ICOM-CC Intentio operis.

From the “enclosed

19th Triennial Conference
2021 Beijing
garden” to the open work
THEORY, HISTORY, AND
ETHICS OF CONSERVATION

Muriel Verbeeck INTRODUCTION

Research Unit AAP (Art, Archeology and Cultural
Heritage)
University of Liège Since the 1990s and the development of contemporary art conservation,
Liège, Belgium the issue of the author’s intention has played a major role in conservators’
[Link]@uliè[Link]
CeROArt thinking and practice. Numerous publications have appeared on the subject
[Link]@[Link]
(Dykstra 1996, Wharton 2016) and methodologies have been developed
to accommodate this issue in the decision-making process (Hummelen
Keywords
intent, intentio operis, Umberto Eco, effect, and Sillé 1999). The contribution of the International Network for the
materiality Conservation of Contemporary Art (INCCA) and Voices in Contemporary
Art (VoCA) in acknowledgment of their practical experience has also
Abstract been remarkable. However, it is important to ensure that intention does
The typology of intentions as defined by Um- not overly monopolize considerations, because the work of art is first
berto Eco and, in particular, what he calls the
and foremost part of an aesthetic relationship (Genette 1994, Pignocchi
intentio operis, helps to highlight one of the
2012). The artist addresses the spectator who interprets the work of art
specificities of conservators: their special knowl-
edge of the materiality of a work helps them to more or less freely. The conservator’s role is neither to support or reinforce
grasp its “aesthetic potential,” i.e., the intrinsic the artist’s intention nor to strengthen the spectator’s perception; it is to
experience it offers, regardless of the artist’s understand the intention of the work—an original concept that we borrow
intentions or the spectator’s interpretations. from Umberto Eco.
Should acknowledgment of both issues be nec-
essary, it is the physical consistency of the work
THE OPEN WORK
that must first guide conservators in restoration
interventions. Restoring a work of art preserves As a brilliant Italian scholar and writer, and a professor emeritus, Eco was
its physical consistency, so that it remains as the interested in semiotics, linguistics, philosophy, and the field of aesthetics
support of an experience that may be differ-
and contemporary art. As an author and novelist—his worldwide success,
ent in the future. This poses the question: What
methodology should be adopted to avoid both The Name of the Rose, springs to mind—he was challenged by problems of
the pitfalls of historical and creative restoration? translation and interpretation. Two of his essays reveal this interest: “The
Open Work” (Eco 1962) and “The Limits of Interpretation” (Eco 1990).

The concept of “open work” is part of the controversy sparked by the essay
“The Intentional Fallacy” (1946), in which Wimsatt and Beardsley affirm
that the author’s intention is not a major factor in understanding a work.
Their position aroused strong reactions in the world of art history; the
controversies then shifted to the field of literary analysis where they have
gained a stronger foothold. Eco took part in the discussion and supported
a more moderate position than the essay’s authors.

Eco considers that, in the process of creating a work, the author realizes
(makes real and concrete) an intention—a text, or a work of art—but
that this voluntarily constitutes “a fundamentally ambiguous message, a
plurality of meanings that coexist in a single signifier.”
2 ICOM-CC What the author creates is not closed: the receiver—reader, spectator,
19th Triennial Conference listener—seizes the given, which is voluntarily polysemic, and interprets
2021 Beijing
THEORY, HISTORY, AND ETHICS OF
it. The aesthetic function is therefore conceived as a transactional
CONSERVATION mechanism (transmission between two people), which includes an element
Intentio operis. From the “enclosed garden” to of indeterminacy.
the open work

This is the case, to a certain extent, in ancient and modern visual art.
In complex paintings such as those by Bosch or Bruegel, the viewer is
clearly required to interpret. Religious paintings, icons of the divine, refer
to something other than that depicted—take Van Eyck’s Mystical Lamb,
for example. The same applies, on a more secular note, to La liberté
guidant le peuple by Delacroix. All such examples, as works of art, create
an aesthetic experience: an experience of something (a phenomenon) by
someone (a subject).

THE WORK IN MOTION

However, from the 1960s onward, this “openness to meaning” was to be

conceived differently. Beyond the spontaneous transactional mechanism
of interpretation, artists envisage “programming” the interaction with their
spectators. They provide in the structure of their work an interpretative
space for the receiver. This was already the case for trompe l’oeil, or
anamorphoses, since artists anticipated that spectators would “see” different
things depending on where they were positioned to view the work. However,
music, literature, and contemporary art go even further. The receiver
becomes necessary for the realization, for the “completion” of the work.

Thus, explains Eco, the works of composers such as Pousseur (Scambi)

or Boulez (Third Piano Sonata) find their final structure only through the
choice their performer makes of the order of the elements. A more current
multimedia example would be “Bandersnatch,” the latest episode of the
television series Black Mirror, presented by Netflix. The story takes place
in 1984, when a young programmer is contracted to make a video game
called Bandersnatch. As the story unfolds, spectators can, via their controller
and decoder, choose different options that affect the main character’s
choices. As interactive decision-makers of certain “branches” of the plot,
the spectators then become the manipulative intelligence behind the young
programmer, who gradually becomes aware of his instrumentalization. There
are five different conditional scenarios, covering a total of 145 minutes.
The work is both open and in motion: it can only be completed by the
involvement of the interactive spectator.

In the field of the visual arts, op art, kinetic art, and digital art have also
successively developed this involvement of the spectator. The mechanical
and kinetic mirrors with dynamic reflection by Daniel Rozin, the Infinity
Mirror Rooms by Yayoi Kusama, and the installations by teamLab Planets
further illustrate the latest developments. The intervention of the receiver
is the sine qua non for a work’s aesthetic functionality.

FROM THE STRUCTURE OF THE WORK TO THE INTENTIO OPERIS

How do these considerations relate to conservation? Paradoxically, they

contribute to refocusing the conservator on the materiality of the work.
3 ICOM-CC A work that is described as “open” is still, in its materiality, a form of
19th Triennial Conference “enclosed garden”: a material structure, which has an organic unity but
2021 Beijing
THEORY, HISTORY, AND ETHICS OF
refers to something else, something transcendent—the aesthetic experience.
CONSERVATION Matter is the vehicle of this experience, nothing more.
Intentio operis. From the “enclosed garden” to
the open work The expression “enclosed garden” (hortus conclusus) can be found in
Brandi’s criticism of Eco’s work—not in Teoria but in The Due Life
(Brandi 1966), more precisely, in the second part of the work entitled
“The integrated spectator.” For Brandi, there is only an “opening” of the
work when there is an act of completing a missing phase of the creative
process; when we can interpret what is potentially included: “The ever-
new arrangement of the fragments of a kaleidoscope is not a way for
the user to collaborate with the kaleidoscope, but simply to update in
the present its potential structure by virtue of which infinite pre-ordered
combinations are made possible” (ibid., 137). This relevant remark by
Brandi may provide a basis for further development of Eco’s thinking.

Within the limits of interpretation, Umberto Eco defines three types of

intention: intentio auctoris (the intention of the author), whose importance
was contested by Wimsatt and Beardsley; intentio lectoris (the intention
of the reader), which Eco defines as the right of the reader to project his
own interpretations, expectations, fantasies, and concerns onto the work
(in this respect aligning with certain theories by Stanley Fish and Gérard
Genette); and intentio operis (the intention of the work), which refers to the
interpretative potential that may escape the author, or the receiver, but that
potentially exists in the work. These are not unlimited but are constrained
by the overall meaning of the text or work. Clearly, a text or a visual work
may be voluntarily or involuntarily polysemic, but the very structure of
the narrative, its intrinsic logic, and the natural meaning are opposed to
certain contradictions. Edgard Allan Poe’s poem The Raven is ready for
interpretation, but interpreting it as a political manual is impossible. To
say that a work is “open,” and thus has several meanings, does not allow
for every signification, and contra-senses even less so.

CRITICAL INTERPRETATION, ORGANIC UNIT

A literary misinterpretation has less consequence than an artistic

misinterpretation by a conservator. A literary contra-sense will be part
of what is called the critical apparatus of the text: a commentary note,
which adjoins the text but does not alter it. On the other hand, an artistic
contra-sense created by a restorer is inscribed directly on the work and
becomes part of it.

To protect against such a risk, how can we determine what could be a

misinterpretation in a work of art? First, by clearly distinguishing semantic
interpretation from critical (or semiotic) interpretation.

Semantic interpretation ... is the result of the process by which

the recipient, in the face of the linear manifestation of the text
(Editor’s note: or the work of art), fills it with meaning. Critical or
semiotic interpretation, on the other hand, tries to explain why the
text (Editor’s note: or the work of art) can produce these semantic
interpretations. (Eco 1992, 37)
4 ICOM-CC The role of the conservator is to produce a critical interpretation that makes
19th Triennial Conference it possible to identify the intentio operis, the intention of the work. How
2021 Beijing
THEORY, HISTORY, AND ETHICS OF
does Eco define it?
CONSERVATION
Intentio operis. From the “enclosed garden” to A plausible interpretation at any given time will only be accepted
the open work if it is confirmed—or at least not challenged—by another point in
the text. That’s what I mean by intentio operis. (ibid., 40)

Consequently, the whole text—from the work of art—is to be taken as

an organic whole.

Let us apply this to the conservation of a contemporary artwork. The

conservator cannot and must not ignore the artist’s intention, but what
matters is the manner in which the artist has materially “implemented” this
intention: the way in which it has been realized (etymologically: became
a thing). What did the artist use as a medium for the aesthetic experience?
Is it a simple, complex, tangible, intangible, static, or dynamic object?
Last but not least, how did the artist do it? How was it implemented and
arranged? With what effect?

The intentions (of the author or the spectator) are part of intentionality in the
phenomenological sense of the term. In other words, they are a projection
of consciousness. What is important to conservators is the transmission
of the support of the aesthetic experience, that is, of the materiality open
to interpretation. Now, who more than conservators are sensitive to the
characteristics of matter, developed in the context of their practice, not
only from a visual but also tactile, plastic, physical, and kinetic angle? Who
more than conservators can understand the means employed to express
these characteristics and the effect induced by them? Who can perceive
more clearly the slightest aesthetic variations in tonality, luminosity,
brilliance, rhythm, and color?

A visual artist can be compared to a composer, tenor, violinist, bass player,

or rapper; the conservator is a kind of sight-reader of the score, able to
synthesize voice, instruments, and the work as a whole. The conservator
listens not only to the artist but also to the work and understands it as a
skilled person who knows musical theory, the rules of composition, the
technique of the instrument, and who can see it also as a sound engineer
would. It is this ability, the ability to listen to the work in a privileged way,
which makes the conservator someone who “passes” on heritage: not the
spokesperson of an intention but the guardian of a realized work—which
has, therefore, escaped its author. The work, like a text, is to be understood
as an organic whole.

STRUCTURE, APPEARANCE, EFFECT

In literature, the intentio operis is expressed through a structure and

a vocabulary that determine a sense (a direction) and a meaning; the
prerequisite is to be able to read and to have what Eco calls “common
sense.” What about the intentio operis of a contemporary work of art?

For the classical work of art addressed to the eye, the conservator distinguishes
between structure (matter, which is the vehicle of the image) and aspect
(appearance); for the contemporary work, what corresponds to aspect (what
5 ICOM-CC is contemplated) is effect (what is felt). The conservator therefore must
19th Triennial Conference reconstitute, in a form of reverse engineering, the link between structure
2021 Beijing
THEORY, HISTORY, AND ETHICS OF
and effect. This is a very complex task. While science has developed
CONSERVATION tools to refine visual perception, it is still difficult to compare two effects
Intentio operis. From the “enclosed garden” to objectively. Their qualification is still largely empirical: all the more so
the open work
since, as Barry C. Smith (2016) notes, neuroscience tends to demonstrate
that there are far more senses than the five traditionally identified ones,
and that they interact in an extremely complex way.

The inventory and nomenclature of effects are only meaningful if the

conservator is able to grasp the unity of the work in its aesthetic functioning
(relating to sensation, feeling) and to keep it “open” (therefore, likely to
be interpreted differently). The work is not the sum of its parts or effects;
it is not a “totalization” but a whole. It has an organic unity, and it is this
unity that the conservator must perceive and transmit so that it continues
to live—that is, to be perceived—as a contemporary work. Here are a few
examples from contemporary art to clarify this point.

CLOACA

The particular problems posed by Wim Delvoye’s Cloaca project (Figure 1),
a work conceived by the artist as a metaphor for art that is useless—a
nod to Kant’s aesthetics—have been developed in a previous publication
(Verbeeck and Broers 2016). In an interview, the artist told the authors of
his relative indifference to the transformations imposed either by the use
or obsolescence of the pieces, by the technical constraints (voltage), or
by the cultural context (the hygiene issues that forced the original Cloaca
rectum to be covered during the New York exhibition). Although he once
relied on a conservator for documentation, Delvoye never saw fit to use a
conservator to preserve or restore his own works. It was his own studio’s
engineers who mainly put his artworks into function—thus, into aesthetic
function—during exhibitions.

Figure 1. Cloaca Original Wim Delvoye, 2000

6 ICOM-CC Successive reinstallations and transformations of different versions of
19th Triennial Conference Cloaca, sanctioned by the artist, shed light on the concept of intentio
2021 Beijing
THEORY, HISTORY, AND ETHICS OF
operis. Cloaca is an organism: each element contributes to a whole—the
CONSERVATION production of feces. The replacement of the parts, the change in the color
Intentio operis. From the “enclosed garden” to of the pipes, etc., are not important to the artist. On the other hand, the
the open work
progressive opacification of the enzyme pots, oxidized by gastric juices,
is conceived as an alteration—not in relation to an initial (or original)
state but to the aesthetic function of the work (Figures 2, 3): that of clearly
showing the digestive process. It is therefore the respect for the effect,
through materiality, that is pursued and not that for intention (“making a
machine that is useless”).

IT ALMOST SEEMED A LILY

The second example is by Berlinde de Bruyckere. It almost seemed a lily

is both the title of a work and an exhibition that was held at the Museum
Hof van Busleyden in Mechelen from 15 December 2018 to 12 May
2019. The artist responded to the Enclosed Gardens—recently restored
Figure 2. Cloaca Original: patina (due to 16th-century devotional objects—by creating her own contemporary
gastric juice) on the jars
installations. De Bruyckere exploited the “openness” of the Enclosed
Gardens (their potential for renewal as meditative objects for present use)
to open up her own creation—her commentary—to interpretation. It is in
fact a vertiginous abyss.

The curator of the exhibition, an art historian, explores the meaning and
intention of the work with the artist (De Bruyckere et al. 2019). What
about the conservator? The conservator, through technical knowledge, is
able to dialogue with the artist on the how and why of its implementation,
its inscription in the present. In Cesare Brandi’s words, not a “contextual”
present but a “flagrant” present. In other words, an efficient materiality—in
the sense that it serves as a support for the aesthetic experience. The role of
Figure 3. Cloaca Original: patina (detail)
the conservator is not to preserve the initial meaning, or even the current
meaning, but the potential meanings of which this material is intrinsically
a carrier. Each work can be re-presented (presented again) or reinstalled,
with a different artist’s intention. However, the reinterpretation taken upon
the conservator by the artist depends on the intentio operis, on what the
work she has materially created is likely to say again, intrinsically.

It almost seemed a lily (wax, wood, wallpaper, fabric, lead, iron, and
epoxy, 328 × 172 × 50 cm) was created for the exhibition (Figure 4). The
theme has the particularity of escaping the usual scale used by the artist
(1:1); neither the Mechelen Enclosed Gardens nor the botanical garden
were able to feed the creative power of the author, who molded skins and
wax onto her own body to obtain gigantic petals.

I connect the petals of the lilies to images of skin, of flesh; their

fragrance to lust and pleasure; their unsavory smell while wilting
to ephemerality and pain. This intense scent brought to mind the
skin traders’ workshop in Anderlecht, the odor of fresh cow skin.
(De Bruyckere et al. 2019, II, 2)

The power of this evocation is not an injunction for the conservator. Its role
is to provide a way to listen to the work: its internal structure, its intrinsic
7 ICOM-CC fragility determined by the materials, its appearance, as a form but also
19th Triennial Conference as a surface. The documentation on the artist’s creation and intention is
2021 Beijing
THEORY, HISTORY, AND ETHICS OF
intended only to shed light, in the final analysis, on this delicately meaty
CONSERVATION marbled aspect of the whole, which must be preserved. A darkening of the
Intentio operis. From the “enclosed garden” to material (wax) or its deformation by heat, for example, can alter the nature
the open work
of the work. For this reason, preventive conservation plays an essential
role, also in the private collection where the work is now included.

Infinitum 2009 presents another case in point (Figure 5). Produced

between 2004 and 2009, this work, composed of several pieces and
comprising mixed materials, has been exhibited several times—notably
at the Palais des Papes in Avignon. Its title makes a twofold allusion: to
the infinite without limits, and to the unfinished. For the conservator, the
singular case that Infinitum offers is an embodied idea: that the whole is
more than the sum of its parts. Each piece seems to form a unit (hands
pinned on a cushion, irregularly shaped wax under a bell jar) and each
is “open” to interpretation. But the challenge, should intervention be
necessary, is to keep the unit, because the parts respond to each other
in their heterogeneous assembly. They do not take their unity from the
artist’s intention—which was different in Avignon and Mechelen—but
from their material co-existence.

What Brandi called the potential unity, and what Eco calls the structural
unity, is a work considered as an organism. Each unit’s conservation should
Figure 4. It almost seemed a lily, Berlinde de
Bruyckere, 2017 therefore be considered as a whole, because their aesthetic efficiency
is due to their simultaneous exposure. The intentio operis, here, is of
course concerned with the appearance of the materials, the structure of
the space that brings them together or separates them, but, above all, their
co-existence, their simultaneous manifestation.

CONCLUSION

To make room for intentio operis in the understanding of a work of art

is to admit that the work can be understood in itself, in its organic unity,
in its material expression. Materiality must be examined as a means, a
condition for the manifestation of the effect it brings. With a sensitive
Figure 5. Infinitum 2009, Berlinde de knowledge of materials, the conservator is probably the one who is best
Bruyckere, 2009 able to conceive the risk that a work might no longer be perceptible in its
polysemic aesthetic register. The role of the conservator then is to keep
the work open and not to induce or support one or more meanings: it is to
reveal the potentialities, never to inscribe them in the matter. The material,
once again, is only the support of the aesthetic experience.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author warmly thanks Hiltrud Schinzel for her suggestions and Isabelle
Brajer for her patient proofreading of the English text—and her always
relevant comments on the content. Our gratitude also goes to the copy
editors for their clever and meticulous proofreading of the article.

REFERENCES
Brandi, C. 1966. The due life, 1st ed., Biblioteca di cultura moderna 625. Rome: Laterza.
8 ICOM-CC De Bruyckere, B., B. Baert, and L. Watteeuw. 2019. It almost seemed a lily: Berlinde De
19th Triennial Conference Bruyckere, Dutch and English edition. Lichtervelde: Cannibal Publishing.
2021 Beijing
Dykstra, S.W. 1996. The artist’s intentions and the intentional fallacy in fine arts conservation.
THEORY, HISTORY, AND ETHICS OF
CONSERVATION Journal of the American Institute for Conservation 35(3): 197–218. [Link]
Intentio operis. From the “enclosed garden” to Eco, U. 1962. Opera aperta. Forma e indeterminazione nelle poetiche contemporanee, 1st
the open work
ed., Tascabili Bompiani. Milan: Bompiani.

Eco, U. 1990. I limiti dell’interpretazione, Studi Bompiani. Milan: Bompiani.

Eco, U. 1992. The limits of interpretation. Paris: Grasset.

Genette, G. 1994. The work of art / Gérard Genette. Poetics. Paris: Editions du Seuil.

Hummelen, I. and D. Sillé, eds. 1999. Modern art: Who cares? An interdisciplinary research
project and an international symposium on the conservation of modern and contemporary
art. Amsterdam: The Foundation for the Conservation of Modern Art and the Netherlands
Institute for Cultural Heritage.

Pignocchi, A. 2012. The work of art and its intentions. Paris: Editions Odile Jacob.

Smith, B.C. 2016. Aristotle was wrong and so are we: There are far more than five senses |
Aeon Videos. [Link]

Verbeeck, M. and N. Broers. 2016. Conservation of contemporary art: From concepts to

practice, Cloaca by Wim Delvoye. In Authenticity in transition – Changing practices in art
making and conservation, eds. E. Hermens and F. Robertson, 141–48. London: Archetype
Publications.

Wharton, G. 2016. Artist intention and the conservation of contemporary art. In Objects
Specialty Group Postprints, Volume Twenty-Two, 2015. Proceedings of the Objects Specialty
Group Session, 13–16 May 2015, 43rd Annual Meeting, Miami, FL, eds. E. Hamilton and K.
Dodson, 1–12. New York: American Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works.

To cite this article:

Verbeeck, M. 2021. Intentio operis. From the
“enclosed garden” to the open work. In Transcending
Boundaries: Integrated Approaches to Conservation.
ICOM-CC 19th Triennial Conference Preprints,
Beijing, 17–21 May 2021, ed. J. Bridgland. Paris:
International Council of Museums.