Ackbar Abbas’s thinking about preservation and disappearance impresses me most. He thinks that, the preservation or old buildings gives us history in site, but it also means keeping history in sight, which is completely different with my previous understanding.
However, I gradually understand his concepts during reading. Just as the design of Hong Kong Cultural Centre, which is built on the sit of the old Hong Kong-Canton railway terminal, it only shows people placeless structures which can be found anywhere. In this way, memory of history on this architecture is replaced by decoration, which is only an image of history meant for visual consumption. Thus in this way of culture as preservation, the real memory of that period of history disappears.
From this example, I learn that preservation is not memory. Instead, it is a result of selection, tending to exclude the dirt and pain but leading to disappearance in the end.
Song Yang, 3035772781
Good attempt in summarising one of the preservation types in the text. To think about it further, what was your previous understanding of preservation? Is there any other examples that you can think of which preserves similarly like the Hong Kong Cultural Centre? Abbas stated he is “against the use of preservation as history to bring about the disappearance of history” (1997, 66); what is your take on preservation of architecture / culture / history?