AUSTRALIA ICOMOS

HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT
VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 - 2014

Asian Cities: Cultural heritage and the interplay

between nation building and internationalism

Contents
6

Editorial
TIM WINTER AND WILLIAM LOGAN

10

Contributors

16

Imagined pasts, imagined futures

TRACY IRELAND

24

The Modern Capital of a Modern Nation: Heritage,

identity and urban transformation in post-socialist Vientiane
COLIN LONG

38

Imagining Yangon: Assembling heritage, national identity

and modern futures
KECIA FONG

54

George Town: The discreet charm of rejuvenated heritage

KHOO SALMA NASUTION

72

Sense of Place in Baghdad: Identification and belonging

in a city besieged by conflict
DIANE SIEBRANDT

76

The Role of Heritage in Asias Capitals: Hanoi, Vietnam

WILLIAM LOGAN

80

From Colombo to Sri Jayewardenepura: National heritage

and the capricious subjectivities of postcolonial capitals
ANOMA PIERIS

86

Scotland in Kolkata: Transnational heritage, cultural diplomacy

and city image
AMY CLARKE

90

Shanghai City of multiple viewpoints

ANNE WARR

94

Victorian Goldfields World Heritage Nomination:

Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park
DAVID BANNEAR

98

Book Reviews

Cover photo: Downtown Yangon looking towards Sule Pagoda. (Source: Kecia Fong, 2013)

Asian Cities: Cultural heritage and the

interplay between nation building and
internationalism
Tim Winter and William Logan

ASIAN CITIES: CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATION BUILDING AND INTERNATIONALISM

It is over a decade since the volume The Disappearing Asian City (Logan 2002) was published.
An edited volume bringing together a number of experts on the region, the book identified
the threats facing buildings, archaeological sites and the historic character of cities, as well as
the myriad of challenges of raising civic and regulatory awareness about the value of cultural
heritage in times of rapid transformation. It was a set of concerns and arguments that remain
as pertinent as ever. Those who have lived and worked in different parts of Asia over the past
decade on cultural heritage issues, frequently use the terms extraordinary or bewildering to
describe the scale and speed of transformation that has taken place. Indeed, for those concerned
about maintaining continuities between past and present whether they be social, spiritual or
material - the development of cities, the wholesale movements of communities in and out of
urban landscapes, together with the dramatic increase in industries like tourism, has often been
disorienting, and in some cases deeply confronting: both professionally and emotionally. And
yet, to focus on loss and destruction would miss a whole set of other fascinating, emergent
and important trends. As numerous publications in the intervening period have shown, cultural
heritage has become a topic of intense interest and debate in the majority of Asian societies,
for a host of reasons (Askew 2010; Broudehoux 2004; Pai 2013).
A Klee painting named Angelus Novus shows an angel looking as though he is about
to move away from something he is fixedly contemplating. His eyes are staring, his
mouth is open, his wings are spread. This is how one perceives the angel of history. His
face is towards the past. Where we perceive a chain of events, he sees one catastrophe,
which keeps piling wreckage upon wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet. The angel
would like to stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed. But a
storm is blowing from Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such violence that
the angel can no longer close them. This storm irresistibly propels him into the future to
which his back is turned, while the pile of debris before him grows skyward. This storm
is what we call progress.
(Benjamin 1940: 392-3)
Taken from Walter Benjamins musings on the rise of a European modernity, this 1940
description of Paul Klees painting Angel of History strikingly captures many Asian contexts over
the past decade or so. Across much of the region, the second half of the twentieth century was
defined by major, and in some cases prolonged, social and political turmoil. For those countries
advancing out of periods of conflict and violence whether it be domestic or international or
struggling to forge culturally and politically cohesive societies after eras of colonial rule, the
storm of progress, a rush towards modernity, has often found its energy and its momentum by
staring back at the past and embracing histories that are contemplated for both their wreckage
and immutable grandeur. In such contexts, cultural heritage has been caught up in a series of
contradictory and paradoxical trends. As governments have sanctioned the demolition of entire
HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT | VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 - 2014

neighbourhoods, even cities, they have simultaneously established new institutions designed
to promote heritage conservation and awareness. And as countries have gone into battle over
the authentic origins of textile designs or the ownership of archaeological sites, they have also
found new ways to cooperate and share mutual pasts through the language of heritage. Of
course, contradictory trends, missed opportunities, and reasons for despair and optimism have
defined heritage movements throughout the world in the last 150 years or so. In this respect
Asia is not unique. But as Winter and Daly (2012) suggest, it is the speed and scale of Asia that
sets it apart from many other regions and moments in history. Over a number of years since the
early 2000s, China, India, Malaysia, South Korea and Vietnam are among those that have seen
GDP growth rates hovering near or around the double-digit level. Equally, in other years, other
countries have been defined by economic stagnation and domestic unrest. This, coupled with
the scale and enormous diversity of Asia culturally, politically and historically also means it
would be nave to try and pin-point some key over-arching trends surrounding the regions
cultural heritage. Rather, publications such as this special issue of Historic Environment on
Asian Cities can only seek to provide indicative examples, and qualitatively rich insights into
various situations and contexts.
Accordingly, the issue opens with an explication of how the language and values of heritage
have shifted over the last decade or so in the small, landlocked country of Laos. Colin Long
tracks the fading of socialism with national day commemorations, and the coterminous rise
of Royalist iconography. Crucially, far from being an isolated phenomenon, this shift reflects
broader current trends across Laos capital, Vientiane, and the development of its built
environment and urban spaces. For Long, the quiet abandonment of socialism has created a
new dynamic of urban development, one oriented by various new influences, including private,
family and international investment. One important trend is the influx of regional investment,
with Chinese and Vietnamese funds driving significant parts of the citys infrastructure, including
its museums and cultural institutions.
Transformation is a theme that also underpins the paper by Kecia Fong on Mandalay, Bagan
and Yangon, three sites that constitute much of the discussion around heritage conservation in
Myanmar today. After decades of military rule, the country is undergoing a series of economic
and social reforms, such that cultural and civic identities are being actively remade. There has
been a spectacular level of international interest and inflow of capital in recent years, albeit in
geographically imbalanced ways. Yangon has been the recipient of the bulk of the attention.
For this reason, after brief interludes into Mandalay and Bagan, Fongs analysis turns to the
complex geographies of knowledge that have formed around conserving one of Southeast
Asias most extensive and well-preserved colonial cities. This wave of international attention
has been accompanied by a complex domestic situation, wherein a nineteenth-century
cosmopolitan urban space has been enmeshed in a modern, post independence political
culture oriented by an inward looking homogenising nationalism. Historic representation is thus
left with tensions between accounting for histories of transnationalism or cultural pluralism and
state-civic anxieties over maintaining social cohesion.
Moving South to Malaysia, Khoo Salma Nasution addresses the familiar and perennial challenge
of World Heritage-induced tourism pressures. Fascinatingly, Nasution identifies the problems
created by the transnational economies of birds, or, to be more precise, the by-products of
swiftlet nesting practices. In the urban precinct of Penangs George Town, swiftlet farming
has emerged as a lucrative business. Nests, made of bird saliva, are harvested in response to
rising demand for the birds-nest delicacy, which is now widely consumed for its perceived
health benefits across Southeast Asia and China. Whilst swifts naturally roost in caves and
houses, farmers have enticed birds to roost in human habitats. In Georgetown the scale of this
practice has grown rapidly in recent years, such that entire streets and neighbourhoods have
been colonised by tens of thousands of birds. Not surprisingly, pollution and environmental
degradation has followed. Whilst the public health contradictions associated with this industry
are intriguing in themselves, Nasution highlights the problems this is causing for those heritage
buildings that lie within the zoned regions of the world heritage site. From there the paper
considers the challenges of tourism induced development and encroachment which have
emerged since World Heritage listing more broadly.
4

ASIAN CITIES: CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATION BUILDING AND INTERNATIONALISM

Moving closer to the western frontiers of Asia, we turn to the issues facing Baghdad, Iraq.
Diane Siebrandt takes up the issues of identity, belonging and attachment in a city ravaged by
war and violence. Her paper opens with a reminder of the cultural and historical significance of
Baghdad: a cultural capital of the world in Siebrandts terms. As she notes, the city continued
to prosper well into the 1980s, and the Baath Party continued to support traditional arts
under the guise of Arab nationalism. In the wake of repeated violence, the citys character was
profoundly changed with concrete barriers and armed checkpoints becoming commonplace.
And yet Siebrandt traces the persistence of tradition and cultural practice; processes that form a
resilience of attachment to place and identity for residents living through horrific circumstances.
It is a story that weaves together poetry with gardens, festivals with refurbished public spaces.
In the article by William Logan the theme is the links between image making, nation building and
the appropriation of Hanoi in such processes. Drawing on his repeated visits to the city, Logan
tracks a number of factors shaping the emergence of heritage related discourses and initiatives
since the 1990s. The interplay between nationalism and internationalism is once again pivotal
here. Tourism, inflows of foreign capital and the 1000th anniversary of the citys founding
are identified as among the factors behind world heritage nomination and the remaking of
the citys historic quarters. In offering a critical reading of such events, Logan suggests the
domestic pressures behind World Heritage listing are indicative of the wider politicisation of
World Heritage and its mechanisms for providing oversight of properties on the list.
Turning to Sri Lanka, Anoma Pieris examines tensions over cultural heritage vis vis shifting
national aspirations. Accordingly, she examines the capital cities of Colombo and Sri
Jayewardenepura and the entanglements of heritage during a 26 year civil war. As Pieris
indicates, in 1978 the government of Sri Lanka moved its administrative capital from Colombo
to the suburb of Kotte, located just a few kilometres away and the site of the pre-colonial city of
Jayavaddanapura (city of victory). Colombo, the capital of successive European colonisers was
recast as the countrys commercial capital. It is a story of competing inscriptions of national
meaning, one that has revolved around class, caste and religious differences. Self-rule and
political turmoil form the wider backdrop of an account that focuses on themes of dereliction
and revival and the eventual worlding of Colombo as an international city. It is within these
challenging circumstances that Pieris considers the role of cultural heritage in nation building
and identity formation.
Taking up the theme of cultural diplomacy Amy Clarkes paper considers the case of Kolkata,
India. As the final resting place of an estimated 2,000 Scots, Kolkatas cemetery continues to
be of significant cultural and historical importance to Scotland today. The site has become the
focal point of a Protocol of Co-operation between the two countries, designed to facilitate
Scottish involvement in conservation projects. Cooperation, nationalism and global prestige
are all in play in Clarkes intriguing account of the project and the institutional relationships
that formed around it. Clarke pursues questions such as why Scotlands historic presence in
Kolkata is so important to modern-day Scotland, and what is driving the use of heritage as
a foundation for diplomatic ties. In considering the implications for the city itself she also
examines what these projects tell us about Kolkatas future as a destination for tourism, and the
likely implications it will have for the citys international image. Cognisant of the dynamics of
diplomacy and its tendency to uncritically celebrate uplifting stories, Clarke highlights the gap
between good intentions, proclaimed aims and the lack of attention paid to project outcomes.
However, the paper neatly steers us away from concluding that the project was a failure by
highlighting the other political and diplomatic agendas at play in such a situation.
The issue closes with a number of book reviews and a short commentary by Anne Warr on
Shanghai. Warrs essay explores four key periods in the citys history that have contributed
to the character of Shanghai today: the Taiping Rebellion of 1853-1864, the Nanjing Decade
of 1927-1937, the Maoist Period of 1949-1976, and Post-Mao Capitalist-Communism era of
1976 onwards. As Warr shows, each period was underpinned by a particular political ideology
concerning Chinas view of itself in the world; processes that are manifest in the citys built
space today.
HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT | VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 - 2014

Finally here, we would like to acknowledge the considerable support Tracy Ireland and other
members of the organisational committee for the 2014 conference marking the Centenary of
Canberra. Without their time, efforts and generosity, this special issue would not have been
possible. As the following pages indicate, this issue represents the first of several outcomes of
the conference.

References
Askew, M. 2010, The Magic List of Global Status: UNESCO, World Heritage and the agendas
of state, in S. Labadi & C. Long (eds), Heritage and Globalisation, Routledge, London,
pp. 19-43.
Benjamin, W. 1940, On the Concept of History, Gesammelte Schriften I, 691-704.
SuhrkampVerlag. Frankfurt am Main, 1974. Translation: Harry Zohn (2003), from Walter
Benjamin,Selected Writings, Vol. 4: 1938-1940, Harvard University Press, Cambridge,
pp.392-3
Broudehoux, A.-M. 2004, The Making and Selling of Post-Mao Beijing, Routledge, London.
Logan, W. (ed.) 2002, The Disappearing Asian City: Protecting Asias urban heritage in a
globalizing world, Oxford University Press, Hong Kong.
Pai, H.I. 2013, Heritage Management in Korea and Japan: The politics of antiquity and
identity, University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Winter, T. & Daly, P. 2012, Heritage in Asia: Converging forces, conflicting values, in P. Daly &
T. Winter Routledge Handbook of Heritage in Asia, Seattle: Routledge, Seattle, pp. 1-35.

ASIAN CITIES: CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATION BUILDING AND INTERNATIONALISM

George Town: The discreet charm

of rejuvenated heritage
Khoo Salma Nasution

40

ASIAN CITIES: CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATION BUILDING AND INTERNATIONALISM

Abstract
UNESCO World Heritage listing is coveted as both an honour and a tourism brand. The
accolade is something of a mixed blessing, however, as increased tourism creates an
environment in which heritage sites are changed to meet the demands of tourism. In
George Town, development both above and below the radar has had a detrimental
impact on the very heritage values which won the site World Heritage listing in the
first place. Development pressures have come in a variety of guises. Buildings have been
illegally converted into swiftlet farms or budget hotels. Though a Special Area Plan was
drawn up for the site, it remains ungazetted, so management of the site remains an issue.
Gentrification has pushed long-time residents out of the city centre, and this too has had
a detrimental impact on George Towns intangible heritage. Historic Urban Landscape
and other strategies need to be put in place to protect the heritage, both tangible and
intangible, that won George Town its World Heritage listing in the first place.

Introduction
For some countries and Malaysia is one of them UNESCO World Heritage listing is more
than a coveted honour, it is a tourism brand. Ironically, escalating tourism brings irreversible
change to the place as entrepreneurs adapt the place to tourists. While such changes might
have happened more gradually in the past, they are now accelerated by the phenomena of
budget travel and the general mobility of capital around Asia. Two Malaysian cities, George
Town and Melaka (Malacca), were jointly listed by UNESCO as the Historic Cities of the Straits
of Malacca in 2008. In George Town, Penang the movement towards nomination was initiated
in 1998 by a non-profit organisation, The Penang Heritage Trust, as a strategy to protect the
historic city centre. With the imminent repeal of rent control in the year 2000 (Khoo & Gwynn
1999), the Penang Heritage Trust managed to raise awareness by getting the listed George
Town inscribed on the World Monuments Watch list of the 100 Most Endangered Sites. The
idea of nomination to the World Heritage tentative list was taken up by the Penang State
Government and subsequently by Federal Government, which had earlier initiated this move
for Melaka on mainland Malaysia. The measures and mechanisms for heritage management
and protection are not fully established but are still evolving in response to the existing situation
and threats.
The Historic Cities of the Straits of Malacca are listed for three Outstanding Universal Values
which correspond to Criteria ii, iii, and iv of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation
of the World Heritage Convention; namely, exhibiting the interchange of human values and
influences, providing exceptional testimony to cultural traditions and being an outstanding
example of townscape and architecture. The Outstanding Universal Values (OUVs) that need
HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT | VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 - 2014

41

to be protected are demonstrated in the layered evidence of historical diversity, the living
community and their intangible heritage, and built heritage, particularly, the shophouse and
townhouse architecture. The outstanding degree of cultural diversity is a quality that infuses all
the three OUVs.
This paper mainly focuses on George Town, a port located in the north of the Straits of Malacca
and the eastern rim of the Indian Ocean. To provide a brief historical background, Penang Island
was part of the kingdom of Kedah, and became a trading post under the East India Company in
1786. Its capital, George Town, very quickly became a cosmopolitan port town, home to many
migrant and diaspora communities. The colonial administration allowed religious liberties and
even legal pluralism before the imposition of English law after thirty years. People maintained
relationships with their home countries, so instead of migration think of circulatory patterns,
instead of cultural diffusion think cultural exchange. The municipal committee practiced a
growing degree of local democracy until George Town was declared a city by royal charter in
1957, the same year that Malaya gained independence.
Religious pluralism, exemplified by the Street of Harmony a street where mosque, church
and temple are located within a short walk of each other is a unique quality of both George
Town and Melaka, and this quality apparently caught the imagination of the World Heritage
Committee and gained its approval. However, heritage management in a multicultural social
context presents particular conceptual and communication challenges (Khoo 2012). Among
the various segments of Penangs citizenship, cultural differences in terms of the use of space
and relationship to the built environment might translate into different expectations and
aspirations for the continuity of built fabric and intangible heritage (Jenkins 2009).
The National Heritage Department implemented the National Heritage Act of 2005 and devotes
much of its resources to the protection of nationally listed heritage buildings. It also coordinates
heritage planning for both George Town and Melaka World Heritage Sites. The Penang State
Government, through the State Planning Committee, is responsible for planning policies and
has passed a State Heritage Bill in 2011 which has yet to be implemented. The state exerts
a direct influence on the local government, to the extent of dictating development policies,
densities and plot ratios. The local government, that is, the Municipal Council of Penang Island
(MPPP), has relatively little autonomy as municipal councillors are appointed by the state rather
than elected. Furthermore, the municipal councillors are largely selected from the ranks of
the state ruling party. The MPPP has set up an internal heritage department and has instated
a Technical Review Committee to provide heritage evaluation as part of the development
approval process. Since 2008, Penang has performed well economically despite its status as
an opposition state. Although there is a great degree of cooperation between the National
Heritage Department and the Penang authorities, statefederal politics has also sometimes
resulted in muddled interventions.
At the local level, there are several organisations promoting heritage protection and
revitalization. For a long time, the Penang Heritage Trust, established in 1986, was the only
civic-cultural heritage organisation, seeking to broaden the field of heritage conservation. The
Trust had an inclusive vision:
George Town, with its vibrant voluntary sector, has nurtured a heritage discourse in
which the people, the buildings, and the space they have created, are deemed to be
targets for conservation. (Cheng, Li & Ma 2014: 618-19)
The Trust was joined by other groups, notably, an arts education group with innovation
programmes. Since 2008, a number of other organisations have appeared. George Town
World Heritage Incorporated, set up by the Penang State Government as a non-statutory body
for managing, monitoring and promoting the World Hertiage Site, is now the lead organisation
interfacing between the local government and the various stakeholders. Think City, a federal
corporations subsidiary, administers the George Town Grants Programme.
42

ASIAN CITIES: CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATION BUILDING AND INTERNATIONALISM

Above and below the radar

The initial threat to the integrity of the site came from a carry-over of earlier planning approvals.
In November 2008, five months after the UNESCO inscription, the World Heritage Centre was
alerted to four high-rise hotel development projects in George Town two within the core zone
and two in its buffer zone which would breach the 18m height limit stipulated in the heritage
guidelines. In April 2009, a joint World Heritage Centre-ICOMOS mission arrived in Penang with
a mandate to clarify the process that had led to the approval of the four projects in question,
to assess their impact on the outstanding universal value of the site and to strengthen the
conservation and management system at the site. After intense consultation and negotiations
with the state and local governments, and the affected stakeholders, both developers in the
buffer zone agreed to the reduced building heights while the two developers in the core zone
agreed to comply with the height limit. All parties reached a compromise which was apparently
satisfactory to the UNESCO-ICOMOS joint commission. The state government promised to
tighten the approval process. (A. Ghafar Ahmad 2010)
It is worthwhile here to think of two types of threat
to the site. There are threats above the radar and
threats below the radar. The proposed four highrises were above the radar and caught the attention
of international heritage authorities. More commonly,
OUVs can be undermined by incremental changes,
which are below the radar. Likewise, Melaka may
be experiencing threats to the integrity of its heritage
site, but without a strong civil society to voice those
issues, their problems remain at least as far as
UNESCO is concerned largely below the radar.
A long battle was fought by the Penang Heritage
Trust (PHT) and other NGOs to have swiftlet farming
operations removed from the World Heritage Site
of George Town and Malacca. Swiftlet farming is
the term used to describe the business of harvesting
edible birds nest, made of bird saliva, for sale. The
industry can be highly lucrative due to rising demand
for this delicacy in China. Swifts naturally roost in
caves and have been known to roost in houses,
but swift farmers have artificially enticed swifts to
colonise human habitats, even entire streets and
townships, where the intensity of this activity is
producing conflicts in urban centres for reasons
of health, nuisance and other public concerns
arising from noise and swift faeces pollution, as
well as being detrimental to heritage buildings and
neighbourhood liveability. While UNESCO has stated
that swiftlet farming has to be removed from World
Heritage site, harvesting this Chinese delicacy is a
highly lucrative business that survives, indeed thrives
due to the existence of a legal grey area between
the jurisdictions of wildlife, veterinary science,
agriculture, local government and public health. Led
by a lawyer, the influential swift-farmers managed to
confuse the public, the government, and even BBC
and UNESCO officials, by appropriating progressive
language and claiming to be preserving heritage
buildings and misleading the public by claiming its
collection to be a traditional business, neglecting to

Figure 1: Artists impression of the original proposed

highrise hotel next to the historic Malayan Railway
building and clocktower along Weld Quay.
(Source: Tan Yeow Wooi)

Figure 2: The hotel development in progress along

Weld Quay plans were resubmitted plans following the
UNESCO / ICOMOS Mission in April 2009 and its new
height reportedly conforms to the 18 metre height rule.
(Source: SN Khoo)

HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT | VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 - 2014

43

Figure 3: New corner building on Bishop Street and King Street

in the Core Zone reportedly conforming to the 18 metre height
and design guidelines, but what is the aesthetic outcome?
(Source: Tan Yeow Wooi)

Figure 4: Four-storey modern infill along Beach Street with

eaves up to 18 metres disrupting the double-storey pitched roof
profile in the Buffer Zone. (Source: SN Khoo)

mention that swift nests were originally collected

from caves not shophouses. International
heritage authorities have remained oblivious
and silent about the blight of urban swift
farming which is destroying heritage towns all
over Southeast Asia. In Malaysia, after much
lobbying guidelines were finally passed banning
this activity in urban areas but implementation
is slow. The government placed a moratorium
on the industry as of December 2013, but six
months later, a researcher Creighton Connolly
(2014) reported 42 active swiftlet houses in the
core and buffer zones of the World Heritage
Site. He noted that this marked a significant
reduction in the number of swiftlet houses
that had existed during the last assessment in
2011, but was still not quite zero as the State
had announced.
The heritage guidelines for new development
which specifies 18m up to the eaves height
limit within the core zone, though reasonably
applied to the waterfront area, are too high
when built next to ordinary shophouses. The
quality of design is another major issue. A
conservation management plan for the World
Heritage Site, in the form of a Special Area
Plan provided under the Town and Country
Planning Act (Act 172), has been prepared
by a private consultant and accepted by the
state authority, but remains a draft until it is
gazetted. The George Town WHS has a total
of 4,665 Category I and Category II buildings,
in both core and buffer zones, listed on the
heritage register. Of these, over 70 buildings
(mostly religious), are listed as Category 1,
which means they are of higher cultural
significance and thus merit a higher degree of
protection. The local government has set up a
Technical Review Panel to vet heritage-related
planning and building submissions. Members
from several professional bodies are appointed
to the panel, but only a few possess proven
heritage expertise.

What Tourists Want

Figure 5: The former medical hall on China Street and Penang

Street restored and converted into a heritage inn, but an
attempt has been made to retain the memory of the former
medical hall and gains have been made in conservation and
sustainability. (Source: Renitang)

44

The use of heritage buildings to take advantage

of anticipated visitor demand has a visible impact
on the World Heritage Site. There are currently
122 licensed hotels and 168 unlicensed hotels
in the Penang Island municipality, most of the
unlicensed accommodation having sprung up
in and around the World Heritage site in the
last three years. The majority of these involve
the conversion of shophouses or shophouse

ASIAN CITIES: CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATION BUILDING AND INTERNATIONALISM

ensembles, by heritage entrepreneurs who

think they know what tourists want.
The best hotel conversions bring some
conservation gains. For example, one old hotel
was restored using slaked lime and conducted
an archaeological dig on the grounds. Another
involved a conversion of a three-storey building
while retaining the original tenant, the oldest
Chinese medical hall in Southeast Asia, on
part of the premises. Old materials have been
optimally reused. While other hotel conversions
took the simple way out by replacing their
timber floors with concrete, the entrepreneurs
behind this heritage inn struggled through
daunting bureaucracy to meet the fire
departments guidelines and retain its wooden
floors by using fire-retardant paint.
A few others, though tasteful and legally
done, may have introduced problematic
interpretations which ignore their cultural
significance in the makeover. Some choices may
indeed be deemed acceptable compromises
in the overall scheme of things. But these
renovations are then taken as a benchmark
and often inspire other conversions elsewhere
that may not be accompanied by conservation
gains, but instead compromise the authenticity
of the building and conveniently adopt
deceptive techniques to impress the visitor. In
such cases, the final results can be confusing,
gaudy, even grotesque.
The majority of hotel conversions, however,
are illegal and destructive to original fabric
and architectural integrity. Drastic adaptations
and reinterpretations are often presented as
restorations, and one even won a tourism
prize. Even heritage consultants have often
been fooled by the innovations as they are
not familiar with local typologies and cultural
specificities. Due to weak heritage management,
many inappropriate development approvals
still slip through the heritage protection net.
Illegal renovations are carried on almost every
day. When issued a stop work order, builders
hurry up to finish the work, working around
the clock, on weekends and even on public
holidays. The tendency to strip the building
instead of preserving historical evidence and
the use of inappropriate materials modern
cement, modern paints, concrete floors to
replace wooden floors, easy-to-lay modern
tiles in place of terracotta tiles with traditional
profiles are additional causes of concern. The
imperative of modern makeovers is a clean
new look at fastest speed and lowest costs.

Figure 6: New corner building on Bishop Street and King Street

in the Core Zone reportedly conforming to the 18 metre height
and design guidelines, but what is the aesthetic outcome?
(Source: Tan Yeow Wooi)

Figure 7: Four-storey modern infill along Beach Street with

eaves up to 18 metres disrupting the double-storey pitched roof
profile in the Buffer Zone. (Source: SN Khoo)

Figure 8: Former swiftlet house on Armenian Street converted

to budget hotel but with no back lane. (Source: SN Khoo)
HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT | VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 - 2014

45

Governments love to encourage tourism and are loathe to impose restrictions on private
investors. Tourism can spur economic growth, give new lease of life to old buildings, provide
jobs and encourage cultural entrepreneurship. But for many local residents who do not profit
from tourism, the changes to the neighbourhood can have an alienating effect. In his book on
Venice, John Berendt (2005: 85) explained the local Venetians plight:
Soon masks were a favourite tourist icon. But with the appearance of each new mask
shop, there always seemed to be one fewer greengrocer, one fewer bakery, one fewer
butchers shop, to the consternation of Venetians, who found themselves having to
walk twice as far to buy a tomato or a loaf of bread. Mask shops became a detested
symbol of the citys capitulation to tourism at the expense of its liveability.
Of late, tourism has been further spurred as a result of a public art scheme which started with
wire sculptures illustrating street names and paintings by a Lithuanian artist. Encouraged by
queues of tourists who pose in front of street art and take selfies, street art has proliferated
around the George Town World Heritage Site and beyond. Although cultural revitalization has
attracted youth, cultural entrepreneurs and creative people, they may also have unintended
consequences. In a section of Armenian Street, where a street market has heightened tourism,
old businesses and residential tenants are moving out, as new activities may be incompatible
with the old. Residential tenants, already so difficult to retain in the inner city, are under ever
more pressure from increased rentals, noise pollution and congestion, to move out.
In many Asian living cities which are listed as World Heritage sites, the prospects of a tourism
boom tends to trigger a hike in property prices, due to disparities between local land values and
the purchasing ability of the regional or global elite. The original owners tend to sell out at an
early stage to tourist industry investors and property speculators. New buyers, in order to make
their investments work, push out low-income residents and are eager to convert their heritage
properties into income-generating assets. This creates increased development pressure on the
World Heritage Site and speeds up social change at the street level. Penangites who have lived
overseas and come back annually have been amazed to see new hotels, cafes, restaurants
and souvenir shops have opened. They are taken in by the charm of new venues which have
been renovated to their taste. At first they are
pleasantly surprised at the revitalization. Then
gradually they realise that the old familiar faces
and places are gone forever. The late great
Andr Alexanders study of historic cities in
Asia (2006: 4) warns of the potential impacts
of tourism in the age of mobile global capital.

Figure 9: The new cafe on Pitt Street (Jalan Masjid Kapitan

Keling) has replaced the local corner coffeeshop and rents have
been hiked up for the adjacent building threatening the artisans
who have been recognized as part of George Towns intangible
heritage. (Source: SN Khoo)

A great deal of destruction of heritage is carried

on in the name of conservation, rejuvenation
and tourism development. The old city is
being rejuvenated and primed for affluent
suburbanites, domestic tourists and foreign
tourists, who prefer to see and experience
gentrified heritage. Property speculation, overdevelopment, traffic congestion and inflation
are making Penang less liveable for the locals.
Rising rents, insecurity of tenure and outright
evictions continue to drive the old inhabitants
out of the historic centre.

A Hole in the Soul of the City?

We should be more concerned about the numbers of residents in the WHS than the number
of tourists visiting it. A census conducted in 2010 showed that the site has barely more than
10,000 inhabitants possibly the lowest figure in 200 years. The latest census taken this year
is expected to show a further decline.
46

ASIAN CITIES: CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATION BUILDING AND INTERNATIONALISM

Stage

Features

Discovery

Visitor number increases, local economy improves slowly, service industry

begins to form.

Take-off

Large increase in visitor numbers; local economy heats up, service

industry sees large investments by major local and international players
edging out small local players.

Maturity

Still slight increase in visitor number; tourism industry has edged out
many parts of the local economy, costs begin to set in (environmental,
social, infrastructure, rising local prices).

Decline

Visitor numbers decline but may remain stable on a much smaller level
if there is no major disaster, economy, social structures and place are
transformed, local culture replaced by sanitized culture for visitors,
traditional local jobs largely vanished, land prices too high for lowincome communities. New competing destinations are discovered that
are still unspoilt.

Table 1: Transformation cycle in the Luang Prabang World Heritage Site. (Source: A. Alexander 2006, p.4)

In the last two years George Town World Heritage Incorporated has commissioned intangible
cultural heritage (ICH) surveys. The results of this cultural mapping last year shows residents
with artisan skills (840 cases), as well as residents with artistic and cultural skills (231 cases), and
residents as well as non-residents who are practicing traditional trades and occupations (1243
cases). The Intangible Cultural Heritage Domain of traditional trades and occupations is not
listed in UNESCOs 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage but
the Convention allows for local communities to develop their own definitions and they have
come up with an original definition for this domain.
In 2013, the mapping of traditional cultural-religious festivals found more than 200 culturalreligious organisations, institutions and sites, related to the Chinese religion, Islam, Hinduism,
and Christianity. The majority of sites relate to the first group, Chinese religion, a fusion of
Buddhism, Daoism and Confucianism. Almost 200 of those sites have a combined total of more
than 500 major and minor festivals. This shows
that the WHS is extremely rich in intangible
cultural heritage, which is not kept in museums
and galleries but is practiced and constantly
renewed by the urban community as part of its
religious-cultural life.
In Malaysia, cultural identity has political
dimensions. We are grateful that World
Heritage listing has conferred international
acknowledgement of the value of Penangs
cultural diversity, built heritage and social
history. It is a boom for the sites communities
that cultural identities can be affirmed and
places protected. However, it is obvious that
the fundamentals are not in place for longterm heritage preservation. Economic returns
do not necessarily translate into benefits to
the inhabitants of the site. The site may well
become relatively successful as a tourism

Figure 10: Tourists love to pose in front of picturesque heritage

decay, but due to increasing property prices and the decanting
of the inner city, the prewar Tye Association next door on
Stewart Lane has already moved out and put their building on
the market. (Source: SN Khoo)
HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT | VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 - 2014

47

destination but this success is largely by bigger local players and national or international
investors. The inner city inhabitants tend to be displaced or relegated to subordinate roles in
the service industry. But if they cease to maintain the urban traditions and intangible heritage,
then we would have lost the testimony of cultural traditions, the very soul of the city.
In several living cities which have received UNESCO listing, a major weakness of heritage
management and monitoring is the lack of understanding of intangible cultural heritage
values and the lack of any real built-in protection for this. As there were no prior inventories,
no current monitoring, and no specific guidelines for intangible heritage, there is nothing to
say when the rules have been broken, or when intangible heritage has been compromised,
diminished or even destroyed.
In George Town, many of the inhabitants are tenants rather than property owners. The
inhabitants are the living community who perpetuate the urban traditions, religious festivals
and hand down intangible cultural heritage from generation to generation; their role as
stakeholders should be recognised in tangible ways. Well-intentioned guidelines and incentives
to spur revitalization, as well as trendy place-making projects, may actually work against this
vulnerable group by encouraging renovations with results which are aesthetically pleasing to
the affluent, but incrementally undermine the sites integrity and authenticity. It is this discreet
charm of rejuvenated heritage targeted at the bourgeoisie cultural tourist that may mask
serious problems with the site.

Rejuvenation from Within

UNESCO listing and the resultant tourism impacts have changed the character of the city in the
space of a few years. The city is now full of new hotels and eateries, mostly unlicensed, which
have nothing to do with George Towns Outstanding Universal Values, while destroying the very
things that made George Town special in the first place. Well, is there another way? Reforms
for affordable housing, taking care of liveability and equitable mobility for locals, plugging the
leaks in the local economy, long-term socio-cultural institution building for conservation and
continuing education, and other community strengthening processes may help protect the
OUVs, while minimising social fractures and displacements. They might even work to stimulate
rejuvenation from within.
There is now a push for a Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approach to be applied to historic
cities in Asia. It is desirable to test this approach in historic cities of cultural diversity, where
inter-ethnic and intra-ethnic differentiation further complicates power and wealth differentials.
Without substantial longer-term public funding, the George Town WHS will certainly have to
rely largely on private investment to restore its decaying fabric. The results could be much better
if there was political will to impose some restrictions and to guide and channel this investment
with a long-term view. The HUL approach talks about engagement with stakeholders, and can
take this idea further by emphasising community empowerment and civic processes and putting
in place a number of social indicators and feedback mechanisms from local heritage groups.
In concluding this paper, it is proposed that a Historic Urban Landscape approach should be
explored as a strategy to privilege the people who sustain the intangible heritage qualities of
the WHS. While change is inevitable, people-centred policies are needed to balance powerful
and predatory market forces. The imagined future is a place where citizens, or rather a collective
of citizens, can between them play the roles of caretakers and custodians of heritage sites,
practitioners and transmitters of urban traditions, keepers of knowledge and story-tellers to
the future generations. In return for these responsibilities, they should also have rights rights
to dignity and housing security, opportunity to prosper economically, culturally and spiritually,
and to be active participants in shaping the citys future. But to imagine the future of a World
Heritage city is also to imagine the meaning of its citizenship the credibility of World Heritage
status would certainly be in doubt if it means imminent displacement for the citys most
vulnerable citizens, turning their homes into the playground for tourists and the rich.

48

ASIAN CITIES: CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATION BUILDING AND INTERNATIONALISM

References
Asian Coalition of Housing Rights (ACHR) 2006, Asian Heritage Project: Visit to Luang
Prabang, Laos, Mission report by Andr Alexander, with input from Maurice Leonhardt,
Bangkok.
Berendt, J. 2005, The City of Falling Angels, Sceptre, London.
Cheng, E.W., Li, A.H.F. & Ma, S-Y 2014, Resistance, Engagement, and Heritage Conservation
by Voluntary Sector: The case of Penang in Malaysia, Modern Asian Studies, 48(3):617644.
Connolly, C. 2014, PHT Newsletter (July), no. 105, pp. 2-3.
Geografia 2010, George Town Land Use and Population Survey: Method, results and
implications, prepared for Think City Sdn Bhd by Geografia, Melbourne.
Ghafar, A. 2010, Melaka and George Town, Historic Cities of the Straits of Malacca: The
challenge to retain the status, World Heritage, 55:22-29.
Jenkins, G. 2009, Contested Space: Cultural Heritage and identity reconstructions,
conservation strategies within a developing Asian City. Lit Verlag, Zurich.
Salma Nasution, K. 2012, George Town, Penang: Managing a multicultural World Heritage
Site, in F.E. Hutchinson, & J. Saravanamuttu (eds), Catching the Wind: Penang in a rising
Asia(Penang Studies Series), Penang Institute and Institute of Southeast Asian Studies,
Singapore.
Salma Nasution, K. & Jenkins, G. 2002, George Town, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia: Development
strategies and community realities, in Logan, W. (ed.), The Disappearing Asian City:
Protecting Asias urban heritage in a globalizing world, Oxford University Press, New York.

HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT | VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 - 2014

49