A Legal Discussion on Failed Restorations

By Marie Kessel.

No, these are not AI-made pieces but works that have been poorly restored, often after being poorly conserved. Art conservation is the act of “documenting, stabilizing, and preserving objects” through the use of scientific analysis, material science, and historic research.^[1] However, the word “restoration” specifically is a loaded one in the art world, and has been the subject of much controversy in recent years.^[2] Cautionary tales of restorations gone terribly wrong from different corners of the world raise questions about ethics and duties owed by all the actors involved (curators, restorers, owners of the art, etc) to the artists’ legacy, the public and to the art historical record.

Given that unsatisfactory restorations could, among other unintended consequences, devalue and even destroy the value of a work of art, which likely results in intervention from attorneys, this article discusses some unfortunate restorations in recent art history for three reasons: to touch on the differences between conservation and restoration, to bring attention to the prevalence of amateur restorations across the world, and to emphasize the importance of proper conservation practices as a whole.

This article will also touch upon the legal issues that can arise from unprofessional restorations. Does the original artist retain all rights of their work after they die? Can an owner of an artwork take legal action on the artwork of a deceased artist for an illegitimate restoration, and does any course of action change when the artist is still alive? While these questions open up a veritable Pandora’s box of legalese, the simple answer is that it depends on a lot of factors.