This interview is part of a series conducted by the FRH Young Professionals and Researchers Working Group with experts in religious heritage, which will serve as the groundwork for preparing a series of recommendations on how to bridge the generation gap in the sector.
This interview with Luigi Bartolomei, Professor in the Department of Architecture at the University of Bologna was conducted by Davide Dimodugno, Postdoctoral Fellow in Canon Law and Law and Religion at the University of Turin.
Q1) What are the first steps a young researcher / professional should take to reach European institutions and other relevant stakeholders?
A: The approach to European institutions occurs mainly for three reasons, which I will list in deliberate order:
- Economic reasons, i.e. the search for funds; b. The search for knowledge, i.e., partners with whom to build new advancements; c. The search for opportunities for joint actions and shared research projects.
To achieve these objectives, participation and the completion of calls for proposals are required, which demand specific skills. Therefore, two necessary competencies are identified: the competencies related to the practices of project writing and the knowledge about the specific subject matter on which the projects are based. It is not certain and perhaps not even possible that these two competencies overlap or coincide in the same person, but one cannot go without the other: where the project writing competency does not pair with the specific expertise, the project could not be drafted and would lack coherence; conversely, where the specific knowledge lacks experience with European projects, acquiring such elements might lead to missing the proposal deadlines.
In conclusion, in my opinion, the approach to European institutions already requires collaboration and teamwork. It involves an overlap of competencies and demands not to proceed alone. Building a community of reference about one’s scientific interests is, therefore, fundamental to successfully approaching European institutions.
Q2) From your observations, what resources or support systems (academic institutions or otherwise) do you think are most beneficial for young professionals entering the field of religious heritage?
A: Religious Heritage is a vast subject with diverse and local variations. Therefore, there may be no universal answer to this question. The essential elements for anyone wishing to enter this field are COMPETENCE and a delicate and attentive observation ability. Furthermore, the support structures may vary from country to country, depending on the cultural conditions of the context or the specific sector being investigated.
I believe that the university is more of a place for acquiring and exchanging skills rather than a place for accompanying one’s research, at least concerning the Italian situation. In my experience, encountering support structures and collaborations for my research occurred due to a thematic convergence. These are companions on the road whom you inevitably find beside you because they are traveling the same path: it is, therefore, useful to make the journey together. These are individuals, institutions, and foundations with which collaborations and partnerships can then be established.
Q3) In your view, what specific areas of professional development or training do you consider essential for those entering this field? And how do you see mentorship with established professionals/experts as a contributing factor to the career advancement of young professionals in religious heritage?
A: It may seem paradoxical given the number of assets, but I still do not see the possibility in Italy to consider this sector as a place for professional development, at least when it comes to the preservation and enhancement of religious cultural heritage. The private market is full of agencies trying to solve the overabundance of churches and buildings of religious communities in a profit-oriented context. Very few foundations operate on this heritage with the aim of social enhancement. On the other hand, the Church does not have an office that systematically deals with this issue, while the superintendencies (which, however, have complex and non-specific recruitment systems) focus more on conservation and less on enhancement.
In short, looking at Italy, we are faced with a void, but this void is currently occupied by a multitude of agencies, very few of which act with awareness of the specificities of Religious Cultural Heritage. This means that even dioceses and religious communities, in many cases, do not know who to choose or whom to turn to, and in many cases, they directly approach real estate institutions, resulting in enhancement plans becoming disposal systems.
Q4) Have you collaborated with or mentored young professionals in religious heritage? If yes, what were the outcomes and lessons learned?
A: What do you believe are the current gaps or deficiencies in the support provided to young professionals in the religious heritage sector?
I’ll start with the second question. I do not know the extent of the “Religious Heritage” sector in Italy. Dioceses manage their own assets autonomously, some better than others, but with limited mutual exchange of knowledge and best practices. Very little is known about how religious communities manage their excess assets.
As for me, of course, I have supervised theses and research projects on this topic, resulting in specific projects such as the redesign of “The Boundaries of Italian Dioceses” or the Census of Places of Worship in Italian Dioceses. None of the people involved in these projects are currently working systematically on religious cultural heritage.
Q5) Have you observed any promising emerging trends or approaches in religious heritage preservation that young professionals should be aware of or involved in? (Add on question)- Looking towards the future, what changes or advancements do you anticipate in the field of religious heritage, and how can young professionals be positioned to adapt and thrive in this evolving landscape?
A: I believe that national churches will not be able to avoid creating dedicated offices unless they leave the issue of excess churches and buildings of religious communities in the hands of a thriving, but not always sensitive, private market. Then, there will be opportunities for professionals in this field, for a conscious action both in terms of conservation and in turning this heritage towards the future.
Q6) From your perspective, what steps can organisations or institutions take to create more opportunities for young professionals to engage in meaningful work in religious heritage preservation and management?
A: In my opinion, European institutions and major cultural institutions should undertake a dual action: on the one hand, making the clientele (almost entirely clerical in Italy) aware of the risks associated with the absence of offices specifically dedicated to the management of religious, cultural heritage. On the other hand, it is necessary to initiate strategic pathways on limited segments of this heritage to demonstrate the usefulness of enhancement processes and to begin a systematic approach.
Q7) How can young professionals benefit from international collaboration and interdisciplinary perspectives, particularly considering the global nature of religious heritage?
A: The exchange of knowledge and practices is always useful and allows for the activation of virtuous processes through the exchange of best practices. Furthermore, the exchange of ongoing experiences can establish paths of collaboration that can later flourish into shared research projects
Q8) Furthermore, what opportunities do you see emerging for such collaborative efforts?
A: The exchange of knowledge and practices is always useful and allows for the activation of virtuous processes through the exchange of best practices. Furthermore, the exchange of ongoing experiences can establish paths of collaboration that can later flourish into shared research projects.
Moreover, research projects have no value if they do not leave something as their final act. Something authoritative and useful to those who will follow, to those who will be able to take up the same themes again.
Q9) Reflecting on your own career journey, what advice or guidance would you offer to young professionals aspiring to make an impact in the religious heritage sector?
A: I really don’t know if the interest and study of religious cultural heritage could become a field of professional development, at least here in Italy. This also shows the extreme delay of our context not only compared to the European scenario but also in relation to the specific needs of care, protection, and enhancement that the vast Italian religious cultural heritage would require. The establishment of offices dedicated to the protection and enhancement of such heritage is undoubtedly a significant advancement, first and foremost for the cultural heritage itself and a guarantee of its recognizability in the social landscape.
However, for this sector, at least concerning the context from which I am writing, what applies to academic life is also true. And for academic life, unfortunately, what Max Weber wrote in the winter of 1918 in “Wissenschaft als Beruf” applies. I quote: “Academic life is an uncontrollable risk. When young scholars come to ask for advice regarding habilitation, the responsibility in giving it is almost unbearable. […] Everyone needs to ask themselves in conscience: Do you think you can bear to see mediocrity surpass you year after year without feeling bitterness and disgust deep in your soul? And every time you receive, of course, this answer: Of course, I live only for my “calling.” But, as far as I know, only very few have resisted without suffering inner damage.”
It seems to me that this can also be said today for those who intend to bring about a positive change in the management of religious cultural heritage in Italy.
Follow us: