The Debate over Restoration of Landmark Renaissance Paintings

The Debate Over Restoration of Landmark Renaissance Paintings

There is along history of whether, or not, to restore old landmark paintings. There are advantages and disadvantages that get considered when trying to make the choice to keep a painting in its original state or restore it. Many paintings during the renaissance period have become part of our history. Do we have the right to restore those old paintings, which potentially will change them forever?

Looking at Leonardo de Vinci's painting call the "Last Supper". This painting was originally painted by de Vinci between 1485-1498. According to Fiero, in "Rebirth: The Age of the Renaissance", she says "Leonardo rejected the traditional (fast-drying) fresco technique in which paint is applied to the wet plaster on the wall. Instead, he experimented with a mixture of oil, tempera, and varnish that proved to be nondurable". The painting began to deteriorate only a few years after it was finished. Without restoring the picture, over time the picture would deteriorate to nothing. Slowly the paint would flake away completely, losing a piece of our history.

Restoring the painting allows the picture to remain a vital landmark of our history. Granted, every time it is restored we lose more and more of the original Leonardo de Vinci work. Paints were made differently back in the 1400's than they are today. Colors are different, so what may have been drab a long time ago, can be brighter today. If we restore the picture with different colors and paint, making it brighter, essentially the originality of Leonardo de Vinci is disappearing. It actually starts becoming someone else's work. Even though, artists and restoration companies do their best to preserve the originality of de Vinci, ultimately it is repainted by different hands. This is where you lose the de Vinci, and starts becoming someone else's image of what de Vinci was feeling at the time he originally painted it.

The "Last Supper" has...