luuly512
Mar 11, 2022
Writing Feedback / Should we preserve or destroy old buidings? [2]
A school of thought claims that money allocated to the preservation of old buildings should be better utilized on modern infrastructure. From my point of view, new buildings are more practical, old buildings, on the other hand, are indispensable cultural relics due to their cultural and economic value.
Old buildings can serve as witnesses to a city's aesthetic and cultural heritage, providing a sense of place and a connection to the past. Ba Son shipyard, located in Ho Chi Minh City, used to be a major shipbuilding facility during Nguyen Dynasty and a national historic monument. The local or the tourist can typically associate historic structures with renowned historic events and characters such as Nguyen emperors, Ton Duc Thang, assisting young generations to gain an understanding of the contemporary's lives. Society would be losing a lot of our historical and cultural background if demolishing such buildings.
Developers tend to be after immediate profit and modernity, yet it is a potential economic gain of historical buildings that they cannot be aware of. Thanks to valuable materials and unique designs of antiquated architectures, older buildings have their own identity and distinctive character, making them seem to be more attractive than modern buildings. Shanghai, which was mostly vacant land across the river, has now been converted to a protected historic center. In addition, the west of the river has become a financial district, a good source of revenue for the government. What's more, repairing and reusing existing buildings uses energy and material resources more efficiently and reduces waste
As a consequence of industrialization, the demolition of old buildings for spaces to build modern infrastructure has become a norm these days. however, I firmly believe historical structures are a heritage of any country and ought to receive proper preservation for the government.
old buildings versus modern infrastructure
A school of thought claims that money allocated to the preservation of old buildings should be better utilized on modern infrastructure. From my point of view, new buildings are more practical, old buildings, on the other hand, are indispensable cultural relics due to their cultural and economic value.
Old buildings can serve as witnesses to a city's aesthetic and cultural heritage, providing a sense of place and a connection to the past. Ba Son shipyard, located in Ho Chi Minh City, used to be a major shipbuilding facility during Nguyen Dynasty and a national historic monument. The local or the tourist can typically associate historic structures with renowned historic events and characters such as Nguyen emperors, Ton Duc Thang, assisting young generations to gain an understanding of the contemporary's lives. Society would be losing a lot of our historical and cultural background if demolishing such buildings.
Developers tend to be after immediate profit and modernity, yet it is a potential economic gain of historical buildings that they cannot be aware of. Thanks to valuable materials and unique designs of antiquated architectures, older buildings have their own identity and distinctive character, making them seem to be more attractive than modern buildings. Shanghai, which was mostly vacant land across the river, has now been converted to a protected historic center. In addition, the west of the river has become a financial district, a good source of revenue for the government. What's more, repairing and reusing existing buildings uses energy and material resources more efficiently and reduces waste
As a consequence of industrialization, the demolition of old buildings for spaces to build modern infrastructure has become a norm these days. however, I firmly believe historical structures are a heritage of any country and ought to receive proper preservation for the government.