Attending the IconBPG25: Conservation Uncovered – Investigation and Discovery in Treatment and Analysis conference was, for me, a reminder of why these in-person events are such a vital part of our professional practice.
Conferences offer space not only to learn, but to recalibrate: to step back from the specificity of our own collections or studios and be reminded of the ingenuity and professional community that underpins conservation work.
I was lucky to attend one of several optional studio tours the day before presentations began, visiting the conservation studios at the Royal Botanic Garden. Studio visits are always a brilliant way to begin a conference, grounding the themes of papers and discussion in the realities of practice. Seeing different workflows, spaces and material challenges up close was a great example of the sheer range of specialisms within conservation, and of the many different – and equally ingenious – ways we approach problem-solving in our work.
The first paper of the conference stayed with me throughout the following days: a presentation on “The "Graz Mummy Book" (UBG Ms I 1946), the oldest direct precursor to the codex form: holistic material investigation and the scientific method”. Rather than focusing solely on the object itself, the speakers (Theresa Zammit Lupi and Lena Krämer) reflected on their experiences following the publication of new research, including the response from other disciplines. I found this openness particularly valuable. Their discussion highlighted not only the complexities of material investigation, but also the realities of working across disciplinary boundaries, especially when conservation-led research challenges established narratives.
This presentation prompted me to reflect more broadly on the position of practice-based conservators within interdisciplinary research. Throughout the conference, I found myself thinking about the importance of outside disciplines recognising conservation expertise – but also about the responsibility we have, as conservators, to actively recognise and integrate the knowledge of non-conservators into our work. This felt especially pertinent at a conference that deliberately incorporated heritage science. When colleagues from other fields are willing to share their experience within conservation forums, it enriches our understanding and strengthens the collaborative nature of our profession.
This theme of shared enquiry recurred across the programme. One of the highlights for me was the paper “Red rotting leather binding: understanding deterioration”, presented by Marysia Tarnowska. This is a topic I have a particular interest in, and hearing current research and approaches discussed in detail was both practically useful and reassuring. Conferences are such an important space for these conversations, particularly around topics that can feel daunting when approached in isolation.
Overall, the IconBPG25 conference felt aptly named. The presentations repeatedly returned to questions of investigation, transparency and reflection, and reinforced for me the importance of curiosity, collaboration and openness within conservation practice. I came away reminded not only of the wide array of the materials we care for, but of the strength of the professional community committed to understanding them together.
Sally Kilby
Cambridge University Libraries