Laman Webantu KM2A1: 2621 File Size: 6.4 Kb * |
Fwd MGG - One More Heritage Building in KL Destroyed By web aNtu 24/8/2000 2:23 pm Thu |
[sangkancil] [MGG] One More Heritage Building in Kuala Lumpur Destroyed
Yet when the Development & Commercial Bank, now the RHB Bank, built
its headquarters, now that of Tan Sri Tajuddin Ramli's business empire,
just behind the temple, one express condition was that building must blend
with the temple in front, which should not be touched. Such concern
amongst officials, usually Malay, was what saved numerous nineteenth
century buildings from twentieth century disfiguration. The Anglican St
Mary's cathedral beside the Royal Selangor Club and Dataran Merdeka wanted
to remodel its front, but was not allowed to, in the early 1980s, because
the Muzium Negara objected, insisting that the national heritage would be
defaced. Today, the civil servant works hand in hand with politicians and
developers to destroy such heritages handed down to us. It began in the
early 1980s, when rather than retain the beautiful wooden house of such
distinction as the Prime Minister's official residence, it was gutted and
a new monstrosity built over it, where he does live any more, not after
his Istana Rakyat is built in Putra Jaya. No one shed a tear then, except
those interested in the heritage of our forefathers. From then, every
thing had a price, and had to be destroyed in the name of progress. When
the LRT was being built, one official suggestion, quickly disabused, was
to disfigure the Sri Mariamman Temple in Jalan Bandar, another religious
building more than a century old. But Hindu temples also get
disfigured: Look at the Sri Kandaswamy Temple in Brickfields, built in
the waning years of the nineteenth century, but recently completely
rebuilt. This destruction of national heritage sites is not only in Kuala
Lumpur. The Malacca government wanted to turn the five-centuries-old
Bukit China, arguable the oldest Chinese cemetry outside of China, turned
into shopping malls and housing estates. That could not have been
possible if the MCA representatives in the state administration had
objected to it. They did not, but the resultant public outcry put paid to
that. As has happened to the redevelopment of the main Chinese cemetry in
Kuala Lumpur. The redevelopment of Jonkers street in Malacca raises
hackles, but the character of that original Dutch-buit street of Chinese
merchants from the 17th century is about to disappear for ever. In Ipoh
and Penang, the systematic destruction of old building, in the name of
progress, is a fact of life. The government targets Chinese structures
for demolition, knowing full well that the MCA and Gerakan would go along
with any such proposals. It is angry that the public, whose only duty in
their view is to elect them regularly into office and then shut up until
the next general elections, have different ideas. They do not want their
heritage buildings destroyed, whatever the economic cost. And rise in
protest. The silence of the MCA and Gerakan lambs is only to be expected.
The MCA has declared war on the Malaysian Indian Congress and its leader,
Dato' Seri S. Samy Vellu, for his opposition to the redevelopment of the
Sungei Besi cemetry. The MCA is angered that he went against a cabinet
directive, at which he was present. Nevertheless, it is important now the MCA leaders should inform
Malaysians, not just the Chinese, why it allowed the Kun Yam Thong
Buddhist temple, outside its own headquarters, to be destroyed. It would
not, unless the Chinese community raise a hue and cry, as over the Sungei
Besi and Bukit China cemetry re-development, and the MCA told to put their
money where their mouth is. One cannot be selective about preserving our
heritage, if some can be allowed to be destroyed, wilfully as the Kun Yam
Thong temple is, and none cares a damn. A heritage is a heritage or not
at all. At present, officials willingly allow heritage buildings to be
destroyed. What angers me is no one, certainly none in the Chinese
community, raised a hue and cry over its destruction. Or are we being
told that national heritage buildings can be destroyed if the custodians
want it, as in this instance? What is frightening about the destruction
is that Mr Hisham did not know, neither did the society that exists to
protect these heritage buildings. They know now, but it is too late.
M.G.G. Pillai |