Preservation Education & Research Volume 9 | 2017 &

PER is published annually as a single volume. Copyright © 2017 Preservation Education & Research. All rights reserved. Articles, essays, reports and reviews appearing in this journal may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, except for classroom and noncommercial use, including illustrations, in any form (beyond copying permitted by sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law), without written permission. ISSN 1946-5904 Cover photograph credit: Amalia Leifeste PRESERVATION EDUCATION & RESEARCH Preservation Education & Research (PER) disseminates international peer-reviewed scholarship relevant to VOLUME 9 EDITORS historic environment education from felds such as historic preservation, heritage conservation, heritage studies, building Gregory Donofrio, University of Minnesota and landscape conservation, urban conservation, and cultural ([email protected]) patrimony. Te National Council for Preservation Education Chad Randl, Cornell University (NCPE) launched PER in 2007 as part of its mission to ([email protected]) exchange and disseminate information and ideas concerning historic environment education, current developments and innovations in conservation, and the improvement of historic ADVISORY EDITORIAL BOARD environment education programs and endeavors in the United States and abroad. Steven Hofman, Southeast Missouri State University Editorial correspondence, including manuscripts for Carter L. Hudgins, Clemson University/College of Charleston submission, should be emailed to Gregory Donofrio Paul Hardin Kapp, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [email protected] and Chad Randl at [email protected]. Electronic submissions are encouraged, but physical materials Ted J. Ligibel, Eastern Michigan University can be mailed to Gregory Donofrio, School of Architecture, University of Minnesota, 145 Rapson Hall, 89 Church Street Vincent L. Michael, San Antonio Conservation Society S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. Articles should be in the Andréa Livi Smith, University of Mary Washington range of 4,500 to 6,000 words and not be under consideration for publication or previously published elsewhere. Refer to the Michael A. Tomlan, Cornell University back of this volume for manuscript guidelines. Robert Young, University of Utah Books for review, and book reviews, should be sent to Gregory Donofrio, School of Architecture, University of Minnesota, 145 Rapson Hall, 89 Church Street S.E., NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR PRESERVATION Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. E-mail [email protected]. EDUCATION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Subscriptions are US$60.00 per year. Payments can be Paul Hardin Kapp, Chair, made online at the NCPE Store (http://www.ncpe.us/ University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign storemembership) or send a check with name and mailing Amalia Leifeste, Vice Chair and Memberships, address to PER, c/o NCPE, Box 291, Ithaca, NY 14851, USA. Clemson University Andréa Livi Smith, Vice Chair and Web Site Editor, University of Mary Washington Steven Hofman, Secretary, Southeast Missouri State University Douglas Appler, Treasurer, University of Kentucky Cari Goetcheus, Internships, University of Georgia Michael Tomlan, Special Projects, Cornell University Lauren Weiss Bricker, Chair Emerita, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Robert Young, Chair Emeritus, University of Utah P eer- reviewed Articles

The Documentation Course: Beyond Drawing

CARTER L. HUDGINS AND AMALIA LEIFESTE

ABSTRACT — What role should architectural documentation play in academic training of historic preservation pro- fessionals? Tat question was at the center of discussions as faculty of the Clemson University / College of Charleston faculty reimagined and revised its required frst semester class Investigation, Documentation, Conservation (IDC). Te two-year course of study in the Clemson University / College of Charleston joint Graduate Program in Historic Preservation has, since its inception a decade ago, privileged feld recording and documentation drawings completed to HABS standards. Initially, the IDC course taught measured-drawing skills but was later expanded to incorporate other preservation perspectives that students would encounter later in their course of study. Te expanded course em- braced, for example, cultural landscape recording and analysis and interior fnish analysis. Even more recently, faculty discussion and the recommendations of external reviewers during accreditation review suggested that this emphasis was efective in merging multiple introductory portions of the curriculum into one course for incoming students but fell short of being an efective introduction to the interdisciplinary nature of current practice. Te course, in efect, siloed architectural documentation from other methods of recording and interpreting cultural resources. Te newest iteration of IDC strives to interweave a broader range of documentation and analytical approaches that provide a more thorough grounding that prepares students to observe and understand the built environment.

THE DOCUMENTATION COURSE

ocumentation courses are one of the the “drawing class” that many students encounter fundamental components of program cur- during their studies shapes their thinking about his- ricula endorsed by the National Council for toric resources, space, architectural details, and graphic DPreservation Education (NCPE 2015). Organized and communication. Te documentation course also ofers a structured to address distinctive programmatic goals, place in historic preservation curricula where multiple

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 47 P eer- reviewed Articles preservation perspectives can be drawn together. In addition to instruction in architectural graphic docu- mentation, the drawing course is ofen framed to include knowledge about architectural history, building mate- rials, and construction methods and to sometimes introduce the larger sociocultural perspectives of cultural landscapes and assemblages of historic structures (such as neighborhoods, mill villages, and towns). Te “draw- ing class” would thus seem to be an ideal vantage from which to discuss pedagogy in historic preservation. Historic preservation practitioners for many decades have pointed to the multifaceted power of historic places to teach about the past (Barthel 1996; Kirchler 2005; Ochsner and Dubrow 1994). It is easy enough to fnd robust discussion of how historic preservation can con- tribute to teaching about the past by engaging an array of subjects. Topics explored include how historic pres- ervation should be incorporated into history courses, secondary school curricula, campus planning, and dis- cussions of many other opportunities for leveraging the hard-won insights that have fowed from successful his- toric preservation eforts (Bluestone 1999; Handler 1987; Livi Smith 2012; Rose 2005; Stiefel and Wells 2014). Much less has been written about eforts to integrate historic preservation’s multidisciplinary nature into the courses that introduce students to our craf. (Figure 1) Fig. 1. Student constructing feld notes at 61-63 Smith Street THE DOCUMENTATION COURSE AND in the fall of 2013. (Photograph by author.) INTEGRATED LEARNING

Tis essay traces concentrated eforts between 2011 and discourse is, for most of us, a premise underlying how 2014 by the graduate program cosponsored by Clemson we approach our investigations of places and our plans University and the College of Charleston to sharpen the for these places in the future. It is perhaps because we analytical purposes of its introductory drawing course “know” our inquiries are grounded in a multidisciplinary by expanding its scope and employing an integrated approach that we have less consciously designed our learning strategy. Proponents of “integrated learning” in courses that way. While we can all list the many ways higher education emphasize the pedagogical and intel- our courses call on multiple disciplinary perspectives lectual benefts from learning that crosses disciplinary and methods, not many of us have discussed how or why boundaries, that seeks application of skills and practices our courses assumed the shape they have. Few drawing in varied settings, and that encourages engagement of courses are self-consciously designed to instill a sense problems contextually (Huber and Hutchings 2004). of the multidisciplinary character of the feld of historic Most of us assumed long ago and know from our own preservation through integrated learning. research and professional practice that a multidisci- All of us assume that integrated learning occurs plinary posture—what educational theorist are calling an across courses in NCPE-endorsed programs. But does it? integrated approach—has long shaped our feld methods. Multiperspectival learning can be exercised in project- All of the problems we engage, from revitalizing main based assignments and is increasingly likely to develop streets, to documenting and interpreting cultural land- with careful course construction toward this goal. Te scapes, to assessing historical signifcance, to name but a traditional drawing course ofers, we think, an ideal plat- few, demand a multidisciplinary approach. An integrated form for integrated learning. A shif from a primarily

48 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles skill-acquisition-based course objective to one of inte- celebrated the graduation of its tenth class in May 2014. grated learning is particularly possible as computer-aided In that same month, the program achieved approval of a drafing and digital measurement techniques assume an thorough revision of its curriculum by the faculty senates increasingly large portion of the drawing methods taught of its two sponsoring universities. Preceding and inform- in drawing courses. We think this trend will accelerate as ing curricular discussions, the program experienced a generations of increasingly computer-oriented students change in academic leadership with the hiring of a new enroll in our programs and the feld continues along the program director and recruitment of another new fac- trajectory toward computer drafing. Te initial point ulty member. Tese new faculty members and the longer being: be it in a drawing course as presented in this article standing members of the faculty participated in multiple or elsewhere in the curriculum, introducing an integrated rounds of programmatic reviews that precipitated discus- learning approach is refective of the feld, capitalizes on sion on the direction of the curriculum and the role of diverse student backgrounds and ways of learning, and the drawing course. External reviews sparked additional can, if positioned early in the course of study, we will dialogue and provided outside perspectives on curricular argue, prepare students to make connections among and matters. Deliberations that stretched over several years between curricular lessons during their advanced study. addressed a question familiar to all preservation educa- Trough incremental changes over years, pulling in tors: What should our students know and when should additional methods of observing, recording, and ana- they know it? As deliberations about revising our cur- lyzing historic buildings, the documentation course riculum gathered momentum, the faculty reafrmed piloted in the fall of 2014 pushed this curriculum com- its commitment to a documentation course that would ponent beyond drawing. Like all courses, our course, instill skills in, and appreciation for, feld recording Investigation, Documentation, Conservation (IDC), and drawing. remains a work in progress. Two earlier versions pre- ceded it. We gauged the success of these earlier versions WHAT SHOULD A DOCUMENTATION COURSE with feedback from faculty and staf and from students LOOK LIKE AND ACCOMPLISH? through the learning outcome assessment protocols Te two-year course of study jointly sponsored required by the two universities that sponsor our pro- by Clemson and the College of Charleston has since gram. Important in our evaluation of IDC were the results its inception a decade ago privileged feld recording of exit interviews and focus group discussions conducted and documentation drawing completed to Historic with graduating students. Tis student commentary American Building Survey (HABS) standards (Figure provided valuable qualitative feedback. So did the 2).1 Our drawing course, Investigation, Documentation, observations and recommendations external reviewers Conservation (IDC), has accordingly occupied a privi- provided during decennial programmatic assessments. leged position within our curriculum. Documentation Tis trio of measures—from faculty, students, and outside methods—feld measurements and drawings, site map- reviewers—is admittedly qualitative. While we continue ping, and recordation of cultural resources—occupies a to discuss the development of metrics capable of describ- signifcant and, some argued, an outsized place in our ing changing student performance in the drawing course, curriculum (Clemson University 2015). In curricular our experience will, we think, facilitate discussions about discussions about the program, however, our faculty how incremental changes in pedagogy for one course can has consistently afrmed our grounding premise that improve student learning through qualitative and anec- we cannot really know a building well, and thus cannot dotal measures. Specifcally here, the perceived success intelligently determine a treatment direction, until we of integrated learning in the most recent iteration of our have documented it thoroughly. Te necessary frst step documentation course is supported using comparative in preservation processes for us is careful examination student work from the two prior iterations of the course and documentation. Is our analytical goal sorting out and summary observations from student refections. building phases? Are we preparing a protocol for taking paint samples? Are we laying out a sampling scheme for MOVING CURRICULAR PARTS dendrochronology? From questions about use, to puzzles Te Master of Science in Historic Preservation (MSHP) about chronology, to the frst and fnal passes at creating program at Clemson and the College of Charleston rehabilitation plans and postrehabilitation management

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 49 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 2. Drawing sheet from the set of drawings depicting Fenwick Hall entered into the HABS sponsored Peterson Prize competition in 2012. (Measured drawing sheet by the MSHP class of 2012.)

plans, documentation drawings are, for us, the funda- that if changes were made to how much we focus on the mental, indispensable place of departure. program, I would advocate for more rather than less time Te cumulative opinion expressed by our faculty, advi- spent on AutoCAD.” In addition to teaching a profes- sory boards, most external reviewers, and recent alumni sional skill, the documentation course should instill an is that documentation is a fundamental professional increasingly refned way to see and think about building skill. Our shared opinion about architectural docu- fabric. Like any good drawing course, our aim was, frst, mentation’s capacity to enhance student awareness was to capitalize on the deep familiarity that comes from the further confrmed as important in that it helped students close study required to produce accurate and detailed acquire and fourish in summer internships and launch measured drawings. And, second, the course would their own careers. Slightly tongue-in-cheek, one of the deepen student awareness of historic building patterns as recent alumni of the program in personal correspon- they drew. Trough the visioning discussions spurred by dence afer graduation enthusiastically noted, “AutoCAD curricular review, consensus established that a large por- all day isn’t as bad if you’re doing it for great buildings!” tion of our documentation course would remain devoted Another student, in an exit interview afer starting her to traditional recording techniques, skills that require summer internship, shared, “I’m incredibly pleased that signifcant time investment. Faculty agreed that this was I can use the program [AutoCAD]. I am able to better an appropriate allocation of time. Drawing would remain understand architectural elements of my internship and in the documentation course as an integral building block I feel that I have a very marketable skill. I would suggest within a suite of tools.

50 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

INTRODUCTION TO INVESTIGATION, IDC: PHASES DOCUMENTATION AND CONSERVATION While the “boot camp” week has followed a consistent IDC is a signifcant component of the frst semester model for many years, IDC has gone through what might curriculum, when the program draws together a new be called three releases. IDC 1.0 and 2.0 have passed into class. Our new students come from diverse academic history. IDC 3.0 launched in the fall of 2014. All three backgrounds with varied skill levels and a wide range of releases of the course shared broad common goals and technical and technological abilities. We think that our purposes. IDC is, on one hand, a studio-based course students are broadly similar in background to students that introduces new students to the program’s studio who enroll in other NCPE graduate programs. In addi- culture. It is, on another, an introduction for most stu- tion to their enthusiasm, some have considerable historic dents to architectural feldwork, to feld measurement preservation experience while others have little or none. and drawing, and to the translation of pencil drawings All have a strong interest in historic buildings but rela- and pencil and pen “notes” into HABS-level measured tively few have much in the way of prior experience in drawings as has been discussed. IDC is, third, an immer- sion into the cooperative culture that overarches our architectural feldwork or architectural investigation. program. Tese overall aims align with an integrated Some students arrive highly profcient in computer- learning model, as does the fact that students learn aided drafing while some are professed neophytes. drawing skills by engaging one subject, or case study, Te broad purpose of the frst semester is to advance all in detail. As a project-based course, IDC has served and entering students, no matter what their initial skill level, will continue to serve as the launching pad for MSHP to a level of profciency in essential skills and fundamen- entries in the annual Peterson Prize competition spon- tal preservation knowledge. Tis level of profciency is sored by HABS.2 Acting on our program’s commitment required for the successful completion of the courses that to active support of HABS documentation goals, each follow in the curriculum and, ultimately, to professional incoming class tackles a documentation project in IDC success. Tis core foundation is developed through ff- which matures into the drawings that the class enters in teen credit-hours earned in four courses. Several courses, the Peterson Prize competition at the end of their fourth their interaction, and their potential for integrated learn- and fnal semester. ing are topics of discussion moving forward. One course ofered in the frst semester curriculum is INVESTIGATION, DOCUMENTATION, the drawing course, which for our program is IDC. For CONSERVATION 1.0 AND 2.0 all students, IDC begins with a week-long “boot camp” IDC began as a pedagogically uncomplicated docu- which provides intensive instruction in HABS standards mentation course that held much in common with its for feld notation, how to translate three-dimensional counterparts in other historic preservation programs. architectural objects encountered in the feld into Within the class’s limited scope, drawing skills were well two-dimensional architectural drawings in the com- instilled but students seem largely to have understood puter-aided drafing sofware AutoCAD from Autodesk, drawing as an end in itself instead of seeing their draw- and the history, culture, and architecture of Charleston ings as both a record and as a launching point for larger through introductory lectures and walking tours of the preservation questions. Te graphic documentation city’s historic boroughs. As the frst charge toward mas- focus of IDC 1.0 proved a less robust introduction to cul- tering feldwork and drawing skills, the documentation tural resources documentation than the faculty desired. assignments during IDC “boot camp” involve sketching Faculty at the time sought a more efective introduction exercises, feld recording and computer drafed presen- to the coursework MSHP students addressed afer their tation drawings of monuments located in Charleston’s initial semester and expanded the scope of the course antebellum Magnolia Cemetery. Tese monuments are with IDC 2.0. IDC 2.0 added components investigat- architectural in character but are generally of a size and ing the larger context of the building and analyzing and scale comprehensible to novice feld researchers. With conserving fnishes—thus more fully representing the fundamental skills in hand, our students enter the longer “I” for investigation and “C” for conservation in IDC’s segment of IDC. course title.

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 51 P eer- reviewed Articles

In order for IDC 2.0 to incorporate cultural land- IDC 1.0 and 2.0 did not stand alone in the frst semester, scapes and analysis of interior fnishes, basic instruction nor does IDC 3.0. Previously, MSHP students completed in land surveying technology and basic theoretical con- four other courses in addition to IDC 1.0 or 2.0: a seminar cepts were integrated into the course. Tese skills and in historic preservation history and theory, a survey of concepts gave greater context to the measured drawing American architecture, an exploration of historic build- assignment and previewed the required-semester class ing technologies, and a seminar in historical research on cultural landscapes. Another portion of the course, methods. Tis frst semester suite of courses is introduc- about one third of the semester, introduced students to tory in character but the courses are also intrinsically basic laboratory procedures and microscopy as applied to interrelated. Research skills developed in the historical the assessment of interior architectural fnishes. In most research methods course, for example, should inform iterations of IDC 2.0, this aspect of the course focused on the assignments put forward in the course on historic taking paint samples and assessing the history of inte- building technologies. We discovered, however, little rior fnishes by applying an array of microscopic analyses interaction between IDC and American Architecture, a techniques. Tis frst experience in the conservation lab course inherited from Clemson’s School of Architecture was moved from the third to the frst semester to ensure that all students complete in semester one. Tere was, at student familiarity with lab procedures and to jump-start the same time, a kind of breezy interaction between IDC basic lab abilities so students could apply them earlier in and our course in historic building technologies. IDC, their studies. architectural history, and building technology, in short, Te format of IDC 2.0 institutionalized a multifaceted marched along parallel tracks, hewing as they did a siloed and multidisciplinary approach to the investigation of approach to reading and understanding historic buildings historic buildings. For that reason IDC 2.0 was taught by and their contexts. a team consisting of an architect, an architectural conser- We also discovered compartmentalizing internal to vator, a landscape architect, and a historian. Te course IDC itself. Proof of that was right in front of us in the considered a case study building over the course of the form of the weighty reports that conveyed loads of data at semester from each of these professional perspectives. At the end of the semester. Te separate report divisions for the end of the course, a compiled report presented the architectural documentation (measured drawings), docu- results of each of these historic preservation perspectives: mentation and analysis of interior architectural fnishes, architectural documentation drawings, documentation and documentation of landscape made the compartmen- drawings of the building’s landscape and setting, and talization legible. Te end-of-semester reports illustrated preliminary assessment of interior fnishes. Assessment profciency in each of these areas but lacked the connec- of our curriculum by external reviewers confrmed tive tissue that would indicate an understanding of how that these extensions to IDC moved the course in the the perspectives worked together to provide a deeper right direction. comprehension of the case study place. Te chapters of the IDC reports conformed to, in short, the same bound- WHAT WAS BROKEN IN IDC 2.0? aries as our feld observations. Te documentation project While external reviewers endorsed IDC’s broader IDC 2.0 addressed in the fall of 2013, as our curricular embrace of multiple preservation perspectives, the fac- discussions gained momentum, ofered the opportunity ulty soon found opportunities to further improve the to identify the redeemable strengths of the course as well course. Faculty deliberation suggested that while IDC as its shortcomings. 2.0 efectively merged multiple introductory portions IDC 2.0: 61-63 SMITH STREET EXAMPLE of the curriculum into one course, it still fell short of presenting the interdisciplinary nature of current his- In the fall of 2013, IDC examined an 1824 Charleston toric preservation practice. Tere remained, the faculty single house in Harleston Village, one of Charleston’s his- argued, opportunity for greater integrated learning toric eighteenth-century boroughs whose development among frst semester courses. IDC 2.0, we discovered, was slowed by economic downturns associated with the was relatively isolated from the skills, perspectives, American Revolution and which was not fully built out and techniques introduced and honed in other frst- until the 1830s. Te house at 61-63 Smith Street occupies semester courses. the northern half of a double lot (Figure 3). Treatened

52 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 3. 61-63 Smith Street, the IDC case study building in the fall of 2013. (Photograph by author.) by deferred maintenance and by subdivision and conver- comparatively little time in IDC researching the history sion to condominiums, Historic Charleston Foundation of the building. Instructors pointed students to a range of (HCF) purchased the property through its revolving fund primary and secondary sources and expected the class to program. HCF undertook some stabilization work on draw on these and other sources in local archives without the property, placed an exterior easement on the build- much coaching. IDC students wrote the history section ing, and sold it to a conservation-minded buyer in 2011.3 of the report at the close of the semester. By back-loading Subsequently, the new owner energetically embarked on a this task, students drew on skills gained in the required rehabilitation of the house, anticipating that she would do frst-semester course Historical Research Methods, a a great deal of the work herself. Working with HCF, the seminar through which students, contemporary with program adopted the house as an IDC case study out of their IDC work, acquire research skills. Tese skills were concern for the loss of historic fabric as piles of construc- then reinforced and extended by performing the work tion debris flled dumpsters at the curb of the property. necessary for the portion of the fnal IDC report on the Te loss of historic interiors at 61-63 Smith Street was building history. somewhat curtailed by the infuence of HCF but has Students also capitalized on a skill set developed in proven unavoidable as the owner seeks to modernize. other parallel core classes for the second chapter of Following the template for IDC 2.0, students examined the report: an architectural description of the house. 61-63 Smith Street through a series of lenses, each per- In American Architecture and Historic Construction spective clearly discernible in the report they assembled Methods, two required frst-semester courses, students at the end of the semester. Te 2013 IDC report opens begin the process of gaining fuency in architectural with a summary history of the property. Tis frst sec- grammar and building systems. Te building descrip- tion is one place where integrated learning among tion section of the IDC project provided an additional courses is apparent in the IDC 2.0 format. Students spent opportunity to exercise budding skills in interpreting

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 53 P eer- reviewed Articles and summarizing structural and decorative aspects of by the faculty following the presentation. Te opportu- a building. nity to present a holistic analysis of a case study building Te third section of the report presented the docu- like 61-63 Smith Street was the victim of the segregat- mentation and interpretation of the landscape, one of the ing of the disciplinary approaches participating faculty newer elements of IDC 2.0. Photographic documenta- brought to their portions of the course. It was the goal tion captured the character of landscape features from of achieving a more rigorously planned interdisciplinary the streetscape to paving patterns and ornamental plant- approach to case study buildings and increased integra- ing species. Photographs complimented a site plan and tion of the analytical tracks applied during the course measured drawings of a handful of landscape details. that led to creation of the new six-credit-hour course we Creation of the site plan provided frst exposure to appli- refer to as IDC 3.0. cation use of a total station to record landscape features and translate feld data into site maps.4 SOLUTION—IDC 3.0 (CURRENTLY IN TRIAL MODE) A large portion of the 2013 report is devoted to presen- As IDC 2.0 entered its second year in the fall of 2013, tation of measured drawings. 61-63 Smith Street is a large and as revision of the MSHP curriculum proceeded, our frame dwelling, with two stories and a fnished garret faculty posed this question: Could we bring the compo- above a raised, fnished ground level that historically nents of IDC into a more interactive posture and in the housed kitchen and other domestic support activities. process weave IDC into more coherent introduction to Buildings this large enable the instructor to make indi- professional practice? Te course that emerged retained vidual assignments, such as the elevation drawings of a some aspect of IDC 2.0, drawing the building and its room, as well as team assignments, such as the plan of the frst foor. Work was primarily executed by individuals landscape to HABS standards, for example. But to that or small groups and bound together by common graphic old framework the faculty added new expectations and a convention and some coordination of overall dimensions. new strategic purpose. Te course would, as revised, con- Te fnal section of the 61-63 Smith Street report con- tinue three of the roles it had served during the program’s tained pages conveying the analysis of interior paint frst decade: (1) IDC would remain the primary vehicle fnishes. Tese pages reveal a degree of interaction with through which students reach profciency in architectural the measured drawing portion of the class by using the feld drawing and, via AutoCAD, fnish measured draw- interior elevations as underlays to diagrams showing ings in electronic formats; (2) the course would retain paint sample locations. Paint analysis for each area of the responsibility for introducing students to documentation house was composed of a methodology, drawings, photo- of cultural landscapes; and (3) the course would continue graphs, and a table locating the site of each paint sample. to serve as the venue through which students are intro- Te resulting paint stratigraphy study provided informa- duced to laboratory processes and procedures and acquire tion about the character of interior fnishes over time. frst-level skills in assessment of architectural fnishes Assessing the result of IDC 2.0 at 61-63 Smith Street, and the conservation of historic building materials. To our faculty understood that the course had incorporated enable the addition of new content and new course goals, assignments that drew efectively on skills and knowledge the faculty doubled the number of credit hours required gained in other courses. Acknowledgement of this fortu- for IDC (from three to six). To this broader base the fac- itous result was one of the facts that pushed the faculty ulty (1) folded in the old course Materials and Methods to discuss further refnements to the course. More per- of Historic Construction and (2) added a workshop in suasive regarding the potential for additional refnement architectural photography. More importantly, the course was the nature of the report that students presented to was organized as a layered, interdisciplinary analysis and the property owner as the semester drew to a close. Each documentation of a shared feld problem. section—landscape maps, paint analysis, documenta- In general, the revised course encourages students from tion drawing—was, we thought, ably presented student their frst encounter with both urban and rural places to work. Each section was, however, a chapter in itself, each understand buildings as expressions of complicated and one sufcient for its descriptive and analytical tasks but interrelated cultural processes. In their frst-week read- each one nonetheless isolated from the others. Students ing assignment, alongside works that provide insight into also employed the language of “my part” or “the section I technical procedures, such as the HABS guide to feld worked on” but demurred when asked broader questions measuring, students discuss the introductory chapter

54 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles of Tomas Carter and Elizabeth Cromley’s Invitation to method privileges diferent aspects of the building, its Vernacular Architecture and in particular their admoni- history, and its materiality. Since no one of these diferent tion, “If culture determines behavior and we can see such ways of seeing and understanding is sufcient alone, our behavior in the things people make, it is logical that we approach to documentation is to apply them all, reinforc- can also move in the opposite direction, working back ing methods of reading and understanding the building, from the object in an attempt to explain the ideas, values its use, and its evolution as we do. Trough these methods and beliefs—the culture—that caused that object to of recording, students learn to slowly and systematically coming into being” (Carter and Cromley 2005, xiii). As order their observations and zoom into a level of detail encouraged by Carter and Cromley and the vernacular missed in less intimate engagements with the building. architectural movement at large, IDC 3.0 more explicitly Te investigation of the building’s setting, whether urban employs feld-based investigation of a historic building lot or rural site, encourages investigation and explana- in or near Charleston to introduce and to reinforce the tion of cultural contexts. Investigation of the physical linkages between feld documentation and the investiga- properties of building systems and building materials, tion of historic building methods, the survey of cultural and analysis of its interior fnishes are still fner-grained landscapes, and the analysis of building materials and pursuits, but these too invite closer consideration of use decorative interior fnishes. and change in the case study building. For example, sketching, feld drawing, AutoCAD doc- Te course work in the history of building technology umentation drawing, total station data point collection, and in feld-based architectural investigation introduces and photography provide methods for recording feld additional content to the fnal report summarizing student observations of the subject building. No single one of learning in IDC 3.0. Description of the building systems, these methods of representation captures all the infor- materials employed, and current conditions comple- mation we wanted to convey about the building. Each ment the content presented in the reports developed in

Fig. 4. Pompion Hill Chapel, the IDC case study building in the fall of 2014. (Photograph by author.)

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 55 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 5. Te wooden pulpit at Pompion Hill Chapel. Photograph, June 1939 by Tomas T. Waterman. (Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division HABS SC,8-HUG.V,2-6.)

56 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles previous IDC iterations. Building from the four seg- of its historic architectural fabric, changes made to the ments of investigation and observation—architectural building over time, and assessment of its current condi- investigation, graphic documentation, cultural landscape tion with a thorough documentation of the building and analysis, and fnish analysis—the fnal IDC report in IDC its site. Tis newer, broader pedagogical goal of integrated 3.0 is conceptualized as a historic structure report (HSR) learning, we anticipated, encouraged participating faculty lite.5 Te separate segments of the course are designed to to facilitate the investigations they undertake with their collectively provide a more synergistic understanding of students with the results of the nearly simultaneous analy- the case study building, framing big-picture preservation sis of landscape, architecture, and materials. questions about the site in this report. Questions about Afer the one-week intensive “boot camp” devoted, the meaning of the building and landscape, its character- in large part, to skill acquisition, students and three of defning features, its signifcance, and how to prioritize their instructors then addressed, in turn, the architec- preservation of the place led students to consider the “so tural documentation, cultural landscape assessment and what” questions that emerged from each segment of the documentation, and materials conservation at Pompion course and the role each of these methods of engagement while a fourth instructor coordinated investigation of the plays in answering the large questions. fabric and form of the building, its construction methods, changes made to it since its construction in the eighteenth IDC 3.0—FALL 2014 POMPION HILL CASE STUDY century, and its condition. During the frst third of the semester, students spent Te IDC case study for fall 2014 was Pompion Hill three days on site, working on individual and group docu- Chapel. Pompion, always pronounced “pumpkin” by resi- mentation assignments (Figure 6). All students measured dents of the South Carolina Lowcountry, is a “back parish” and completed feld drawings of a plan, one interior and chapel of ease located near Huger, South Carolina (Figure one exterior elevation, and one detail. On nonfeld days, 4). Pompion Hill Chapel is listed in the National Register students converted feld drawings to AutoCAD fles and of Historic Places and is a National Historic Landmark. began the process of knitting individual feld drawings into Constructed in the middle decades of the eighteenth cen- a fnished set of drawings. tury, Pompion Hill Chapel is no longer an active church On the frst day of feldwork the entire class took over- (but holds two annual services and social events) and is all measurements and established a common building maintained by a nonproft association led by descendants footprint before dividing into teams to tackle portions of the families who owned and managed the plantations of the building. Previously, the task of knitting together that once lined the east branch of the Cooper River adja- individual students’ drawings was reserved for the fnal cent to the chapel. Architectural historian Tomas T. week of documentation, occurred within the digital space Waterman photographed the chapel in June 1939 during of the computer (as opposed to on site), and ofen fell to a visit to the Lowcountry for HABS. Te chapel was, in the a student or two who assumed the role of team leader. 1930s, already widely known for the intricate ornamental Coordinating initial feldwork and requiring early and carving that embellishes its raised pulpit (Figure 5). frequent compilation of small-group work products took Well-maintained at an idyllic location overlooking aban- the spirit of integrated learning down to a pragmatic doned rice felds, Pompion’s masonry walls are wracking and small-scale level. Te required fow back and forth as clay soils supporting the foundation shrink and expand between individual work and group coordination led to with a rising and falling water table. Torough documen- some frustration in terms of diferent personalities and tation of the chapel and its setting was a frst step toward work fow schedules, but ultimately improved accuracy of mitigation of the efects of soil subsidence. Documentation the product and ofered an experience with some of the drawings would, we thought, also be a kind of architectural professional challenges of working with a team. Students insurance for posterity, conveying the condition of this got to know the other portions of the building in addi- important eighteenth-century building as our students tion to their own area of responsibility. Stitching together recorded and interpreted it. individual drawings that depicted parts of the build- Our investigation of Pompion Hill Chapel ofered a frst ing into a single coordinated drawing that recorded the opportunity to unsilo the way students engaged an IDC entire building was complemented by the task of situat- case study building and landscape. IDC 3.0 combines an ing the building into a group-produced drawing of the investigation of construction methods with close analysis larger context.

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 57 P eer- reviewed Articles

Following orientation lectures on the documenta- and analysis and on-site material conservation alternated tion of cultural landscapes and the use of total station with architectural documentation. surveying equipment, students spent one day plotting In the fnal weeks of the class, students were prompted a site plan and recording cultural features (Figure 7).6 to use the essential building blocks of observation and For further cross-pollination between sections, students recordation they had developed over the semester to gen- took total station measurements at building corners or erate a fnal report. Drawing on the multiple segments “tied the building into the site plan,” providing accuracy of IDC 3.0 skills and the content specifc to Pompion, verifcation for hand measurement and total station cali- students were charged with the creation of a preliminary bration and points of reference. Generating the site plan HSR—what we called an “HSR lite” in the IDC 2.0 itera- brought students’ attention to site and building orienta- tion of the course.7 In addition to presenting the fndings tion and why certain landscape and architectural features from each segment of the course, the report used the data were connected. collected through the semester (material observations, As these documentation projects unfolded, students drawings) to draw connections between the components were also engaged in an aspect of the revised course of the report. Students approached this kind of synthetic that linked feld-based and lecture-based instruction. thinking frst in individual refection papers. Papers Lectures on masonry construction, including termi- answered these questions: What are the character defn- nology and bond patterns, and timber framing found ing features of Pompion Hill Chapel? How would you application as students convened at Pompion to begin prioritize their preservation? What is the signifcance of the process of assessing and recording the construction Pompion Hill Chapel? And what does the building com- methods employed there. Tis knowledge of materials municate about the culture that created and inhabited the and their manufacturing processes came into play as stu- place over time? dents were asked to assess the physical condition of the Tese questions improved the analytical thinking stu- chapel. Te direct purpose of this facet of the course was dents applied to their fnal report and drove home the to reinforce acquisition of architectural vocabulary and message that the skills developed in IDC are critical but learn about the building through assessment of physical are not the objective of a preservation education. As stu- evidence. In guided observation and interpretation ses- dents refected on bigger questions about Pompion Hill sions, students applied skills acquired in the classroom Chapel they efectively drew together observations from to this real-world setting. In a building that they already multiple dimensions of the course. One student drew knew relatively well from taking feld measurements, on research skills and content gained in the American exercises in the description and documentation of brick Architecture course to situate Pompion in a wider stylis- bonds, pointing, masonry repairs and parallel assessment tic category, drawing on content from the lecture-based of joinery and decorative carving provided opportunities portion of the class, secondary sources, and architectural for close reading of physical evidence. Te combination of features observed and drawn. “At Pompion the Georgian the drawings and these observation and interpretive ses- design is materialized through the balanced symmetry of sions enabled students to render an in-depth assessment the fenestration, the regular proportions of the north and of the evolution and condition of the building. south entrances and the three-part Palladian window on Te conservation thread of IDC 3.0 at Pompion focused the chancel extension.” Another student considered how on the evaluation and conservation of grave markers and siting and architectural quality speak to the signifcance memorials, a task that overlapped with the landscape of the place and also drew a humanizing understanding survey and with students’ ability to observe and diagnose of what this place meant to its community at the time conditions of the chapel’s building materials. Assessment of construction. of the condition of the markers and the materials from I think the location of the chapel also conveys a which they were made provided an introduction to archi- meaning or signifcant point the builders and original tectural conservation practices and methods. Pompion parishioners intended. Te chapel commands sweep- Hill Chapel is a one-hour drive from Charleston so feld- ing views of the Cooper River and adjacent countryside, work days alternated with studio days to allow students and when you are traveling down river it is impossible to to keep pace with the translation of feld measurements miss the chapel. Tat speaks to the central importance of into electronic drawings. IDC faculty also established a religion in the parishioners’ lives, as well as their belief course schedule that insured that landscape recordation that the church ought to be prominent and well built. Te

58 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 7. Students documenting Pompion Hill Chapel in the fall of 2014. (Photograph by author.)

fnest materials were used, especially for a country chapel Tese examples of student quotes along with the fnal of ease, as well as exerting extensive efort in the details report produced at the end of IDC 3.0 suggest that students such as the pulpit, which was lifed right out of a pattern are increasingly registering the notion that the methods of book used by Saint Michael’s church downtown. engagement presented in IDC are means to deeper analy- As a fnal example, a student astutely drew connec- sis and a basis to inform further preservation work, be it tions between existing physical evidence presented a preservation treatment, evaluation of signifcance, or by the building and landscape and a growing historic interpretation of a place, and not the end itself. Drawings awareness about racial hierarchies in the region that themselves and the skills to develop these drawings are were then used as a lens to hypothesize about the social far more meaningful when understood to have broad customs of the chapel: “Looking collectively at both the application to help answer questions and inform decision graveyard and the chapel interior, evidence portrays who making. Tus, incorporating an integrated learning view worshipped [at] and supported Pompion Hill. . . . Tis evi- has improved the relevance of the drawing course for our dence demonstrates the racial power structure and social MSHP program. As is now refected in the course struc- afairs within Pompion Hill Chapel.” Tese examples of ture, preservationists seek data, through close observation synthetic thinking reinforce the belief that integrated and analysis, and learning a place by drawing it. Tis data learning holds great potential for sophisticated learn- has the potential to inform their decisions in many ways. ing and generating interesting insight and compelling Te components of IDC 3.0 are increasingly understood questions for further investigation in ways that insular as processes to be used in service to answering questions preservation lenses miss. about a place and its care.

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 59 P eer- reviewed Articles

CONCLUSIONS: POTENTIAL IN Hudgins has directed archaeological projects in Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, and Ireland and completed architectural surveys in DOCUMENTATION COURSES Alabama and Virginia. He is currently completing an archaeologi- cal investigation of an abandoned seventeenth-century town on the Te pedagogical rationale behind the revision of our Caribbean island of Nevis where he is also participating in the analy- documentation class, IDC, was to push us and our stu- sis of the sites of two large eighteenth-century slave villages. Hudgins dents beyond drawing without seeing. Our goal was to has also participated in an NEH-funded project that has begun the frst systematic identifcation, documentation, and analysis of slave create instruction and opportunities for engagement that housing in the Chesapeake with colleagues at the University of Mary would span the scale of investigation from broad ques- Washington and Mount Vernon. tions about building plan and purpose to fne-grained questions about materials and condition. Tough the AMALIA LEIFESTE level of investigation students were able to accomplish in Clemson University / College of Charleston this project during their frst semester of graduate study Charleston, SC (USA) is not comprehensive enough to be considered a complete Amalia Leifeste received her bachelor of architecture degree from HSR, IDC students did look at one building and its cul- the University of Oregon. Te school’s focus on sustainable, contex- tural setting through many of the lenses that are critical tual design and the social dimensions of architecture characterize to understanding a building in depth. her work there and professionally. Her exposure to a wide range of projects while in practice, including remodels and large-scale adap- Our introduction to documentation, materials analy- tive-use projects, led to her interest in sensitive design interventions sis, architectural conservation, landscape assessment, within existing buildings. and the investigation of historic buildings will, in the Deeping her interest in these subject, Amalia earned her postpro- fessional master of architecture degree from the University of Texas at end, be counted successful if it expands how students Austin, including certifcates in both sustainable design and historic perceive the application of the skills acquired in IDC. preservation. She is now an assistant professor with the Clemson Ultimately, an integrated learning model applied to the University / College of Charleston joint Graduate Program in Historic drawing course can provide practice in developing inter- Preservation. She teaches documentation, preservation studio, history of building technology, and sustainable preservation courses. esting research questions. In addition to seeing the value in their developing skill set, we are pleased that the frst run of IDC 3.0 appears to build general inquisitiveness REFERENCES essential to the best scholarship our colleagues and their students produce. Arbogast, David. 2010. How to Write a Historic Structure Report. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.

Barthel, Diane. 1996. “Getting in Touch with History: Te Role of CARTER L. HUDGINS Historic Preservation in Shaping Collective Memories.” Qualitative Clemson University / College of Charleston Sociology, 19 (3): 345–64. Charleston, SC (USA) Bluestone, Daniel. 1999. “Academics in Tennis Shoes: Historic Preservation and the Academy.” Journal of the Society of Carter L. Hudgins is director of the joint Graduate Program in Architectural Historians, 58 (3): 300–307. Historic Preservation. A native of the small Tidewater Virginia town of Franklin, Hudgins completed a BA at the University of Richmond Carter, Tomas, and Elizabeth Cromley. 2005. Invitation to and an MA at Wake Forest University prior to receiving a PhD in Vernacular Architecture: A Guide to the Study of Ordinary Buildings early American history at the College of William and Mary. Trained and Landscapes. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press. as a historian and archaeologist, Hudgins has interspersed work Clemson University. 2015. College of Architecture, Arts and in both the public and private sector through his academic career. Humanities | Degrees and Certifcates. Retrieved August 4, 2015 A feld archaeologist with the Virginia Department of Historic from http://wwwdev.clemson.edu/caah/departments/historic- Resources early in his career, he later served for seven years as direc- preservation/academics/index.html. tor of Historic Charleston Foundation. Prior to his appointment to the faculties of Clemson University and the College of Charleston, Handler, Richard. 1987. “Overpowered by Realism: Living History Hudgins was a member of the history faculties at the University of and the Simulation of the Past.” Journal of American Folklore, 100 Alabama at Birmingham, where he implemented the graduate cur- (397): 337–41. riculum in public history, and the University of Mary Washington, Huber, Mary Taylor, and Pat Hutchings. 2004. Integrative Learning: where he was chairperson of both the Department of History and Mapping the Terrain, Te Academy in Transition. Washington, DC: American Studies (2002–08) and the Department of Historic Association of American Colleges and Universities. Preservation (1984–93), a program in which he held appointment as the Hofer Distinguished Professor of Early American Culture and Kirchler, Leslie. 2005. “Architecture and Landscapes of Segregation: Historic Preservation. An Historical Look at the Built Environment of Educational Hudgins research interests include vernacular architecture in Facilities in the United States.” Berkeley Planning Journal, 18 (1): early America and early modern material culture of the Atlantic rim. 79–99.

60 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Livi Smith, Andrea. 2012. “Te Young Preservationist: Findings 2010). Te fnal report compiled at the end of each IDC course is from the First Undergraduate Historic Preservation Education limited in scope in the sense that it captures materials present, Symposium” Preservation Education and Research Journal, 5: 87–97. current conditions, and readily discernable historical evolution in NCPE (National Council for Preservation Education). 2015. brief—documentation of existing conditions and a frst round of Membership Standards. Retrieved August 4, 2015 from http://www. historic analysis—but doesn’t include mechanical and electrical ncpe.us/about-ncpe/standards/. systems nor any forms of advanced instrumentation or destructive investigation techniques. Ochsner, Jefrey Karl, and Gail Lee Dubrow. 1994. “Architecture and Historic Preservation: Invigorating the Dialogue.” Journal of 6 Data points captured via total station were brought into Architectural Education, 47 (4): 186. Autodesk’s sofware AutoCAD Civil 3D before being converted to into AutoCAD. Students drew a site plan using the total station data Rose, Julia. 2005. “Melancholia to Mourning: Commemorative points as an underlay. Lines and textures were produced using the Representations of Slave Dwellings at South Louisiana Historical AutoCAD drafing sofware as students built on previous familiarity Plantations.” Journal of Curriculum Teorizing, 21 (3): 61–78. with this method, now dealing with a diferent type of drawing, the Stiefel, Barry L., and Jeremy C. Wells, eds. 2014. Preservation site plan, and larger scale. Education: Sharing Best Practices and Finding Common Ground. 7 Te full fnal report is available for download in .pdf fle format Hanover: University Press of New England. at the following link: http://media.clemson.edu/caah/pdp/hp/ pompion-hill-chapel-idc-fall-2014.pdf. For comparison of this HSR Lite to past reports, browse the gallery of student work found at the program website. ENDNOTES

1 Te Historic American Building Survey (HABS), a program of the National Parks Service, began in the 1930s to record threatened, historically signifcant structures. Formed as a New Deal measure to employ many out-of-work architects and drafsmen during the Great Depression, HABS endures today with a larger mission as, among other things, an archive for drawn and photographic documentation of many of the nation’s important cultural resources. HABS ofers documentation best practices for feld recording, photography, and both hand and computer drafing. “HABS level drawing” signifes a level of precision, completeness, and somewhat standardized graphic style in addition to conforming to basic drafing conventions. 2 Te Peterson Prize is an annual competition held in the honor of HABS’s founding father, Charles Peterson. Te competition solicits sets of drawings from academic institutions—most commonly architecture and historic preservation programs. Tese competition entries are judged and all drawing sets are archived in the Library of Congress, thus contributing to the HABS collection. Tis repository of drawing is within the public domain, and can be accessed through the Library of Congress’s website: http://www.loc.gov/ pictures/collection/hh/. 3 Historic Charleston Foundation is one of the two preservation advocacy organizations in Charleston, South Carolina. Tis organization holds the distinction of being the frst in the nation to develop a revolving fund program. Tis program purchases threatened properties, addresses pressing issues in the care of the buildings/structures, places easements on the properties, and sells the properties. Te program ofers assistance to building owners afer their purchase in the form of consultation and a degree of monitoring for easement compliance. Te program furthers HCF’s mission by preserving properties around the peninsula without adding substantially to the portfolio of properties owned and managed by the foundation. 4 Te total station is a piece of land surveying equipment that uses light refection technology to measure distances and angles in three dimensions and stores points plotted in the feld in an onboard computer. 5 A historic structure report is a preservation documents examined at length in National Park Service briefs and works such as David Arbogast’s work How to Write a Historic Structure Report (Arbogast

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 61 62 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Environmental Integrity: Interpreting Historic Indoor Conditions

BETSY FREDERICK-ROTHWELL

ABSTRACT — Te rapid deployment of air conditioning over the past ffy years nearly guarantees that many Americans have had little conscious experience with unconditioned space. Tis paper considers the potential for historic house mu- seums to provide that experience and to operate as venues for discovery and interpretation of traditional, building-based cooling methods and seasonal cultural practices through the lens of “environmental integrity.” If integrity is defned as the “ability of a property to convey its signifcance,” this paper, as a conceptual exercise, is attempting to assess “environmental integrity,” or the ability to convey past environmental practices. To explore this concept in practice, the essay presents several case studies in the hot and humid American South to document the sites’ approaches to interpreting historical climate-related building designs and practices. Te fndings of this study are encouragingly mixed. While many sites remain completely sealed and air conditioned without acknowledging this inherent anachronism, some are implement- ing or considering alternative approaches that have potential to change the way Americans think about air conditioning, indoor environments, and the past.

hen preservationist and educator James the summertime; and just as they would refuse to eat in a Marston Fitch (1990), in his infuential non-air-conditioned restaurant or stay at a non-air-con- text Historic Preservation: Curatorial ditioned hotel, so would they be reluctant to spend much WManagement of the Built World, advised on the insertion time in a non-air-conditioned historic house museum” of new air-conditioning systems into historic buildings, (Fitch 1990, 256). Air conditioning was inevitable, and he was clear that “such interventions must by defnition the preservationist’s job was to make it invisible. be invisible” (255, italics in original text). Although he Tis paper revisits Fitch’s conclusion in an altered regretted the loss of “maximum verisimilitude” that social context, one that is more concerned with the would come with installing new environmental control efects of climate change and the contribution of energy- systems, Fitch concluded that a proposition to leave his- intensive cooling systems to that change. It proposes toric buildings unconditioned would be a nonstarter. He that a creatively interpreted house museum—one that reasoned, “Most middle-class American tourists travel in makes historical seasonal practices or contemporary

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 63 P eer- reviewed Articles technological choices more explicit—could instead be a increase in mechanical cooling is the subsequent loss of “starter” of conversations about current and future meth- seasonal patterns associated with pre-air-conditioning ods of indoor environmental control. In order to obtain culture. Business hours and foodways rarely change with a preliminary understanding of preservation practice in the seasons now, although they frequently did in the past. these terms, this paper documents the environmental Patterns of seasonal dress, although they still change conditions and interpretive practices at a select group throughout the year, are ofen rendered meaningless—at of historic house museums in the American South, least for women—in the chilly indoor environments of examining to what extent they communicate how past most workplaces (Belluck 2015). inhabitants lived with or without air-conditioning tech- Many historic sites, especially those functioning as nology. Although the observations and analysis in this house museums, from the 1960s forward installed air- essay are not intended to be understood as conclusive conditioning systems to protect artifact collections and or representative of preservation practice, they nonethe- to draw in visitors they feared would stay away if their less suggest that signifcant, positive shifs in materials buildings remained unconditioned. Consequently, many conservation theory and practice that allow for environ- historic indoor environments were signifcantly altered; ments that more closely approximate historical indoor they may have looked like the past, but they did not feel conditions still leave many opportunities to interpret like the past. Although dropped ceilings and large vents historical practices and contexts more explicitly. appeared in historic buildings throughout the United States, air-conditioning as an interpretive topic was CHANGING CONDITIONS largely ignored. Now, with the installation of small-duct air-conditioning systems in historic house museums, Fitch would perhaps be pleased to know that in recent as in the recent renovation of the Hemingway House years public discussion has begun to question the extent museum in Key West, Florida (Gonzales 2016), it has to which we air-condition our buildings and that public become almost invisible. history is contributing to such discussions. Te year 2012 A recent visit to a small house museum in Austin, marked the 110th anniversary of the frst installation Texas, highlighted this situation. Te museum’s primary of a “true” air-conditioning system at the Sackett and structure, a small mid-nineteenth-century wood frame Wilhelms building in Brooklyn, New York. Journalists building, has been equipped with central air-condition- and commenters alike took the opportunity to refect on ing. Te primary purpose of this environmental control how America got “cool.” Americans asked themselves, system is to protect the small collection of period furni- “How did we get here?” and “Where will this go?” (New ture housed in the building; the secondary purpose is to York Times 2012; Rosenthal 2012). It has become clear provide a “comfortable” environment for visitors. While to many that an understanding of the specifc history of the museum’s choices are typical of most house museums, air-conditioning and antecedent practices is critical to and in fact until recently considered the most respon- making decisions about the future direction of this tech- sible approach by professional museum organizations, nological path. it is nonetheless surprising that neither the museum’s Historic buildings can ofer a meaningful benchmark interpretive materials nor its docents point out the air- against which to gauge this signifcant technological conditioning system as an anachronistic element. Tis is and cultural change that has occurred over the past especially remarkable given that not only do they make a sixty years in the United States, but current preserva- great efort to point out even small items of tableware that tion practice ofen obscures this historical transition. are not from the museum’s chosen period of signifcance, Te rapidity of this change may explain the general lack but also that the building itself is one of the few elements of historical perspective, for the deployment rates of air- in the collection that is actually original to that period. conditioning technology are striking even within the Unintentionally, this de-emphasizes the strategies, build- span of a single generation. According to the US Census ing elements, and practices that its occupants historically Bureau’s American Housing Survey, in 1973—the frst used to manage their comfort and indoor environment. year the Census Bureau conducted the survey—47 per- Fortunately, the conditions are changing yet again. cent of residential units in the US had air-conditioning, In addition to the public debates about air-conditioning but by 2011, 89 percent had it (US Census Bureau 2011; like those that appeared in 2012, professionals in archi- US Department of Commerce 1975). Corollary to the tecture and cultural resources conservation are through

64 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles their discourses revisiting past practices and priorities sites that will be discussed in detail in this essay are the and revising guidelines, aiming toward a more nuanced Pitot and Gallier Houses and the Williams Residence in approach to environmental management in both new New Orleans, and Drayton Hall, the Joseph Manigault and old buildings. Interest among many architects in House, and the Aiken-Rhett House in Charleston, South sustainable passive cooling techniques such as natu- Carolina. Tree sites in Savannah, Georgia, the Owens- ral ventilation, operable windows, solar chimneys, and Tomas, Davenport, and Andrew Low Houses, will be shaded facades has grown in recent years, and pres- discussed in brief. ervation advocates have been relatively successful in It should be emphasized that these fndings represent promoting historic buildings as inherently sustainable only the frst phase of a larger research efort to character- (e.g., Elefante 2007).1 Professional cultural heritage con- ize interpretation of this type at historic sites in the United servation groups have more self-consciously begun to States. Tis should be understood as an exploratory reevaluate museum standards and guidelines that pre- efort, comprised of a series of case studies, conducted to scribe narrow temperature and relative humidity ranges develop a preliminary picture of the range of conditions for preservation of museum artifacts and historic build- and interpretive approaches in the feld. Te method for ing materials, although revisions to these standards and selecting sites involved review of preservation publica- modifed practices are still the subject of debates within tions, assessment of online resources provided by city the discipline (Hatchfeld 2011; Maekawa, Beltran, and tourism boards and preservation advocacy groups, and Henry 2015). Both of these movements draw a critical eye discussion with preservation professionals familiar with to contemporary air-conditioning practice and point to the chosen cities. Te only criteria that a historic site had a possibly less-conditioned future, but they do not ofen to meet to be included in the study were that it had to be incorporate a complementary efort to interpret features open to the public and ofer some kind of public tour. Te or environments in the context of the daily social and group of sites does not include every interpreted historic cultural practices. house museum in a given city. Rather it provides a pic- Sociologist Elizabeth Shove suggests that the path ture of conventional historic interpretation practices in towards a “lower carbon way of life” will likely involve each city, from the perspectives of multiple mainstream not only technological innovation but also reintroduc- preservation organizations. Te author interviewed cura- tion and revival of some historical practices along with torial, executive, or otherwise designated staf at each site the new (Shove 2012). Historic sites have the potential and took the standard house tour ofered to the public. In to be a venue for exposure to such historical practices, one case (Pitot House), staf members ofered the author an individual tour, informally tailored to address the but because they are unfamiliar to most, they require author’s specifc interests. Tis aforded the author an deliberate elucidation. Tus, the concern of this paper opportunity to inquire about interpretation approaches is not primarily with whether historic sites do or do not to specifc elements of the house. All tours and interviews install air-conditioning in their buildings, but rather with historic site staf took place between July 17 and how preservationists interpret this technology and its July 30, 2013. historical alternatives. A range of interpretation approaches were identifed INTERPRETING CLIMATE AT HISTORIC HOUSE MUSEUMS through observations in the feld, but for the purposes of this pilot study, they can be described as following two As a conceptual proposition, this paper posits that general strategies: narrative and experiential. Narrative historic house museums could be valuable venues for dis- approaches showed, demonstrated, or described past sea- covery and interpretation of traditional building-based sonal practices or particular building features through cooling methods and seasonal cultural practices. In order interpretive text or tour script. Tey engaged primarily to understand some of the creative ways that preserva- through visual and verbal means in an air-conditioned tionists are thinking about this issue, visits were made setting (Gallier, Williams, Owens-Tomas, Davenport, to nine historic house museums in three locations in the and Andrew Low Houses). Experiential approaches American South (New Orleans, Louisiana; Charleston, included in the public tour some form of unconditioned South Carolina; and Savannah, Georgia) to document indoor space that approximated environmental condi- the museums’ physical state of conditioning and, more tions in the historical period of interpretation, although importantly, how they interpret that state to visitors. Te it should be noted that these unconditioned spaces were

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 65 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 1. Pitot House southwest (bayou) elevation. (Photo by author.) not generally interpreted as representative of the period original to the Pitot family, but they are antiques selected (Drayton Hall, Pitot, Manigault, and Aiken-Rhett to represent the period of interpretation (Figure 2). Houses). While the experiential approach was never the Te house is open for tours many days of the week, but exclusive approach at any one site—all included or priori- because of the house’s relatively small size and location tized narrative elements—it had the beneft of engaging somewhat distant from the city’s tourist center, the house the thermal and tactile senses of the visitor. No sites tours are not scheduled and can be fairly informal. Tours included a hands-on element that would encourage visi- may be given by a Landmarks Society staf member or a tors to manipulate buildings features or environments. volunteer docent. Certainly, neither narrative nor experiential approaches In its current state, the majority of the Pitot House is are unconventional in terms of preservation practice, but fully air-conditioned, but the Landmarks Society has the presence of both demonstrates there are a variety of restored or preserved many of its original passive cool- ways to interpret the theme, regardless of the presence or ing features, such as exterior window shutters—very absence of air-conditioning at the site. common in New Orleans—and open loggias on the lower and upper foors, partially enclosed by louvered shut- NEW ORLEANS: PITOT HOUSE— ters (Figure 3). Because the tour at the Pitot House was VERNACULAR INTERPRETATION informal, the author was able to inquire at length about Te Pitot House, a late eighteenth-century Creole these features of the house. Te tour guide was able to country house, is operated by the Louisiana Landmarks demonstrate the operability of the exterior shutters and Society (Figure 1). It is restored to the period around to describe or demonstrate a variety of other elements. 1815, when its most prominent occupant, James Pitot, Te Landmarks Society has considered fully uncondi- the frst post–Louisiana Purchase mayor of New Orleans, tioned alternatives for the house museum. In 2011, the occupied the house. Te furnishings at the house are not Pitot House, with a grant from the National Center for

66 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 2. Pitot House interior with period furniture. (Photo by author.)

Preservation Technology and Training (NCPTT), hosted a workshop, “Preservation Re-engineering: Finding Green Environmental Management in Vernacular Historic Buildings in a Hot and Humid Climate.” Te stated purpose of the workshop was to “evaluate sustain- able twenty-frst century alternatives to conventional twentieth century structures,” but the workshop partici- pants weighed several challenges facing the Landmarks Society in its operation of the Pitot House: modest fund- ing, small staf, minimal opening hours, high utility bills, and a malfunctioning air-conditioning unit causing con- densation damage. Te workshop participants, many of whom were preser- vation architects and engineers with extensive experience in traditional passive cooling techniques, recommended a new direction for the Pitot House museum. Specifcally, they proposed including the building’s climate adap- tive features in the interpretation program, prioritizing “building comfort over visitor comfort,” and using repro- duction instead of period furniture. Some workshop groups proposed even more radical possibilities: remov- Fig. 3. Pitot House second foor loggia with louvered-shut- ing the existing mechanical systems and making the ter enclosure. (Photo by author.)

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 67 P eer- reviewed Articles building an “experiential learning resource,” where “visitors will have an authentic experience of historic rou- tines regarding operation of a home in response to daily weather patterns” (Louisiana Landmarks Society 2011, 2). Te Landmarks Society did not enact the recommen- dations of the 2011 workshop. Instead, the organization chose to replace the malfunctioning air-conditioning system, and the building remains fully conditioned, albeit with a better control system. Staf informants were not certain why the organization’s board took this direction, but they speculated that the board members, many of whom did not participate in the workshop, maintained understandably more conservative views than those of the workshop participants.

NEW ORLEANS: GALLIER HOUSE—SUMMER DRESS

Te 1857 Gallier House museum is currently operated by Te Woman’s Exchange, a local preservation group (Figure 4). Te Gallier House also represents a restora- tion approach, interpreted to 1860, when it was occupied by its original owner and designer, James Gallier, Jr., a prominent New Orleans architect of the period. Te fur- niture and artworks exhibited in the museum refect the Fig. 4. Gallier House northwest (street) elevation. (Photo by mid-nineteenth century, but the pieces themselves did Kerri McCafety, courtesy Te Woman’s Exchange.) not belong to the Gallier family. In its current state, the Gallier house museum is fully air-conditioned. Although the museum does not actively beds. Although the exhibit has been scaled back over the acknowledge the air-conditioning system, the museum years—once a whole-house exhibit, it is now limited to guides as part of their standard tour introduce many of the parlors on the frst foor—it remains generally popu- the building’s passive cooling strategies. Tey point out lar with visitors. Interpretive staf noted that while some items such as walk-through windows, wide outdoor gal- visitors express disappointment that they are not able to leries with canvas shades for summer occupancy, and see clearly the elaborate furniture and decorative items some features unique to Gallier’s design: a ceiling ven- while they are in summer dress, most react positively to tilator in the master bedroom and a ventilating skylight the exhibit. in the library space created in an enlarged hallway near NEW ORLEANS: THE WILLIAMS RESIDENCE— the central stair. LAYERING OF TECHNOLOGY Given the Gallier House museum’s emphasis on its extensive furniture and decorative arts collection, it is Te 1889 Williams Residence is currently operated as a not likely to remove the air-conditioning system any time house museum by Te Historic New Orleans Collection soon. However, since its opening in the mid-1970s, the (THNOC), which takes a preservation approach to the museum has every year presented a unique exhibit called site (Figure 6). Te interiors and furniture were lef as-is “Summer Dress” that interprets the household’s yearly when the Williams family moved out in 1963, and they adjustments to the hot and humid New Orleans sum- are interpreted to the time when the Williamses occupied mers (Figure 5). For the exhibit, the museum covers the the residence in the 1940s and 1950s. Regularly scheduled furniture in canvas slip covers, removes heavy drapery tours are typically given by volunteer docents. from the windows, lays grass mats on the foors, wraps Te house museum itself is not particularly unusual, chandeliers and elaborate picture frames in protective but its tour was the one on which the guide, without netting, and installs mosquito netting over the family prompting, pointed out the air-conditioning units and

68 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 5. Gallier House interior in “sum- mer dress.” (Photo by Kerri McCafety, courtesy Te Woman’s Exchange.)

Below, Fig. 6. Williams House northeast el- evation. (Photo by author.) ducts within the house as a conscious part of the inter- pretive framework (Figure 7). Tis corresponds with the museum’s preservation approach because the house’s frst air-conditioning system was installed in the 1940s, within the museum’s period of interpretation. It also supports one of the overall interpretive themes of the house, namely the Williamses’ own midcentury pres- ervation model marked by the self-conscious display of repurposed antique objects. Whether a Napoleonic vase converted into a lamp or an 1889 house converted into an air-conditioned space, the philosophy is consistent, and the museum interprets it as such.

CHARLESTON: DRAYTON HALL—A BALANCING ACT

Drayton Hall is one of twenty-seven National Trust for Historic Preservation sites (Figure 8). Its preservation approach is rather unique for its total lack of building technology (no electricity, plumbing, or mechanical sys- tems), and the museum has no plans to install any form of mechanical conditioning in the house. Te museum’s gif shop, located in the Victorian-era former caretaker’s cottage, is air-conditioned and tour leaders point this out

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 69 P eer- reviewed Articles

only one window in each room is regularly open during operating hours, preventing any cross-breezes that might develop with two open windows. Rather, modern electric fans are used to push air through the building (Figure 9). For the purposes of materials preservation, Drayton Hall has experimented with sophisticated environmental monitoring systems, but these have not been fully inte- grated into the interpretive program from the perspective of its historical inhabitants. In 2001, Drayton Hall spon- sored the installation of an environmental monitoring system that could both measure potential material-dam- aging conditions (temperature, humidity, light intensity) and advise the staf when to open or close the building’s windows, doors, and shutters to mitigate these adverse conditions. Te capacity of the advisory system was never fully realized, however, because its dynamic scheduling in some instances conficted with tour schedules and condi- tion requirements (Henry 2007). Tat said, Drayton Hall has a robust and active interpretation program (Lavin 2002), and with growing public interest in passive and low-energy buildings, it is possible that in the future the organization may develop an interpretive program that integrates the manipulation of the building’s envelope not just from the perspective of materials conservation, but also as a way to understand how people did so in the past. Such a program could also invite conversation not only about how, but also about who maintained the envi- ronment and thereby better connect visitors with the Fig. 7. Williams House interior with exposed air-condition- perspectives of the former household staf. ing ducts. (Photo by author.) CHARLESTON: MANIGAULT HOUSE— to visitors primarily for pragmatic reasons—as a place for HYBRID STRATEGY FOR RESTORED HOUSE visitors to escape the heat during their visit—not for the interpretive purposes of emphasizing historical contrast. Designed in 1803 for wealthy planter Joseph Manigault, Currently, there is no formal narrative program to the Manigault House is a restoration, interpreted to the interpret how the building or the building occupants early nineteenth-century period when the Manigault managed the heat in the summer months, although the family occupied the home (Figure 10). Te current care- tour guide leading the large-group tour that the author taker, the Charleston Museum, has furnished the house attended was able to answer in detail questions about with late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century furni- certain building features traditionally used to temper ture, much of it made in Charleston. With the exception the heat. Nonetheless, the experience of the indoor envi- of a few modest pieces, none of the furniture belonged to ronment at Drayton Hall, while certainly very diferent the Manigault family. It ofers regularly scheduled group from air-conditioned settings, does not necessarily repli- tours, led by trained docents. cate the experience of historical inhabitants. Because the In its current state, the Manigault House museum is organization must responsibly balance the preservation partially air-conditioned. Te only conditioned public of unique and valuable historical building materials with room is the frst-foor dining room, where guided tours “maximum verisimilitude,” it cannot manipulate the begin. Te rest of the house is cooled by passive means, building envelope in the way past inhabitants presumably with operable windows and adjustable interior shutters would have throughout the day and seasons. For example, (Figure 11). Te museum did not deliberately pursue to prevent extensive water infltration in the event of rain, this hybrid method as an interpretive approach. Rather,

70 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 8. Drayton Hall south elevation. (Photo by author.)

the choice was fnancially and functionally strategic. At the time of restoration, the museum could not aford to install a central air-conditioning system, and there was little space in the house to accommodate hidden ducting. An interpretive staf member noted that the philosophy toward the exhibited furniture is also pragmatic. Because the furniture collection was assembled primarily from houses in Charleston, many pieces had long adjusted to the region’s varying climate. Although the tour guides at the Manigault House do not regularly call out the lack of air-conditioning, the open windows ofen draw questions from visitors about how the family stayed cool in summer. Museum staf noted that while some summer visitors express surprise at the lack of central cooling, most seem to make the asso- ciation with how the Manigault family lived when they occupied the house.

CHARLESTON: AIKEN-RHETT HOUSE—HYBRID STRATEGY FOR PRESERVED HOUSE

Te circa-1820 Aiken-Rhett House is operated as a house museum by the Historic Charleston Foundation Fig. 9. Drayton Hall interior, fan needed to move air (HCF), which takes a self-conscious preserve-as-found because only one window in each room is open. (Photo approach to the structure (Figure 12). Te house is by author.) sparsely furnished; many of the pieces exhibited once

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 71 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 10. Manigault House south elevation. (Photo by author.) belonged to the Aiken family. Te Aiken-Rhett House management section, authored by the frm Watson ofers a self-paced audio tour and places docents at key & Henry Associates—also the developers of Drayton locations along the tour path to answer visitors’ questions. Hall’s monitoring and advisory system—observed that Like the Manigault House, the Aiken-Rhett House is the unconditioned state of the house is “not only key to partially conditioned, and this state is not deliberately understanding the sensations and thermal comfort of interpreted for visitors. Only the house’s single-room art occupants past, but also to understanding the architec- gallery and its renovated basement level, which includes ture of the building as a sophisticated assembly of passive staf, service, and retail areas, have air-conditioning. Te and operational features for moderating the efects of the rest of the house remains unconditioned and its indoor Charleston climate,” (Figure 13), but the report’s recom- environment mitigated by passive means. Te content of mendations for improving the interpretative practices the audio tour does not address these features or their use at the house, authored by a diferent frm, did not carry directly, but the self-paced nature of the tour does allow forward this message (Building Conservation Associates for extended experience in unconditioned spaces as well 2013, 69). Rather, the recommendations for integrating as for quick escape—something which is not as easy on a the thermal environment into the interpretive program formal guided tour. focused on the efects on materials and fnishes pres- A recent feasibility study stated that the HCF has ervation, not the daily and seasonal operation of the resolved not to install a central cooling system at building’s elements by past inhabitants. However, the the Aiken-Rhett House (Building Conservation Historic Charleston Foundation takes issues of environ- Associates 2013). Te feasibility study’s environmental mental responsibility seriously, and there is potential

72 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

for a change in practice. Te HCF has recently begun a campaign throughout Charleston promoting traditional passive cooling practices and even enacting them at its own ofces, which are housed in an eighteenth-century historic building. Te HCF promotes this initiative with interpretive signage, and a similar approach could be taken at the Aiken-Rhett House (Figure 14).

SAVANNAH: OWENS-THOMAS, DAVENPORT, AND ANDREW LOW HOUSES

Te Owens-Tomas (1819), Davenport (1820), and Andrew Low (1849) House museums are thoughtfully operated by a local museum foundation, a local preser- vation foundation, and a national preservation society respectively (Figure 15). All of the houses represent a res- toration approach, and all are fully air-conditioned. All ofer traditional guided tours, and none introduce climate adaptation or passive cooling practices in a substantial way. Nonetheless, a few practices are worth noting in this context. In their regular programs, all three houses interpret seasonal housekeeping practices, such as those carried out on a larger scale at the Gallier House museum. Fig. 11. Manigault House interior with open windows. Te Low House presents one of its bedrooms in “summer (Photo by author.)

Fig. 12. Aiken-Rhett House southeast elevation. (Photo by author.)

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 73 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 13. Aiken-Rhett House frst foor walk-through windows with exterior shutters. (Photo taken by John McWilliams in 1990. Source: Historic American Buildings Survey HABS SC-269.) dress,” and another in winter form, and the Davenport and Owens-Tomas Houses partnered to interpret summer and winter dress at the whole-house scale. Te Davenport is interpreted to summer and Owens-Tomas to winter. Interpretive staf at the houses do not explain the appearance of these rooms on the regular tour, and management staf at both locations acknowledge that this interpretation is likely lost on most visitors.

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR INTERPRETATION

Historic house museums are simultaneously the most familiar for visitors and the most challenging for preser- vationists. Richard Moe, in his provocatively titled article, “Are Tere Too Many House Museums?” has issued a stern warning: the number of house museums is grow- ing, and the funding for them is shrinking (Moe 2002). All contributors to the recent publication Interpreting Historic House Museums recognize that house museum interpretation has too long relied on “interesting facts” and must shif to thematic approaches clearly articulated Fig. 14. Sign interpreting passive cooling practice at Historic within the historical context beyond the walls of the Charleston Foundation ofces. (Photo by author.)

74 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 15. Owens-Tomas House northwest elevation. (Photo by author.) house (Donnelly 2002). Equally important is the weav- Key to this new direction is thorough interpretation ing of formerly neglected stories of race, gender, and of these thermal environments as historical resources landscape into historic house interpretation. Many sites themselves, not just as an alternative means of preserv- have done this with new interpretive programs, such as ing and conserving material artifacts. Te case studies in sophisticated multiperspective tours, where a single site this essay suggest creative approaches that connect people ofers several tours, each through the eyes of diferent with experiences from the past and that may help them inhabitants of the site. navigate the difcult decisions raised by climate change Te interpretation of historical approaches to cli- and a desire to reduce energy consumption. mate mitigation ofers a similar opportunity to multiply the dimensions of history made available to the house RESOURCES FOR INTERPRETATION museum visitor. Until recently, this type of interpretation Te houses at historic house museums are valued was complicated by narrowly defned environmental con- as interpretive tools. Te tendency is to see structures trol guidelines and concerns about visitor resistance to through the lens of historical styles; a building’s functional unconditioned environments. Yet with changing public design or its regional or climatic context is secondary. perspective and the rethinking of these guidelines and Intentional or not, the choice is perhaps understandable the development of alternative methods for environmen- as the resources to develop a functional understanding of tal management (Maekawa, Beltran, and Henry 2015), historic indoor environments are limited. Architectural it is becoming possible for house museum managers to historian Reyner Banham’s (1969) text, Architecture of be responsible stewards of historic materials while still the Well-Tempered Environment, is considered the stan- providing visitors with a thermal environment more rep- dard history of indoor environmental technology, but resentative of the past. it is future oriented and accepts mechanical cooling

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 75 P eer- reviewed Articles as a technological given, limiting the book’s relevance dense set of themes introduced at historic sites, it may be in understanding specifc cases of nineteenth-century necessary to integrate both interpreters and visitors more design. Robert Bruegmann’s (1978) lengthy article trac- actively in the process of research. Sites may have to rethink ing early heating and ventilating technologies is valuable their traditional hands-of approach, instead letting visi- in other contexts, but it focuses on broad trends mostly in tors manipulate the building envelope and feel, rather than Britain, making it difcult to extrapolate to local condi- just see, the efects. tions in diferent climate regions. Lisa Heschong (1979) argues in Termal Delight in Architectural guides for passive climatic design, such Architecture that people have strong emotional and cultural as Victor Olgyay’s (1963) seminal book Design with ties to places with distinct thermal qualities. Although Climate, are admirable for their holistic approach to Heschong’s book focuses on exceptional uses—the sauna, localized design, but they are aimed at design profession- the public bath—her point resonates: people enjoy, and als and highly technical in their graphical representation. even seek out, variation in their thermal experiences, and A more recent and promising variation on this resource these experiences are ofen part of long traditions. Tis type is A Manual for the Environmental and Climatic essay argues a variation on her point: caretakers of historic Responsive Restoration and Renovation of Older Houses in sites, rather than viewing the unique indoor environments Louisiana (Cazayoux 2003), sponsored by the Louisiana of their buildings as a liability, could capitalize on their Department of Natural Resources. It is written for a lay properties’ distinctive conditions. Historic sites could pro- audience and carefully documents traditional patterns vide an important experience: time in an “unconditioned” and techniques of passive design for a particular region. space, which counters everyday environments’ invariabil- However, these architectural guides ofen present gen- ity and uniformity with air-conditioning. eralized conditions that lack detailed social and cultural One of the most critical questions today is, in the face of context. Works by historians such as Katherine Grier rising energy costs and shifing world climate conditions, (1997) and John Crowley (2001), who write about cul- should Americans change their air-conditioning habits? tural constructions of comfort from the perspective of Tis paper posits that with active interpretation at historic social history and anthropology, ofer complex and pro- nonconditioned spaces, it is possible that Americans may found readings of material culture. Yet the fundamental come to know, value, and use historic spaces specifcally challenge of interpretation at historic sites persists: how because they are not air-conditioned, and that the expe- to make these complex concepts meaningful to visitors rience may alter the frame through which they perceive through the medium of the site. Methods developed by “modern” conditioned space as well. Here, refection on designers and architects working consciously within recent shifs in ideas about contemporary food produc- vernacular contexts may ofer new ways to interpret com- tion may be instructive. Many cite the sensual experience plex, contingent, and multidimensional histories through of eating their frst farmers’ market tomato as the moment material rather than rhetorical means (Heath 2009). they began rethinking today’s mechanized and rational- ized modes of providing food. Historic buildings and sites, THE CLIMATE OF INTERPRETATION FOR with meaningful interpretation, could provide an analo- THE INTERPRETATION OF CLIMATE gous experience and play a signifcant role in sparking a Evoking past climate-adaptive and seasonal practices is similar cultural shif in American conditioning habits. particularly challenging because primary resources docu- menting past techniques, patterns, and impressions of BETSY FREDERICK-ROTHWELL passive cooling are slim to nonexistent. Tis is not surpris- University of Texas at Austin ing because when people did not know they were “uncool” Austin, TX (USA) (i.e., before air-conditioning made it possible to be cool at Betsy Frederick-Rothwell is a doctoral candidate in architecture all times), they rarely articulated in detail how they man- at the University of Texas at Austin, specializing in historic preserva- aged the climate, and with technological change, material tion. She received her MS in Historic Preservation from UT Austin remnants of past practices were actively erased. Given this and formerly worked as a preservation specialist for the US General lack of conventional documentation, comprehending past Services Administration in San Francisco, CA. climate adaptation may require alternative approaches. Instead of simply adding another layer to the already

76 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS in Reducing Dependency on Air-Conditioning.” Contribution to the Experts’ Roundtable on Sustainable Climate Management A portion of this research was made possible by a San Strategies, Tenerife, Spain, April. Antonio Conservation Society Foundation Scholarship Heschong, Lisa. 1979. Termal Delight in Architecture. Cambridge, granted through the Texas Architectural Foundation. MA: MIT Press. Lavin, Meggett. 2002. “Building a Tool Kit for Your Interpreters: Methods of Success from Drayton Hall.” In Interpreting Historic House Museums, edited by Jessica Foy Donnelly, 251–68. American REFERENCES Association for State and Local History Book Series. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Banham, Reyner. 1969. Te Architecture of the Well-Tempered Environment. Chicago: University of Chicago. Louisiana Landmarks Society. 2011. “Solution Presentation: Te Combined Overview.” Summary of National Center for Preservation Belluck, Pam. 2015. “Chilly at Work? Ofce Formula Was Devised Technology and Training (NCPTT) workshop, “Preservation for Men.” New York Times, August 4. Retrieved October 3, 2016 Re-engineering: Finding Green Environmental Management in from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/04/science/chilly-at-work-a- Vernacular Historic Buildings in a Hot and Humid Climate,” New decades-old-formula-may-be-to-blame.html. Orleans, LA, April 7–8. Bruegmann, Robert. 1978. “Central Heating and Forced Ventilation: Maekawa, Shin, Vincent L. Beltran, and Michael C. Henry. Origins and Efects on Architectural Design.” Journal of the Society 2015. Environmental Management for Collections: Alternative of Architectural Historians, 37 (3): 143–60. Conservation Strategies for Hot and Humid Climates. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute. Building Conservation Associates. 2013. Aiken-Rhett House: Feasibility Study, Interpretation and Preservation Treatment Moe, Richard. 2002. “Are Tere Too Many House Museums?” Approach. Prepared for the Historic Charleston Foundation, Forum Journal, 16 (3): 4–11. Charleston, SC. New York Times. 2012. “Should Air-Conditioning Go Global, Cazayoux, Edward. 2003. A Manual for the Environmental and or Be Rationed Away?” June 21. Retrieved August 15, 2013 from Climatic Responsive Restoration and Renovation of Older Houses http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/21/should-air- in Louisiana. Baton Rouge: Louisiana Department of Natural conditioning-go-global-or-be-rationed-away. Resources, Technology Assessment Division: Energy Section. Olgyay, Victor. 1963. Design with Climate: Bioclimatic Approach Crowley, John E. 2001. Te Invention of Comfort: Sensibilities and to Architectural Regionalism. With Aladar Olgyay. Princeton, NJ: Design in Early Modern Britain and Early America. Baltimore, MD: Princeton University Press. Johns Hopkins University Press. Rosenthal, Elisabeth. 2012. “Air-Conditioning Is an Environmental Donnelly, Jessica Foy, ed. 2002. Interpreting Historic House Quandary.” New York Times, August 18. Retrieved February 14, Museums. American Association for State and Local History Book 2016 from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/sunday-review/air- Series. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. conditioning-is-an-environmental-quandary.html. Elefante, Carl. 2007. “Te Greenest Building Is . . . One Tat Is Shove, Elizabeth. 2012. “Te Shadowy Side of Innovation: Already Built.” Forum Journal, 21 (4): 26–38. Unmaking and Sustainability.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24 (4): 363–75. Fitch, James Marston. 1990. Historic Preservation: Curatorial Management of the Built World. Charlottesville: University of US Census Bureau. 2011. “Table C-03-AH, American Housing Virginia Press. Survey for the United States, 2011.” Retrieved August 18, 2013 from http://factfnder2.census.gov. Gonzales, Dave. 2016. “A Comfortable Step Back in Time: Adding Air Conditioning to the Hemingway Home.” Preservation US Department of Commerce, US Bureau of the Census. 1975. Leadership Forum - A Program of the National Trust for “Current Housing Reports Series H-150-73A, Annual Housing Historic Preservation. Retrieved August 29, 2016 from http:// Survey: 1973, Part A, General Housing Characteristics for the forum.savingplaces.org/blogs/special-contributor/2016/08/24/a- United States and Regions.” Washington, DC: US Government comfortable-step-back-in-time-adding-air-conditioning-to-the- Printing Ofce. hemingway-home.

Grier, Katherine C. 1997. Culture and Comfort: Parlor Making and Middle-Class Identity, 1850–1930. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press. ENDNOTES

Hatchfeld, Pamela. 2011. “Crack Warp Shrink Flake: A New Look at 1 Elefante (2007) and Moe (2002) were reprinted in Forum Journal Conservation Standards.” Museum, 90 (1): 40–51. (Fall 2012) as part of an issue of the journal devoted to “game changers,” articles that had a signifcant infuence on preservation Heath, Kingston. 2009. Vernacular Architecture and Regional thought. Design: Cultural Process and Environmental Response. Oxford, UK: Te Architectural Press.

Henry, Michael C. 2007. “Te Heritage Building Envelope as a Passive and Active Climate Moderator: Opportunities and Issues

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 77