Page 21 - Hrobat Virloget, Katja, et al., eds. (2015). Stone narratives: heritage, mobility, performance. University of Primorska Press, Koper.
P. 21
erpretations of stone in the karst yesterday, today and tomorrow
cradle of karstology, the study of karst formations, and as such without a doubt belongs to
the List of World Natural and Cultural Heritage (Klemen Krek, 1999, p. 32; see also 1995,
p. 56). Only then did the experts revise their proposal and added the Karst with its cultural
landscape and all architectural and other monuments to the list of suggestions.
It has to be pointed out that mostly older generations, who lived in old farmhouses
as children and youngsters, adopted a negative attitude to stone objects and stone architec-
ture. The elderly man from Volčji Grad explained that the development after World War
II was very fast and that new and more beautiful houses were built, which also the elderly
wanted to live in. Stone was no longer valued.
The first important turning point in the re-evaluation of stone occurred in the 1980s.
Already in the 1970s, the project office of the construction company Kraški zidar stood up
for the so-called Karst building style in the Karst, that is:
a new Karst building tendency, not the old one. The project expressed a wish for the use of stone,
but it was not mandatory to use it. […] However, everyone who wanted a new wall, even those
who were wealthy enough to build a stone wall, built one of concrete, because it was more modern
at that time. This distinct renewed use of stone in the Karst may be ten years old or even younger.9
Another man from Komen10 explained that until the 1980s, stone walls were only
built by those who had the knowledge of building and did not have enough money for a
concrete wall, and not because people saw beauty in a stone wall or wanted to preserve the
Karst culture.
According to the local newspaper Primorske novice, which reflected social and so-
cietal circumstances in the Primorska region of that period, interest in stone began to
grow in the 1980s, when also the company of the Karst marble industry Marmor Seža-
na recorded an increased demand for its products. Consequently, in 1980, the company
wanted to restore the reputation that the oldest activity of quarrying and stonemasonry
in the Karst once had. The company established a business community of the Slovenian
stone activity. Its main tasks were geological research and education of staff for this in-
dustry. It also organized stonemasonry workshops in primary schools, which must have
been fruitful, as many students continued their studies in Ljubljana; curiously, fifteen
years ago there was not a single local apprentice to be found (Guzej-Sabatin, 1988, p. 4).
In the 1980s, also experts became aware of the value of stone elements and the impor-
tance of preserving characteristic Karst architecture, which was partly a result of the con-
tribution of conventions and declarations of world organisations, such as UNESCO and
the Council of Europe. In 1984, the Association of Conservators of Cultural Heritage
of Slovenia, sponsored by the Municipality of Sežana, organized the conference Zaton
kraške arhitekture [Decline of the Karst Architecture], where lecturers from various pro-
fessions, such as architecture, ethnology and art history, each from their own perspec-
tive highlighted the state of stone architecture in the Karst and spoke about how it could
be protected, restored and brought back to life. Architecture as a fundamental feature of
the social and landscape image of the Karst was a prevailing issue of the conference. In
the introduction, Marjan Slabe wrote that:
9 From an interview with a retired engineer from Komen born in 1942 (August 22, 2008).
10 From an interview with a retired locksmith born in 1952 (January 8, 2008).
19
cradle of karstology, the study of karst formations, and as such without a doubt belongs to
the List of World Natural and Cultural Heritage (Klemen Krek, 1999, p. 32; see also 1995,
p. 56). Only then did the experts revise their proposal and added the Karst with its cultural
landscape and all architectural and other monuments to the list of suggestions.
It has to be pointed out that mostly older generations, who lived in old farmhouses
as children and youngsters, adopted a negative attitude to stone objects and stone architec-
ture. The elderly man from Volčji Grad explained that the development after World War
II was very fast and that new and more beautiful houses were built, which also the elderly
wanted to live in. Stone was no longer valued.
The first important turning point in the re-evaluation of stone occurred in the 1980s.
Already in the 1970s, the project office of the construction company Kraški zidar stood up
for the so-called Karst building style in the Karst, that is:
a new Karst building tendency, not the old one. The project expressed a wish for the use of stone,
but it was not mandatory to use it. […] However, everyone who wanted a new wall, even those
who were wealthy enough to build a stone wall, built one of concrete, because it was more modern
at that time. This distinct renewed use of stone in the Karst may be ten years old or even younger.9
Another man from Komen10 explained that until the 1980s, stone walls were only
built by those who had the knowledge of building and did not have enough money for a
concrete wall, and not because people saw beauty in a stone wall or wanted to preserve the
Karst culture.
According to the local newspaper Primorske novice, which reflected social and so-
cietal circumstances in the Primorska region of that period, interest in stone began to
grow in the 1980s, when also the company of the Karst marble industry Marmor Seža-
na recorded an increased demand for its products. Consequently, in 1980, the company
wanted to restore the reputation that the oldest activity of quarrying and stonemasonry
in the Karst once had. The company established a business community of the Slovenian
stone activity. Its main tasks were geological research and education of staff for this in-
dustry. It also organized stonemasonry workshops in primary schools, which must have
been fruitful, as many students continued their studies in Ljubljana; curiously, fifteen
years ago there was not a single local apprentice to be found (Guzej-Sabatin, 1988, p. 4).
In the 1980s, also experts became aware of the value of stone elements and the impor-
tance of preserving characteristic Karst architecture, which was partly a result of the con-
tribution of conventions and declarations of world organisations, such as UNESCO and
the Council of Europe. In 1984, the Association of Conservators of Cultural Heritage
of Slovenia, sponsored by the Municipality of Sežana, organized the conference Zaton
kraške arhitekture [Decline of the Karst Architecture], where lecturers from various pro-
fessions, such as architecture, ethnology and art history, each from their own perspec-
tive highlighted the state of stone architecture in the Karst and spoke about how it could
be protected, restored and brought back to life. Architecture as a fundamental feature of
the social and landscape image of the Karst was a prevailing issue of the conference. In
the introduction, Marjan Slabe wrote that:
9 From an interview with a retired engineer from Komen born in 1942 (August 22, 2008).
10 From an interview with a retired locksmith born in 1952 (January 8, 2008).
19
