the city of Santiago de Cuba, whose valuable architectural scape is set in maritime and mountainous surroundings of exceptional scenic beauty. Even in cities without the antiquity or recognition of Havana, Santiago Trinidad and Camagüey, and whose heritage dates fundamentally form the late 19th or early 20th century, there has been a growing concern, as may be seen in las Tunas, Ciego de Avila and Guantánamo.

Doubtless, this has been influenced by the high professional level of architects and other specialists who have worked in the national technical groups in the various provinces. Our policy to train rescue groups for the cultural heritage begun in the 70s has rendered results. Given Cuba's conditions of isolation and embargo, the number of professionals trained in Italy, Spain, Mexico and other counties has been outstanding and has taught us the value of knowledge during difficult periods. Within this optic, the National Center for Conservation, Restoration and Museology (CENCRM), supported by UNESCO since its founding in 1982, has organized hundreds of national and regional courses that have trained hundreds of technicians.

The role of the municipalities has also been a determining factor, inasmuch as the has been a growing awareness of the value and usefulness of heritage as a reaffirmation of the national and local identity, its particularity and distinctiveness in relation to others, its capacity to house modern functions and to generate income for the development of poor country.

As to the current situation, there are serious debates. Segio Baroni, an architect, urbanist and planner warns us that "Havana is now subject to the new challenges of globalization; it is the front line for new developments from abroad: tourism, mixed enterprises; and dollarization, with all the pathologies that accompany them."

Under these circumstances, one may ask whether the authenticity of the Cuban national heritage is in danger. Already in certain intellectual circles in Cuba and abroad, this delicate subject is being discussed, generally with the healthy intent to safeguard the efforts to defend our cultural resources. But outside Cuba, some are not aware of the capacity and determination of those who day in and day out defend from inside Cuba the national patrimony an who would not allow its disintegration under any circumstance.

Concerning the future of Havana, the architect Mario Coyula has correctly stated that "the adequate balance between the country's difficult economic situation and its possible functional and financial solutions require a just evaluation of Havana, without accepting its loss through lack of use but also without deforming, selling, mortgaging or giving it away." The foundation for this position was stated by the late Luis Lápidus:"The city of indubitable majesty only suffered in isolated areas the developmental alterations so common in other cities of the region, and today, like no other, it has the unique didactic capacity to be read without sudden jerks through its architectural evolution, which spans styles and eras throughout its neighborhoods, axes and edges in a coherent sequence that is facilitated by the fluidity of its streets. The price for this suspension in time has been paid slowly but inexorably. Hopeful and at times melancholic, proud of its past glories, free of cosmetics, its infinite attractions eaten away by an unmerciful physical erosion, the city rises from its cracks, its spalls and collapse to proclaim its almost heroic determination to survive for posterity."10

To support its policy of monumental conservation, Cuba has a corpus of legislation and a specialized institutional system that is continuously enriched through contacts with institutions from abroad. Through ICOMOS and other international and regional organizations, Cuban professionals are engaged in a fruitful exchange. Cuban universities, and especially its architectural schools are the fundamental venue for the generation of ideas and projects. Together, they produce methods to deal with our heritage that are both ethically sound and economically sustainable. If our focus were not to include the economic aspect, the protection of our heritage would be utopian.

Acceptance that society evolves and that each moment has an inherent expression must go hand in hand with an unshakable commitment that the authentic values that make us unique cannot be manipulated, much less destroyed. Herein lies the challenge: how to assimilate inevitable changes without altering the essence; how to add and not subtract from the values of the patrimonial resources, nor to erase the credible and true sources needed for a precise interpretation of its authenticity, as prescribed by the 1994 ICOMOS Conference of Nara, Japan.

On this depends the future of the Cuban heritage and its values, at times enriched, but never betrayed.

Translated by Gustavo F. Araoz, US/ICOMOS

9 Coyula, Mario. "La Habana Siempre. Lecture presented at the CENCRM, Havana 1995.
10 Lápidus, Luis. "Crear Aptitudes y Actitudes ante el Patrimonio." In ICOMOS Scientific Review 2: Ciudades y Pueblos Historicos.Junta de Galicia, 1993.