I119,新G第8篇ISSUE作文,求拍

tanseUID: 3029785

119.When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
____________________


Although it seems feasible all of the new things always vanquish the old ones, for instance, a new fashion laptop is cooler than the old-generation computer; a new car is shiner than the old one; a new girlfriend is ……Hmm, that’s beyond of the discussion, this claim often would be knocked down when it comes to the archaeology. Yes, it is true that older more, precious more in the area of archaeology.
As concerned of the question, whether or not the modern new building should be given privilege of precedence over to the historic old ones? Of course, the answer is “No!”So, what are the convincing reasons behind the answer of “No” besides the superficial one that those buildings are ancient enough?
As a matter of fact, historic building in the city usually presents the national identity, morality and spirit regarding of the passed-away times. For example, people would understand comprehensively, deeply and vividly what’s the soul of Ancient Greece and Athenian democracy when they stand in front of the facade of the Parthenon temple since the construction and sculpture of the temple is the enduring symbol of the Greek culture. How could imagine that contemporary Italian government would demolish the Parthenon only for building a large shopping mall or center Plaza in the same location? If they do so they will become slaughters of the whole world civilization.
On the other hand, architects can research the details of the preserved historic buildings so that they can inherit and evolve the traditional method of architecting. Obviously, a tangible and preserved completely historic building would supply more of direct materials and data for the research project than any literal records. From this angle, it is compatible between protecting ancient building and developing modern architecture because the designers can learn much from the experienced ancestors by the “architectural fossil”, the historic buildings.
However, there are always counterparts on the contradictory side for only one side of any opinion, why not figure out those cases in which the answer of “Yes” to the same question above is justifiable too?
Probably, investing a new highway would flourish the local economic and market while there is a historic building in the designed route, then how to resolve the problem? The future highway could make a detour which is a choice avoid of destroying the ancient building. Or there are many other similar historic buildings in that area outside of the designed highway according to the advices by the experts, so it is optional to pull down that one obstructing the highway..
In sum, it is very essential and indispensable to preserve historic building, to some extent, which is equal with emphasizing on protection of national identity, national spirit, even the world civilization. Consequently, the ancient precious building needn’t sacrifice for the modern construction of city.  Nonetheless, sometimes there is exceptional, in that case, only those experts in the relevant discipline can make decisions scientifically and effectively. Subsequently the government should turn to the experts before they carry out any actions.

--