Rethinking the National Library Debate
"The library building's destruction by no means implies a permanent loss of monuments and collective memory."
|
[ page 3 ]
There is one point, however, that both sides have completely missed--the potential for an ideal landscape to arise out of the present controversy. In the context of the National Library debate, such a potential could not be more obvious. The proposed city campus, by its very nature, already incorporates elements of change and permanence; mobility and stability. One example of this duality lies in the movement of people in the area: while the SMU campus will have a clearly defined student community, "people are going to be flowing in and out" (Seah 162). The challenge to the planners here is "making [this] mobility orderly and beautiful" (Jackson 155), something Jackson identifies as a step towards the emergence of an ideal landscape. Jackson also states that knowledge of "the land, its uses, its values, and the political and cultural forces affecting its distribution" are essential in planning a balanced landscape, a sentiment reflected in architect Koh Seow Chuan's writing on the related loss of Bras Basah Park: "we have to value the land we have, and connect buildings visually and physically" (Koh 196). Sociologist Chua Beng Huat suggests one way of doing this: to preserve the building and adapt its use to the SMU ("Have a Buzz" 163). Furthermore, the library building's destruction by no means implies a permanent loss of monuments and collective memory; for "over time, the new National Library will have its memories-it will generate its own unique experiences in the new place, and these will have their own value" ("Open Discussion" 118). The same can and should also be said of the new SMU city campus.
The entire debate can be reasonably summarized as a toss-up between economic practicality, favoring change; and historical sanctity, favoring permanence. What is missing is a critical awareness on both ends that a balance must be achieved for the National Library to avoid the pitfalls of either extreme. A reading of Jackson exposes the shortcomings of both arguments, but more importantly, offers a way forward in the pursuance of an ideal and balanced landscape. More than that, a Jacksonian approach also identifies the URA and SMU's plans for the library as a move towards that solution, for the proposed city campus has the requisite mobility and stability for such a landscape to emerge. The current stalemate has occurred only because the debate was initiated by the pro-preservationists, who problematically construed the issue as being economic sense versus social memory.
The National Library is not the only landscape in Singapore which has been contested in these terms. While the debate surrounding it has been of a relatively high profile, the conundrum of development and heritage conservation continues in other parts of the country such as Chinatown and Little India, and in even lesser-known places whose stakeholders are neither resourceful nor articulate enough to challenge the authorities. The difference, however, lies in the fact that the National Library and its environs have a far greater potential for balance than any other landscape in Singapore. It is neither too rooted in history/permanence, like Chinatown; nor too commercially bastardized/changed, like the Singapore River; for a compromise to be reached. It would indeed be a crying shame if the URA and SMU lose sight of this potential of the library's grounds as an ideal landscape. If they do, it will only be a question of time before this debate is replayed all across Singapore's heritage landscapes in a similarly unnecessary and unfortunate fashion.
Works Cited
Ang Hwee Suan. "Not Feasible for Tunnel to Begin Earlier." Straits Times 12 April 1999: Kwok, Ho and Tan 190.
"Have a Buzz Till Midnight." Straits Times 11 March 1999: Kwok, Ho and Tan 163.
Ho Weng Hin. "Fragments of Memories, Questions On My Mind." Kwok, Ho and Tan 43-57.
Huang, Shirlena, Peggy Teo, and Heng Hock Mui. "Conserving the Civic and Cultural District: State Policies and Public Opinion." Yeoh and Kong 24-45.
Jackson, John Brinckerhoff. "Concluding with Landscapes." In Discovering the Vernacular Landscape. New Haven: Yale UP, 1984. 147-157.
Koh Seow Chuan. "There's Hope Yet for Park and Library." Straits Times 15 February 2000: Kwok, Ho and Tan 196.
Kwok Kian Woon, Ho Weng Hin, and Tan Kar Lin, eds. Between Forgetting and Remembering: Memories and the National Library. Singapore: Singapore Heritage Society, 2000.
Lau Wai Har. "My Personal Memories of the National Library." Kwok, Ho and Tan 23-35.
Lim, Lydia. "Picture-perfect Setting for Bras Basah Campus." Straits Times 1 April 2000: Kwok, Ho and Tan 210-1.
---. "National Library Building to Go." Straits Times 7 March 2000: Kwok, Ho and Tan 207.
Long, Susan et al. "Redevelopment to Preserve Spirit of Past." Straits Times 7 March 2000: Kwok, Ho and Tan 208.
"Open Discussion." Kwok, Ho and Tan 84-139.
"Plan to Build New National Library." Straits Times 23 March 1989: Kwok, Ho and Tan 149.
"Public Will Have a Say in Building's Fate." Straits Times 9 March 1998: Kwok, Ho and Tan 159.
Seah, Lynn. "Dad, I'm Off to Town, to Study." Straits Times 11 March 1999: Kwok, Ho and Tan 162.
Tan Hsueh Yun. "Library Must Go for 2 Key Reasons." Straits Times 20 March 1999: Kwok, Ho and Tan 174.
About the writer: Don Shiau, this year's co-winner of the folio prize, is a Sociology major, who joined the USP in 2001.
[Page 1, 2, 3]
Go to volume 1, 2002