（8.8）issue26【超越自我小组】第四次作业

hermituforestUID: 2354296

TOPIC: ISSUE26 - "Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such situations, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be served."
WORDS: 561          TIME: 01:22:39          DATE: 2008-8-9 1:38:21

Some people thought that modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. But I think historical buildings have its own culture value. Planning a city's construction is a complex way, which we must reconsider it.

Almost all painters draw pictures in a totally blank paper, where their instinctive ideas can express without any restriction. Cities' construction planners want the same blank so that they can build a city more harmony. But there are many historical buildings already on that paper. They may feel uncomfortable. There are many incoordination in Beijing because the historical buildings and the modern ones belongs to different types. Some quadrangles in the city take so many place where may have more important buildings relevant to people's everyday life in crowd city just because its historical value.

Historical buildings, on the contrary, preserved through quite a long history. It is them not other buildings being preserved because they have some historical value. We cannot see any common people's houses, low officer's offices, or small factories' buildings with a long history. But the Buckingham Palace, as the representation of England's royal life; the Eiffel Tower, as the representation of revolution of construction designation; and the great wall, as the representation of the laboring people's great wisdom. The existing of these building does not only mean its original use, but the culture itself. Destroying these buildings for contemporary needs equals to destroy the culture in residents' mind. Chinese Cultural Revolution, for example, destroyed many valuable historical building with the name of counter-revolutionary--counter ruler's profits in practice--which destroyed not only some buildings, but the whole Chinese culture just as its name. After that revolution, the great cultures passed by generations almost die off with the historical buildings.

There is a dilemma of modern construction and the historical value seems uncompromised. They have different styles, and always want the same place in the crowd city. However, it's better seek one solution than destroy any of the necessary aspects to the city. For historical building's part, it is unreality to preserve all of them which build in the past, because city is developing rather than maintain its primary figure. Remove some ordinary ones like the quadrangles to modern demand cannot destroy the whole culture. And for contemporary construction artists, how about search for another artistic method? Here is an example. In the middle of a painter's 6 year's creation, a three years boy made some stain on his unfinished drawing. What he should do? Abandon it means to waste 3 years precious time and he may lose his inspiration when he would gone over. The best way is thought that stains is from the god and change it as a part of his drawing. Maybe, the stain would become a bright point after the drawing has been finished. So is the modern construction. The designer should find a way which can make two types of buildings harmony. Like Eiffel Tower which is a historical building but harmony with Paris' low modern buildings and the integral sky.

To balance between historical buildings and the modern constructions is a complex way. We cannot just conclude that modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. What we must fulfill are both of them as the modern needs and the culture are all a necessary part of a city.

London818UID: 2518970

楼主，我可以加入超越自我小组吗？