Straits Times Forum 13 Jun 11;
I DISAGREE with Ms Erika Lim ('Protect what's left of cultural value'; last Saturday) that Bukit Brown cemetery deserves to be preserved. Cemeteries have to give way if our housing needs are to be met.
If the Government did not redevelop cemeteries along Orchard Road, we would not have buildings such as the Ngee Ann City shopping mall.
My grandparents were buried at Peck San Theng - now the Bishan housing estate. I used to enjoy clearing tall grass to find their tombstones during Qing Ming, and remember my elders burning joss sticks and incense papers.
The hills are gone, but we can still reminisce by looking at old photographs.
In land-scarce Singapore, social progress must prevail over conserving burial grounds. Life goes on. When one window to history is closed, we open a new one for future generations.
Paul Chan
Bukit Brown: Spare a thought for the alternative
Straits Times Forum 13 Jun 11;
THE fate of Bukit Brown cemetery echoes that of the old National Library. Upon the latter's removal, then National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan said: 'I hope... the new National Library will one day evoke similar memories for the younger Singaporeans.'
Six years on, however, the new library has not achieved the same level of public resonance as the old one. What is often overlooked is the fact that it is impossible to have the same affinity for new glass-and-steel buildings as one has for older constructions. Once destroyed, that quality can never be replicated or replaced.
In the new economy, old fragments are not just good for memories' sake, but help a city's competitive advantage by bolstering the sense of diversity, contradiction and creativity - all valuable assets now.
We need to see our history not as a hindrance or trade-off to progress, but a resource for it. Cities such as London and Paris are great precisely because they layer their history and keep so much of their old fabric intact.
Paradoxically, the inability to 'layer' is a typical Singaporean trait; the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and the Housing Board adopt a rather narrow definition of history, favouring more 'glorious' colonial-style buildings and shophouses while removing the less 'presentable' parts. For example, with the exception of Tiong Bahru, hardly a trace can be seen of earlier Housing Board estates or reminders of our nation-building past.
The scarcity of land is always cited as a reason against conservation. Singapore's land area is 712.4 sq km with a population density of 7,126 people per sq km. By contrast, Manhattan's land area is just 59.5 sq km with a density of 27,485 people per sq km. Potentially, 11 Manhattans can fit into one Singapore, with leftovers. This leads us to the question of the old library tunnel and Bukit Brown. Does it absolutely have to be that plot of land? It seems to be more an issue of values and priorities rather than necessity.
If there is no significant change in our value system and conservation policy, Singapore would be heading towards a homogenised future, with each generation preserving less and less of what is distinct. I urge the URA and Housing Board to spare a thought for the alternative.
Liu Zhenghao
It's about what we hold dear
Straits Times Forum 13 Jun 11;
THE current debate over the fate of Bukit Brown cemetery reminds me of an earlier one over the old National Library building.
Many impassioned pleas were made to preserve the building, but the Government insisted it was necessary to replace it with an underground road tunnel that seems, to me at least, to be under-utilised.
Ultimately, it is not just a matter of what we need but also what we want and what we hold dear. In Rome and many other Italian cities, the streets are extremely narrow because the people hold dear their millennia-old buildings. They could well have argued for a need to demolish these buildings to improve traffic flow, but they chose instead to live with the inconvenience.
More than a need to clear Bukit Brown for housing, we need to evaluate our needs and priorities as well as the possible options. For a start, we need to reconsider if we really need or want a projected population of 6.5 million people.
And if housing needs are that pressing, will Bukit Brown be converted into a Housing Board estate for the masses? Or will it, being in the prime district, be set aside for a small number of first-class bungalows for the rich?
Are there really no other options when, all over Singapore, there are pockets of old and under-utilised buildings?
Richard Seah
