Engineered Past, Planned Future: Conservation of a Constructed Heritage in The Lion City

ENVS 3021: History and Theory Name: Ling Shi Yin Seminar tutor: Stamatis Zografos

Engineered Past, Planned Future: Conservation Of A Constructed Heritage In The Lion City

4820 words + 395 caption 5215 words in total

1

 

Fig 1. Mouth of Singapore River and city’s General Post Office (right) during reclamation work in 1976. (Reuter, 2015)

2

01_ Introduction

“ I turned eight in the harbour of Singapore. We did not go ashore, but I remember the smell — sweetness and rot, both overwhelming.

Last year I went again. The smell was gone. In fact, Singapore was gone, scraped, and rebuilt. There was a completely new town there.”

- Rem Koolhaas, Singapore Songline (1995)

Rem Koolhaas published an essay on Singapore in 1995, titled Singapore Songlines, which within he opines that Singapore has lost, or rather, has not built its identity in the rush for urbanisation — it is a deadpan mechanical Disneyland of engineered precision.

It is understandable why he said that — the majority of Singapore is less than 50 years old. The city is a representation of half a century worth of experimental production under an authoritarian reign in its unabridged form. It is run by a rule that has excluded randomness and the unexpected: even its nature is planned. There is a strict and singleminded focus. Singapore is the epitome of a unique ecology of the contemporary — an ecology of planned urbanisation and growth.

Singapore is an ever-growing island, having increased 23% purely in size since independence. Located 1°17′N off the equator, on prime geographical location between the Indian and Pacific oceans, it is 719km2 after its extensive land reclamation. It is multiethnic: 74% Chinese, 13% Malay, and 9% Indian.1 As the world’s only island city-state, its territory is widely known. It is blessed with the essential ingredients for the construction of a legend: small, threatened, fragile and finite.

1

Indexmundi.com. (2016). Singapore Demographics Profile 2016. [online] Available at: http:// www.indexmundi.com/singapore/demographics_profile.html [Accessed 15 Feb. 2017].

3

 

Fig 2: The Fullerton Hotel (right) formerly General Post Office, a hospital during WWII, Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore’s headquarters (1970s-1995). It was gazetted as a national monument in 2015.

(Reuter, 2015)

4

However, for an Asian city, Singapore is especially ‘western’. Perhaps as mentioned by Koolhaas, it was an ‘apparent victim of an out-of-control process of modernisation’, a progression too fast for it to discover its own charms. In the beginning, the city’s main aim was to be global and self sufficient, as a result the government razed lands in the process of industrialisation and brought in immediate and ‘random’ adaptations from around the world. On the flip slide, this act may have just become the city-state’s uniqueness — a result of desiderata haphazardness: a mishmash of everything. Soon after, the idea of ‘locality’ and ‘individuality’ struck. In order to foster a greater sense of identity for this newly independent country, conservation was employed as a means of achieving the goal. By conserving certain architectural ‘icons’, the city aims to contain and preserve the collective memory of the public. The question for this young nation is then what to keep?

This essay aims to unpack and understand the paradoxes and challenges of conservation through Singapore, a comparatively young nation. Through this, it argues that there is no universal standard of conservation; it is a practice that is tailored to suit the specific needs of a country.

5

6




(Kong, 2011)

7

 

Fig 4: Bumboats stack the shore of the Singapore River at Boat Quay in September 27, 1965 (Reuter, 2015)

Fig 5: That same location in May 2015, with many of the shophouses now skyscrapers and the bumboats largely absent. (Reuter, 2015)

8

02_ Context : Development of the Lion City

Gaining independence in 1965, the small city-state has risen from a third world to a first world country in just 40 years, a feat that was once unimaginable. Modern Singapore was founded by Sir Stanford Raffles in 1819 and became a British colony until 15 February 1942 when it was surrendered to the Japanese. After the Japanese surrendered in 1945, Singapore descended into a momentary state of anomie and economy fell to an all-time low. In the years that follow, a strong sense of nationalist opinions developed amongst the local populace. After the split from Malaysia on 9 August 1965, Singapore officially became an independent state. With high unemployment rates, poor sanitation and lack of social housing, the Singapore government began its urban renewal plan for the country.

As part of its development, Singapore bulldozed many plots of land in an attempt to build its first industrial estates with a focus on the manufacturing sector. Land was also cleared for the construction of new ‘satellite’ towns, in which brutalist inspired high-rise, highdensity public housing flats were built upon at an astonishing rate. In 1959, less than 9% of the city’s population lived in public housing flats. The number rose to 43% in 1974 and by 1989, more than 85% of the population was relocated into such flats.2 This parallels the extent of which Singapore’s urban renewal had undergone. As a newly independent state, this extensive urban development of the city was propelled by the urgent need for ‘survival’. Fortunately, Singapore achieved its goal and became one of the Four Asian Tigers3, cementing its spot as one of the powerhouses in Asia.

2

Koolhaas, R. (2017). Singapore Songline. In: R. Koolhaas and B. Mau, ed., S, M, L, XL, 3rd ed. New York: Monicelli Press, p.1033.

3

Investopedia. (2017). Four Asian Tigers. [online] Available at: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fourasian-tigers.asp [Accessed 22 Jan. 2017].

9

 

Fig 6: Sentosa Cove — an area of luxury residence built entirely on reclaimed land. (Soh, 2017)

10

Singapore is unlike any other Southeast Asian country. As noted by Koolhaas, it had been extremely influenced by the west. Additionally, due to its short history, it does not have a history and culture as deeply embedded in its people as compared to other Asian countries such as China, Japan and Thailand. Though India was colonised by the British, just like Singapore had been, the free port policy in Singapore meant that there were many migrants in the city-state.4 The general make up of new and unfamiliar people meant that there was a lack of a common identity, culture and a sense of belonging. Interestingly enough, this amalgamation of various ethnic groups contributed greatly to the formation of the nation’s identity and promptly became one of Singapore’s key features.

There are 5 main types of heritage in Singapore — nation building, economic success, multiculturalism, the created environment and the natural environment.5 Amongst them, it is contested that traditions carved into the built environment is most important as without the ‘visual landmarks’, past records remain intangible notions, unable to grasp. Therefore, the conservation of built structures that act as the link between the past and present is vital to the spirit of a country. 6

Even prior to independence, Singapore had already begun giving thought to the idea of conservation. The first stirring was in 1963 in the report by the United Nation missions to the planners.7 It was not until the late 1970s that conservation of Singapore’s built heritage became an important factor in the master planning of the country. The very first definite

4

Lepoer, B. (1989). Singapore - Founding and Early Years. [online] Countrystudies.us. Available at: http:// countrystudies.us/singapore/4.htm [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

5

Tay, K. (1988). The Committee on Heritage report. Singapore: Government of Singapore, pp 27-29.

6

Ibid.

7

Abrams, C., Kobe, S. and Koenigsberger, O. (1963). Growth and urban renewal in Singapore : report prepared for the government of Singapore. New York: United Nations Programme of Technical Assistance, Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs, 1963.

11

 

Fig 7: Tanjong Pagar Railway Station which opened in 1932 ran its last train in 2011 and was gazetted as a National Monument. (Soh, 2017)

12

step in conservation in Singapore was effected through the Preservation of Monuments Board (PMB), established in 1971 by an Act of Parliament in acknowledging the need to conserve Singapore’s historically and architecturally significant buildings.8 In 2009, the PMB merged with the National Heritage Board (NHB). It was subsequently made a division under the NHB in 2013 and renamed the Preservation of Sites and Monuments. The NHB identifies and recommends suitable structures to be preserved as nations monuments.9 The Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) was established in 1974 and together with the NHB, they are now the main authorities with regards to conservation of the built heritage in Singapore.

However, as Singapore peaked in its evolution, it became apparent that the upward curve of development was to intersect the downward graph of historical presence. Koolhaas laments that in the rush for urbanisation, the history of Singapore had been almost thoroughly erased. Singapore is aiming to be global, yet simultaneously trying to remain as local as possible. In the pursuit of urban renewal, it is interesting to ask if Singapore has succeeded in preserving its history and identity through the built environment. 

8

Kong, L. (2011). Conserving the past, creating the future : Urban Heritage in Singapore. 1st ed. Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore.

9

Eresources.nlb.gov.sg. (2017). Preservation of Monument Boards is established - Singapore History. [online] Available at: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/a3be461e-c6a1-4fe0-8740-f7ec29baa8ef [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

13

14




(Kong, 2011)

15

 

Fig 9: Emerald Hill shophouses in 1970s prior to conservation (Kong, 2011)

Fig 10: Jurong Town Hall (built 1971-1974) ( NHB, 2015)

16

03_ Paradoxes of conservation “We are living in an incredibly exciting and slightly absurd moment, namely that preservation is overtaking us.”

- Rem Koolhaas

To conserve is to protect something, usually of environmental or cultural importance, against harm or destruction. Architectural conservation is the protection of buildings and infrastructure from further degradation as a result of time, weathering or man-made harm such as vandalism. Akin to libraries, the built environment acts as an archive, connecting the past and the present. Buildings that are conserved are called listed buildings. They are selected based on their architectural or social significance in relation to their surrounding and country. In Singapore, architectural conservation and restoration often go hand-inhand.

It is interesting to note that the notion of conservation is paradoxical. It’s primary aim is to protect against destruction, to prevent its downfall. However, the word itself and the act of conservation both come as an afterthought. Is only thought of and acted upon when the object of protection is facing some sort of threat.

The speed in which the act of preservation is catching up to the present is increasing exponentially. The distance between what was conserved and the present has been decreasing relentlessly over the years. In the 1700s, it could be nearly 3000 years; in the 1900s, perhaps 150 years and in the 21st century, maybe less than 50 years. In fact, Singapore’s latest national monument is only 43 years old, a baby amongst the other considerably young local monuments.10 It is no wonder Koolhaas stated that ‘preservation 10

Chew, H. (2015). Jurong Town Hall 'a baby' among national monuments. The Straits Times. [online] Available at: http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/jurong-town-hall-a-baby-among-national-monuments [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

17

18

Fig 11-18: The first eight buildings gazetted as national monuments since 1973. Top, from left: Cathedral of the Good Shepherd (built 1843–47), Armenian Church (built 1835–36), St Andrew’s Cathedral (built 1856–61).

Centre, from left: Hajjah Fatimah Mosque (built 1845–46), Telok Ayer Market (built 1890–94), Thong Chai Building (built 1892). Bottom, from left: Thian Hock Keng (built 1839–42), Sri Mariamman Temple (built 1843).

(Kong, 2011)

19

Fig 19-25: Singapore’s National Monuments.Top, from left: Singapore Changi Prison (built 1936), Masjid Sultan (built 1928), Old Hill Street Police Station (built 1845-1856), Ying Fo Fui Kun (built 1881-1882), Central Fire Station (built 1908), St Andrew’s Cathedral (built 1856-1861), Goodwood Park Hotel (built 1990) (roots.sg, n,d)

20

is overtaking us’.11 This fact is made all the more alluring when the act of historical and heritage conservation has been given such emphasis and recognition in a relatively young, exceptionally modern and highly ‘westernised’ Asian country.

In terms of what was being listed and protected started off with ancient monuments and religious buildings showcasing traditional motifs and methods of construction because those were the things modernisation left behind as it progresses through time.

Subsequently, structures with increasing, and ironically decreasing, revered character and increasingly sociological substance were preserved. Now we conserve factories, theatres and even prisons. In other words, anything and everything around us can be preserved.

Additionally, the scale of preservation has increased exponentially over the years to include not only individual buildings but districts and landscapes.

1989 marked a breakthrough in Singapore where 10 conservation areas with over 3200 buildings were gazetted for conservation. These include the historic districts of Chinatown, Little India, Kampong Glam, Singapore River, Cairnhill and Emerald Hill.12 This is an applaudable move as extending the conservation boundaries would better safeguard the culture and atmosphere of the place and time, allowing one to better experience the vanished past. Just like how it takes a whole group of students, teachers and daily interactions to build up a school’s culture and atmosphere, it takes a district to understand the intricacies and atmosphere of an area. However, an interesting contradiction arises due to the city’s own take on conservation and this will be touched on in the following chapter.

11

Koolhaas, R., Wigley, M., Carver, J., Koolhaas, R. and Otero-Pailos, J. (2014). Preservation is overtaking us. 1st ed. New York: Columbia University Press.

12

Ura.gov.sg. (2016). A Brief History of Conservation. [online] Available at: https://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/ conservation/vision-and-principles/brief-history [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

21

22

Fig 26-27: Clarke Quay 1980s (above) and 2015 (bottom). (Reuters, 2015)

23

Fig 28: Cathay Theatre in 1940s (Australian War Memorial, 1945) Fig 29: The Cathay.

Conserved Art Deco frontage. (own photograph, 20145) Fig 30-31: Interior of Shuffle, a bar in one of the shophouses in Clarke Quay (own photographs, 2016)

24

04_ Façadism in Singapore: Of Intensity and balance

The history of a place may be viewed differently over time — interpreted and reinterpreted as our conception of who we are as a people changes. The question of whether heritage conservation is actually effective in helping us retain our memory and sense of belonging is a tricky one — especially if the function of the building has been changed.

A problem Singapore faces in its efforts in heritage conservation is its land limitation.

Unlike its western counterparts that posses plentiful land, a listed building in Singapore seldom retains its initial function. Sir John Soane’s Museum in London is a perfectly preserved example. The artefacts and works are kept untouched to show the conditions of the house. The initial usage of the building is retained. Windsor Castle is kept ‘untouched’, the palace becoming a museum to showcase the ‘lives’ of its residence in the past. In response to this problem, Singapore adapted the idea of façadism. Façadism is the maintenance of the front of a building whilst rebuilding the interior architecture and back of building.13 This is often seen as a compromise between conservation and demolition. An example would The Cathay — its art deco façade conserved as a national monument while a modern 17-story glass structure is built behind and into it. This practice is common vis-à-vis individual buildings. A less drastic measure is taken when dealing with conserved districts in the city.

Gazetted as a conservation area in 1989, Clarke Quay which used to be Singapore’s commercial centre — characterised by its riverside warehouses and shophouses of the Transitional style, barge lighters and bumper boats have since been transformed into an

13

Façadism: Preserve or Renew?. (2017). [online] Architecture.com. Available at: https:// www.architecture.com/WhatsOn/November2016/GilesRoundKeynoteFacadismPreserveorRenew.aspx [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

25




Fig 32-33: The River House (URA, n.d)

26

entertainment precinct and tourists destination filled with bars, clubs and restaurants. No new extensions are built directly on the shophouses due to its back-to-back layout favoured in the past. Instead, the interior is completely renovated and its functions changed.

With the context and program altered, it is difficult to argue that one is able to appreciate the art of the past and the memories never experienced; to allow for those to simultaneously exist alongside the present while acknowledging that one is cut off from it by conflicting beliefs and dreams of past societies. Its past purpose was a significant aspect of its architecture content but now one can only understand it as what was once thought through secondary and tertiary evidence as archived through the retained architectural details and other documents.

Despite the general disregard for the original functions of the building, URA has put in considerable efforts in retaining the authenticity of significant landmarks within an area. An example is the ‘River House’. Formally a residence belonging to a rich Teochew merchant, it was subsequently used as a godown for gambier and other commodities. After conservation efforts, it was once a club before becoming a modern Cantonese diner today.14 The original intricacies and interior architecture were left intact to showcase the charm and spirit of Singapore’s heritage.

The Singapore government’s stance on conservation is that it should not assume ‘the fossilisation of traditional trades and lifestyles that existed before conservation’.15 Liu Thai

14

River House. (2016) [online] Urban Redevelopment Authority. Available at: https://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/ publications/corporate/aha/1995/River-House-Clarke-Quay [Accessed 16 February 2017] 15

Lee, H. T. (1991) The Conservation Dilemma, Mirror, 27(15), p 3 27

Fig 34 (above) : Little India Historic District Fig 35 (bottom): Conservation sites in Central area (Perry, Kong, Yeoh, (1997)

28

Ker, former Chief Executive Office of URA then said that ‘the URA has therefore left it to market forces to throw up activities in the conservation schemes’.16 As the then Minister for National Development, S. Dhanabalan, compendiously summarises: ‘our approach [to conservation] is simple: restore the buildings and let a new tradition emerge’ 17 These statements express the government’s opinions that ‘urban conservation should be economically viable if not profitable’.18 To ensure the building is relevant in the contemporary age, its program constantly changes in response to the needs of the time as Singapore simply does not have the space to conserve every building in its entirety. This adaptive re-use strategy is exemplified in the various historical districts — Clarke Quay, Chinatown, Little India and Kampong Glam.

Land limitation has resulted in the adaptive re-use approach in Singapore’s architectural conservation. By letting the market control the usages of the conserved buildings in general whilst keeping a strict reign on a selected few, it allows for the balance between the conservation of the built environment and cultural heritage and urbanisation. This method acts as a vessel for the conversion of areas into comparatively high-income consumer service centres, consistent with the island’s ever-changing social structure and economic functions while retaining, albeit minimal, a hint of the forgotten past.

16

Ibid. p3

17

Burton, S. (1993) History with a Bottom Line, Time, 12 July, pp 36-37

18

Perry, M., Kong, L. and Yeoh, B. ed., (1997). Urban conservation and heritage management. In: Singapore: A Development City State, 1st ed. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, p.281.

29

30




(Kong, 2011)

31

 

Fig 37: Civic and Cultural District master plan released to public in 1988 (Perry, Kong, Yeoh, 1997)

32

05_ Locality of historical districts: Rewriting memory

Although the adaptive re-use scheme may seem like a viable option, there are also problems with the system: many of the conserved buildings seem to cater to tourists rather than locals. Conservation begun in Singapore primarily as a tool to unite its people with a sense of belonging, reminding them of their past. It gives its people ‘a sense of history and memory even as [they] move into the future’.19 However, the city-state seemed to have lost sight of this goal as it progressed.

After experiencing the recession and a 3.5% decrease in tourism in the mid-1980s due to a ‘lack of colour in the increasingly antiseptic city-state’, the state turned to conservation as a means of bolstering the economy.20 A plan of US$223 million was devised for the redevelopment of ethnic enclaves and historically and culturally rich infrastructures.21 These include the 4 main historical districts, Heritage Link, Emerald Hill and Bugis Street amongst others. Heritage conservation, with the focus on the built environment, therefore became closely associated with redevelopment plans catered to tourists.22

Undeniably, the rows of shophouses as an architectural typology play an important role in constructing the character of the place. However, Chinatown after conservation has lost its original community of long-time inhabitants. The populace, bonded by social synergy and shared experiences, has been scattered and replaced with a nostalgia of the Chinese community ‘less to do with the locals than with the buildings and more to do with the

19

Vision and Principles. (n.d.). [online] Ura.gov.sg. Available at: https://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/conservation/ vision-and-principles/vision [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

20

Burton, S. History with a Bottom Line, p 36

21

Perry, M., Kong, L. and Yeoh, B., Urban conservation and heritage management, pp.256-257.

22

Ibid. p.257 33




Fig 38: Sub-districts of Chinatown District (Perry, Kong, Yeoh, 1997) Fig 39-40: Sago St within Chinatown district circa 1950 (NAS, 2011)

34

remembered past as opposed to the lived present’. 23 This ‘inextricable link’, referred to by Steven Holster and Derek Alderman, ‘between memory and place’ is severed and recreated.24 The idea of the local Chinese community is presented to the tourists through this new lens. Places serve as mnemonic aids, they are what our memories manifests in.

The atmosphere of a place is the materialisation of the collective memory shared by its people. ‘Collective memory’, a term coined by sociologist Maurice Halbwach, represents a collection of individual memories bounded by shared experiences, which unites the people by providing them with a sense of belonging within the group.25 Pierre Nora, a French historian who expanded upon Halbwach’s approach of instrumental presentism vis-a-vis collective memory, highlighted that as modernity emerged, ‘elites in society produced ‘simulations of natural memory’ that supported emerging nation-states’.26 Just like how Singapore has redesigned the country, it is now doing the same to its culture and past memory.27 The occasional indication of the genuine past is revealed only during nationwide festive seasons such as Lunar New Year and Duanwu Festival. Besides that, Chinatown rarely sees locals and is often quiet.

A take on architectural conservation that has less to do with the sustenance of a culture and past memory and more to do with a tool to generate revenue says a lot about the

23

Yeoh, B. S. A. and Lau, W. P. (1995). Historic District, Contemporary Meanings: Urban Conservation and the Creation and Consumption of Landscape Spectacle in Tanjong Pagar. In: B. S. A. Yeoh and L. Kong, ed., Portraits of Places: History, Community and Identity in Singapore, 1st ed. Singapore: Times Editions, pp.

46-67.

24

Hoelscher, S. and Alderman, D. (2004). Memory and place: geographies of a critical relationship. Social & Cultural Geography, 5(3), p.348.

25

Halbwachs, M. and Coser, L. (n.d.). On collective memory. 1st ed. Chicago [u.a.]: University of Chicago Press.

26

Britton, D. (n.d.). What is Collective Memory?. [online] memorialworlds. Available at: https:// memorialworlds.com/what-is-collective-memory/ [Accessed 17 Feb. 2017].

27

Ink, (2012). Building back identity. [Blog] Chasing Identities in Chinatown. Available at: http:// chasingidentitiesinchinatown.blogspot.co.uk [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

35

Fig 41: The old and the new juxtaposed Fig 42: Sago St after conservation.

(Perry, Kong, Yeoh, 1997)

36

mindset of the government. The aim of setting up the PMB was to allow Singaporeans a ‘deep sense of the past which will provide the ‘cultural depth’ to see [them] through crisis.28 This is built upon the idea of collective memory. With the collective memories of its locals being rewritten, the question of what conservation actually means to Singapore arises.

Perhaps the example of Little India where the newly renovated shophouses along Buffalo Road have seen poorer business in contrast to other parts of the district where the shophouses have not been restored might indicate the changes that it ought to take.29

28

Quoted from (The Straits Times, 18 March 1992) in Perry, M., Kong, L. and Yeoh, B., Urban conservation and heritage management. pp.275-276 29

Quoted from (The Sunday Times, 2 Aug, 1992) in Perry, M., Kong, L. and Yeoh, B., Urban conservation and heritage management. p.272.

37

38




(Fong, 2014)

39

 

Fig 44 (above): The Old National Library (built 1960) (roots.sg, n.d)
 Fig 45 (bottom): The remains of the building at Fort Canning Hill (koropok.com, 2010)

40

06_ Development & Conservation: The Old National Library of Singapore

The first impression a listed building gives is that it’s architecture — aesthetic form in this case — is unique and of significance. Heritage conservationists often consider historic sites from the viewpoint of significance in architecture or design. Acceptably, at times, form and its architectural idea play weigh significantly more. An example would be London’s Park Hill estate, an iconic Grade II listed brutalist beauty, one of the few buildings that pioneered the ‘streets in the sky’ concept by The Smithsons. However, majority of the buildings are listed due to its historical and social significance — the experiences the public has in relation to the structure. Herbert Muschamp, an architecture critic for The New York Times wrote, “The essential feature of a landmark is not its design, but the place it holds in a city’s memory. Compared to the place it occupies in social history, a landmark’s artistic qualities are incidental.”30

The Old National Library Building was a beloved icon for many Singaporeans. Despite a huge groundswell of public protest, the library was closed and demolished in 2004 for the construction of a tunnel to ease the city’s road traffic. This incident sparked a greater appreciation for local cultural roots and an unparalleled wave of support for heritage conservation among Singaporeans. The redbrick building reminded the people of its colonial roots and had an extensive collection of English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil books.

The very first national library located within the city and in the country, and surrounded by many nearby schools, it became a popular destination for studying and hanging out for both the young and old. However, the pressure of urban redevelopment was building up.

The public dissent in the media and several open letters from the public to the 30

Mayes, T. (2017). Why Do Old Places Matter? Memory - Preservation Leadership Forum - A Program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. [online] Forum.savingplaces.org. Available at: http:// forum.savingplaces.org/blogs/forum-online/2013/12/04/why-do-old-places-matter-memory [Accessed 17 Feb. 2017].

41




Fig 46: Lee Kong Chien Reference Library in the New National Library (Teo, 2005)

42

government,31 showed the importance of the library in the lives of the people. However, the government always has the final say, which resulted in the demolishing of the old city fabric that the library stands. Despite the aggressive decision, efforts to retain the collective memory of the place were seen. The former library’s two red-bricked entrance pillars remained on the actual site accompanied by a commemorative plague and a commemorative wall was constructed in the new library using the original bricks salvaged from the old library.

Listed architectures contribute to a sense of continuity as strands of collective history transcends individual experiences and lifetimes — ‘People look to this refashioned memory, especially in its collective forms, to give themselves a coherent identity, a national narrative, a place in this world.’ 32 After the tunnel that cuts journey times from 5 minutes to 18 seconds was built, it raised a common question of ‘how important was the 5 minutes’.33

Architecture as memory triggers not only confer a sense of belonging, they also instigate people to question the expansive societal memories they yet to know.34 As these triggers disappear, the curiosity to discover is severed. The decision to demolish socially important landscape and then build commemorative structures and memorials for it highlights the apathetic attitude the government has for conservation. It is undeniable that the same strict planning from the state got Singapore this far. However, towards delicate issues that have

31

Collection of open letters submitted to the press showing the dissatisfaction of the people.

Was the Fort Canning Tunnel worth it, after all?. (2007). [online] Wildsingapore.com. Available at: http:// www.wildsingapore.com/news/20070304/070312-2.htm [Accessed 17 Feb. 2017].

32

Hoelscher, S. and Alderman, D. Memory and place: geographies of a critical relationship. p.348.

33

Siew K. H., Vasantham G., Tan K. T., Tan C. T., Kang L., Tan S. H, Today Online. (2007). [online] Wildsingapore.com. Available at: http://www.wildsingapore.com/news/20070304/070312-2.htm [Accessed 17 Feb. 2017].

34

Lewicka, M. (2008). Place attachment, place identity, and place memory: Restoring the forgotten city past.

Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(3), pp.209-231.

43

 

Fig 47: Collage of Peranakan shophouses in Singapore (SmalltalesofSG, 2012)

44

no key performance indicators such as heritage conservation, whether the same attitude will work is questionable. This is because there has never been precedence for such an occurrence, meaning that heritage conservation in Singapore currently suspends in an ideological void and in an absolutely lost situation. Due to its youth, a discussion as to what constitutes as historically and socially important for the nation is highly debatable.

Perhaps it is time the government relaxes in its autonomy and that a more open and democratic method of selection be embraced. This way, citizens will be involved in the building of their own heritage as the ‘construction of memory is not effective without community participation’35 . The government in turn could also start to understand what kind of heritage and social history is considered important in the minds of the people, which will lead to more informed decisions when it comes to renewing its master plans of every 5 years.

35

Yat, M. L. ed., (2013). Landscape of the Non-Descript: Kuala Lumpur Chinese Cemeteries. In: Architecture and Urban Form in Kuala Lumpur, 1st ed. London: Ashgate Publishing Limited. p163 45

46




(Sengkang Babies, n.d)

47

Fig 49: Joseph Conrad’s Lord Jim book cover (Ewing, 2011) Fig 50: Newspaper cutting to save Bidadari Cemetery (Lim, 2012) Fig 51: Map showing expressway to be built on Bukit Brown Cemetery. (LTA, n.d)

48

07_ History of the Dead, Heritage of the living: Singapore’s traditional Chinese cemeteries

Besides buildings, history and collective memory are often found in transitional spaces or less strictly planned areas such as traditional burial grounds. However such places are often neglected in the state’s conservation schemes. Each tomb has a story, a culture and memories to it. Put thousands of them together, the burial grounds in Singapore are perhaps places with the richest history in Singapore. Though not gazetted as an area of conservation nor a national monument, Bukit Brown cemetery is one of the island’s last few green spaces home to many bird species and the final resting place for more than 100,000 people including many of the country’s forefathers. However, part of the 213-acre cemetery will be exhumed in order to make way for an eight-lane highway that will cut the cemetery in half. In a modern and new city, traditional burial grounds are a scarce link to the past. This exhumation is the starting step towards further redevelopment of the area.

By 2030, the entire plot of land will be converted into housing. 36

Singapore has been silently loosing its many cemeteries, amongst them was Bidadari Cemetery which served the Christian, Muslim, Hindu and Sinhalese communities and was the resting grounds for many important people. One of them being Augustine Podmore Williams, an English mariner whose story inspired Joseph Conrad’s Lord Jim.37 In its place now stands a new town. A memorial garden was erected nearby to commemorate the cemetery. Singapore’s prominent shopping belt — Orchard Road, is also built on a former

36

Han, K. (2015) Land-starved Singapore exhumes its cemeteries to build roads and malls [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/07/land-starved-singapore-exhumes-its-cemeteries-to-buildroads-and-malls [Accessed 16 Feb 2017].

37

Ibid.

49

Fig 52 (above): Chua Chu Kang Cemetery. (Wray, 2015) Fig 53 (bottom): Mandai Crematorium and Columbarium (Teo, 2013)

50

graveyard. The desecration of burial sites to give way to modern development with economical benefits reiterates the focus of the country.38

Chua Chu Kang cemetery, located in a comparatively less developed part of western Singapore, is the only Chinese cemetery left open for burial. However, the Chinese section is next to be exhumed. Following this trend, Chinese traditional cemeteries will no longer exist, creating a disjoint in the understanding of traditional burial cultures between the older and younger generation. The traditions of Qing Ming and Chong Yang Festivals ingrained in the Confucius and Taoist belief, in which account for almost 50% of the population39 is rapidly disappearing together with its burial grounds. Ironically, what we are seeing is the extinction of a traditional Chinese culture in a predominantly Asian city helmed by a small but decisive group of people.

The ‘general success’ in the shift from burial to cremation in Singapore is due to the relaxation of cultural traditions, the convenience of it and the commonly held view that ‘there is not much land’ and as quoted by Jenny, a mid-twenty local Chinese interviewed, ‘practically, burial is out of the question when my time comes.’ 40 As fewer people opt for traditional burial, the need to participate in the traditions of grave maintenance decreases, resulting in a chance for the government to seize the lands for development.

38

Ibid.

39

2010 Census of Population. (2010). 1st ed. [ebook] Singapore: Department of Statistic Singapore, p.11.

Available at: https://www.singstat.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/publications/ publications_and_papers/cop2010/census_2010_release1/cop2010sr1.pdf [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

40

Kong, L. and Yeoh, B. (2003). The Dead in the Living "Nation". In: L. Kong and B. Yeoh, ed., The Politics of Landscapes in Singapore: Constructions of "Nation", 1st ed. New York: Syracuse University Press, pp.68-69.

51

 

Fig 54-55: Bukit Brown Cemetery and its nature (Goh, Leow, 2013)

52

Chinese traditional burial cemeteries are less important due to its low economical contribution and are the first to go when the need to urban development arises. This brings the question as to what heritage conservation, be it locally or globally, is for. Is heritage conservation fuelled by the genuine desire to protect cultures, traditions and memories so that future generations can learn and experience them or is it by the economic contribution it provides to the country? Personally, I find that it is possible and most likely the case that both desires coexist, however, which outweighs the other is the important factor. In Singapore, it seems to be the case that economics play an important role in heritage conservation decision-making. However, there are efforts to negotiate, delay and ultimately conserve the few remaining cemeteries in Singapore. A conservation group and website were set up for Bukit Brown cemetery to promote awareness and disseminate information regarding the place. The cemetery has also been named on the World Monuments Watch 2014 by the World Monuments Fund, a precedent for the country.41 Since then, there has been compromises and concessions given by the authorities to the site and its future.

Perhaps Singapore could learn from its neighbour where the Kualar Lumpur Chinese Cemeteries was converted into a heritage park in an attempt to save the collective memory of its Chinese community.42 The Chinese proverb ‘

,

’ (jia you yi

lao, ru you yi bao) directly translates into : a family with an elderly is akin to having a treasure at home. In Chinese teachings, age represents knowledge and thus wealth.

Having such sites that stood the test of time after so many years succumb to forces of economic development is a pity and definitely a loss to the country in terms of heritage. 

41

Bukit Brown | World Monuments Fund. (2013). [online] Wmf.org. Available at: https://www.wmf.org/project/ bukit-brown [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

42

Yat, M. L., Architecture and Urban Form in Kuala Lumpur 53

Fig 55: Old and the new juxtaposed (Kong, 2011)

54

08_ Conclusion

Singapore’s conservation efforts have been greatly stepped up since the past. In order to better retain and capture the spirit of the past, Singapore has expanded its conservation boundaries to include historical districts, with a focus on the different ethnic groups, highlighting the multiracial characteristic of the country. However a more in-depth analysis reveals that the island-state is still struggling with the delicate balance between conservation and development. It is difficult to say whether Singapore is doing enough because unlike any other developed country, land limitation coupled with its short history and forceful nation planning has it suspended in an ideological void, where there is no precedence to learn from. As a result, it developed the idea of ‘adaptive re-use’ in an attempt to remain relevant and economically viable in the present.

The importance of heritage differs with every generation as the people ‘rediscovers [their’ own past.43 Conservation of the built environment in Singapore generally retain the aesthetics of the past while allowing market forces to change up the programmes that inhabit the historic spaces. As noted by Lee Hsien Loong, then Minister for Trade and Industry and Second Minister for Defence, in 1989 that ‘our roots are important. We should not be root-bound, but neither should we abandon our roots. They anchor us, and will help us grow’.44

However, the suffocating extent of conservation planning has resulted in a constructed heritage rather than a conserved heritage, rewriting the collective memory of supposedly

43

Lee, H. (1989). The National Identity: A Direction and Identity for Singapore. In: Speeches: A Bimonthly Selection of Ministerial Speeches, 1st ed. Singapore: Ministry of Communications and Information, p.4 44

Ibid. pp.26-38.

55

 

Fig 57: Big Splash — A former public waterpark built in 1977. Closed and demolished in 2008 due to decline in popularity, it held many fond memories of the residents. (Soh, 2016)

56

culturally rich areas. This highlights the struggle between conservation and development.

Whether treating conservation of the built environment as first a profitable investment and secondly a cultural one for the country is debatable. As a young nation, the question of what to conserve and whether it is successful thus far is highly contentious.

Through this essay, it is shown that there is no standard of conservation as the city-state develops its own take on conservation. Conservation is to be tailored to each country’s needs. Just like how every country is different from another, the methods for preserving those historically and culturally important landmarks will consequently differ. It is a neverending and extremely challenging quest to strike the right balance between the conservation of the past and the planning of the future.  

57

09_ Bibliographies


1. (2007). [online] Wildsingapore.com. Available at: http://www.wildsingapore.com/news/ 20070304/070312-2.htm [Accessed 17 Feb. 2017].

2. 2010 Census of Population. (2010). 1st ed. [ebook] Singapore: Department of Statistic Singapore, p.11. Available at: https://www.singstat.gov.sg/docs/default-source/defaultdocument-library/publications/publications_and_papers/cop2010/census_2010_release1/ cop2010sr1.pdf [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

3. Abrams, C., Kobe, S. and Koenigsberger, O. (1963). Growth and urban renewal in Singapore : report prepared for the government of Singapore. New York: United Nations Programme of Technical Assistance, Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs, 1963. Blackburn, K. and Tan, P. (2015). The Emergence of Heritage Conservation in singapore and Preservation of Monuments Board (1958-76). Southeast Asian Studies, [online] (Vol. 4, No. 2), pp.341-365. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/2433/199716 [Accessed 23 Jan. 2017].

4. Britton, D. (n.d.). What is Collective Memory?. [online] memorialworlds. Available at: https:// memorialworlds.com/what-is-collective-memory/ [Accessed 17 Feb. 2017].

5. Burton, S. (1993) History with a Bottom Line, Time, 12 July, p 36-37 6. Bukit Brown | World Monuments Fund. (2013). [online] Wmf.org. Available at: https:// www.wmf.org/project/bukit-brown [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

7. Chang, K. (2012). A Push for Historic Preservation on the Moon. The New York Times. [online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/science/space/a-push-for-historicpreservation-on-the-moon.html [Accessed 22 Jan. 2017].

8. Chew, H. (2015). Jurong Town Hall 'a baby' among national monuments. The Straits Times. [online] Available at: http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/jurong-town-hall-a-baby-amongnational-monuments [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

9. Eresources.nlb.gov.sg. (2017). Preservation of Monument Boards is established - Singapore History. [online] Available at: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/a3be461ec6a1-4fe0-8740-f7ec29baa8ef [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

58

10. Faรงadism: Preserve or Renew?. (2017). [online] Architecture.com. Available at: https:// www.architecture.com/WhatsOn/November2016/ GilesRoundKeynoteFacadismPreserveorRenew.aspx [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

11. Glendinning, M. (2013). The Conservation Movement: A History of Architectural Preservation.

1st ed. Abingdon, England: Routledge, p.68.

12. Halbwachs, M. and Coser, L. (n.d.). On collective memory. 1st ed. Chicago [u.a.]: University of Chicago Press.

13. Han, K. (2015) Land-starved Singapore exhumes its cemeteries to build roads and malls [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/07/land-starved-singaporeexhumes-its-cemeteries-to-build-roads-and-malls [Accessed 16 Feb 2017].

14. Hoelscher, S. and Alderman, D. (2004). Memory and place: geographies of a critical relationship. Social & Cultural Geography, 5(3), p.348.

15. Indexmundi.com. (2016). Singapore Demographics Profile 2016. [online] Available at: http:// www.indexmundi.com/singapore/demographics_profile.html [Accessed 15 Feb. 2017].

16. Ink, (2012). Building back identity. [Blog] Chasing Identities in Chinatown. Available at: http:// chasingidentitiesinchinatown.blogspot.co.uk [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

17. Investopedia. (2017). Four Asian Tigers. [online] Available at: http://www.investopedia.com/ terms/f/four-asian-tigers.asp [Accessed 22 Jan. 2017].

18. Kong, L. and Yeoh, B. (2003). The Dead in the Living "Nation". In: L. Kong and B. Yeoh, ed., The Politics of Landscapes in Singapore: Constructions of "Nation", 1st ed. New York: Syracuse University Press, p.68-69.

19. Kong, L. (2011). Conserving the past, creating the future : Urban Heritage in Singapore. 1st ed.

Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore.

20. Koolhaas, R. and Mau, B. (1995). S M L XL. 3rd ed. New York: Monacelli Press, pp.1009-1089.

21. Koolhaas, R., Wigley, M., Carver, J., Koolhaas, R. and Otero-Pailos, J. (2014). Preservation is overtaking us. 1st ed. New York: Columbia University Press.

22. Lee, H. T. (1991) The Conservation Dilemma, Mirror, 27(15), p 3

59

23. Lepoer, B. (1989). Singapore - Founding and Early Years. [online] Countrystudies.us. Available at: http://countrystudies.us/singapore/4.htm [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

24. Lewicka, M. (2008). Place attachment, place identity, and place memory: Restoring the forgotten city past. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(3), pp.209-231.

25. Lim, S. (2003). Regionalism, English Narrative, and Singapore as Home and Global City. In: R. Bishop, J. Phillips and W. Yeo, ed., Postcolonial Urbanism, 1st ed. Great Britain: Routledge, pp.

205-224.

26. Lim, W. (2004). Architecture, art, identity in Singapore. 1st ed. Singapore: Asian Urban Lab. 27. Mayes, T. (2017). Why Do Old Places Matter? Memory - Preservation Leadership Forum - A Program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. [online] Forum.savingplaces.org.

Available at: http://forum.savingplaces.org/blogs/forum-online/2013/12/04/why-do-old-placesmatter-memory [Accessed 17 Feb. 2017].

28. Perry, M., Kong, L. and Yeoh, B. ed., (1997). Urban conservation and heritage management.

In: Singapore: A Development City State, 1st ed. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, p.281.

29. River House. (2016) [online] Urban Redevelopment Authority. Available at: https:// www.ura.gov.sg/uol/publications/corporate/aha/1995/River-House-Clarke-Quay [Accessed 16 February 2017] 30. Spab.org.uk. (2009). SPAB: The Manifesto - conservation principles, philosophical basis, SPAB manifesto, William Morris in 1877. [online] Available at: https://www.spab.org.uk/what-is-spab-/ the-manifesto/ [Accessed 22 Jan. 2017].

31. Tay, K. (1988). The Committee on Heritage report. Singapore: Government of Singapore, p 27-29.

32. Ura.gov.sg. (2016). A Brief History of Conservation. [online] Available at: https:// www.ura.gov.sg/uol/conservation/vision-and-principles/brief-history [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

33. Vision and Principles. (n.d.). [online] Ura.gov.sg. Available at: https://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/ conservation/vision-and-principles/vision [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

60

34. Yat, M. L. ed., (2013). Landscape of the Non-Descript: Kuala Lumpur Chinese Cemeteries. In: Architecture and Urban Form in Kuala Lumpur, 1st ed. London: Ashgate Publishing Limited. p163 35. Yeoh, B. S. A. and Lau, W. P. (1995). Historic District, Contemporary Meanings: Urban Conservation and the Creation and Consumption of Landscape Spectacle in Tanjong Pagar. In: B. S. A. Yeoh and L. Kong, ed., Portraits of Places: History, Community and Identity in Singapore, 1st ed. Singapore: Times Editions, pp.46-67.

36. Zhang, Y. (2013). The fragmented politics of urban preservation. 1st ed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Pressa

61

10_ Image bibliography

1. fig 1-2: Reuter. (2015). [Image] Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/ article-3181291/Swampland-skyscrapers-amazing-images-Singapore-s-transformation-highrise-metropolis.html [Accessed 16 February 2017].

2. Fig 3: Kong, L. (2011). Conserving the past, creating the future : Urban Heritage in Singapore.

1st ed. Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore.

(Kong, 2011) 3. fig 4-5: Reuter. (2015). [Image] Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/ article-3181291/Swampland-skyscrapers-amazing-images-Singapore-s-transformation-highrise-metropolis.html [Accessed 16 February 2017].

4. Fig 6: Soh, D. (2017). Sentosa Cove. [image] Available at: https://www.facebook.com/ darrensohphotographer/photos/a.

263296830353838.82698.262702667079921/1633822479967926/?type=3&theater [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

5. Fig 7: Soh, D. (2017). Tanjong Pagar Railway Station. [image] Available at: https:// www.facebook.com/darrensohphotographer/photos/a.

263296830353838.82698.262702667079921/1591147840902057/?type=3&theater [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

6. Fig 8-9: Kong, L. (2011). Conserving the past, creating the future : Urban Heritage in Singapore. 1st ed. Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore.

(Kong, 2011) 7. Fig 10: National Heritage Board, (2015). Jurong Town Hall. [image] Available at: http:// www.channelnewsasia.com/image/1885324/1433159957000/large16x9/768/432/jurong-townhall.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

8. Fig 11-18: Kong, L. (2011). Conserving the past, creating the future : Urban Heritage in Singapore. 1st ed. Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore.

(Kong, 2011) 62

9. Fig 19: Singapore Prison Service, (2015). Singapore Changi Prison. [image] Available at: http:// www.channelnewsasia.com/blob/2516344/1455516039000/changi-prison-turret-data.png [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

10. Fig 20: Roots.sg, (2017). Sultan Mosque. [image] Available at: https://roots.sg/~/media/Roots/ Images/monuments/057-sultan-mosque/sultan-mosque-01.png [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

11. Fig 21: Roots.sg, (2017). Former Hill Street Police Centre. [image] Available at: https://roots.sg/ ~/media/Roots/Images/monuments/033-former-hill-street-police-station/former-hill-street-policestation-04.png [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

12. Fig 22: Roots.sg, (2017). Ying Fo Fui Kun. [image] Available at: https://roots.sg/~/media/Roots/ Images/monuments/030-ying-fo-fui-kun/ying-fo-fui-kun-05.png [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

13. Fig 23: Roots.sg, (2017). Singapore Central Fire Station. [image] Available at: https://roots.sg/ ~/media/Roots/Images/monuments/032-central-fire-station/central-fire-station-02.png [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

14. Fig 24: Roots.sg, (2017). St Andrew Cathedral. [image] Available at: https://roots.sg/~/media/ Roots/Images/monuments/070-saint-andrews-cathedral/st-andrews-cathedral-04.png [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

15. Fig 25: Roots.sg, (2017). Goodwood Park Hotel. [image] Available at: https://roots.sg/~/media/ Roots/Images/monuments/049-goodwood-park-hotel/goodwood-park-hotel-01.png [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

16. Fig 26-27: Reuter. (2015). [Image] Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/ article-3181291/Swampland-skyscrapers-amazing-images-Singapore-s-transformation-highrise-metropolis.html [Accessed 16 February 2017].

17. Fig 28: The Cathay Theatre in Singapore. (1945). [Photograph] Australian War Memorial, Australia.

18. Fig 29-31: Own photograph 19. Fig 32-33: Urban Redevelopment Authority. [Image] Available at: https://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/ publications/corporate/aha/1995/River-House-Clarke-Quay [Accessed 16 February 2017]

63

20. Fig 34-35: Perry, M., Kong, L. and Yeoh, B. ed., (1997). Urban conservation and heritage management. In: Singapore: A developmental City State, 1st ed. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp.264, 269.

21. Fig 36: Kong, L. (2011). Conserving the past, creating the future : Urban Heritage in Singapore.

1st ed. Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore.
 (Kong, 2011) 22. Fig 37-38: Perry, M., Kong, L. and Yeoh, B. ed., (1997). Urban conservation and heritage management. In: Singapore: A developmental City State, 1st ed. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp.264, 269.

23. Fig 39-40: National Archive Singapore, (2011). Sago St 1950. [image] Available at: http:// 1.bp.blogspot.com/_OOF6l7FubTw/TU0_ju_LdXI/AAAAAAAAD0c/0RNkNr9T_6s/s1600/ sago_st1_sm.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

24. Fig 41-42: Perry, M., Kong, L. and Yeoh, B. ed., (1997). Urban conservation and heritage management. In: Singapore: A developmental City State, 1st ed. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp.266, 267 25. Fig 43: Fong, P. (2014). Fort Canning Tunnel. [image] Available at: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/ 3861/15044917876_600ca11e7c_c.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

26. Fig 44: Roots.sg, (2017). Old National Library. [image] Available at: http://roots.sg/~/media/ Roots/Images/landmarks/walking-in-the-footsteps/old-national-library.png [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

27. Fig 45: Koropok.com, (2010). Old National Library. [image] Available at: http:// farm5.static.flickr.com/4040/4510830785_fdb9373846_o.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

28. Fig 46: Teo, C. (2005). Lee Kong Chien Reference Library. [image] Available at: https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Library,_Singapore#/media/File:National_library_interior.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

29. Fig 47: SmalltalesofSG, (2012). Shophouse collage. [image] Available at: https:// smalltalesofsg.wordpress.com/tag/heritage/ [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

64

30. Fig 48: Sengkang Babies, (n.d.). Sikh guard of Bukit Brown Cemetery. [image] Available at: http://sengkangbabies.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/DSC_16951.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

31. Fig 49: Ewing, K. (2011). Lord Jim book cover. [image] Available at: http://kathyewing.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/02/lord-jim.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

32. Fig 50: Lim, K. (2012). Save Bidadari's bird haven. [image] Available at: https:// rafflesmuseum.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/bidadari-bird-sanctuary.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

33. Fig 51: Singapore Land and Transport Authority, (n.d.). Link to PIE. [image] Available at: https:// beneathbukitbrown.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/dualcarriage-e1333275186768.jpg [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

34. Fig 52: Wray, E. (2015). [image] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/07/ land-starved-singapore-exhumes-its-cemeteries-to-build-roads-and-malls [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017].

35. Fig 53: Teo, C. (2013). Mandai Columbarium. [image] Available at: http:// cavinteo.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/niche-of-peoples-president-dr-wee-kim.html [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

36. Fig 54: Goh, S. G. (2013) [image] Available at: http://bukitbrown.com/main/?page_id=7930 [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017] 37. Fig 55: Leow, C. (2013) [image] Available at: http://bukitbrown.com/main/?page_id=7930 [Accessed 16 Feb. 2017] 38. Fig 56: Kong, L. (2011). Conserving the past, creating the future : Urban Heritage in Singapore.

1st ed. Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore.
 (Kong, 2011) 39. Fig 57: Soh, D. (2016). Big Splash. [image] Available at: https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ t31.0-8/13767284_1389630524387124_7133821598328789342_o.jpg? oh=62c5be769699b28f33a9fd4434dc875f&oe=5944C5CF [Accessed 18 Feb. 2017].

65

.

66