PUBLIC SYMBOLS IN SINGAPORE : A STUDY OF THE CIVIC AND CULTURAL DISTRICT

Abstract

The quality of the built environment is of central concern to human agents. This is reflected in the impetus for urban conservation in modern affluent societies. Singapore, which has experienced tremendous economic and social progress in the past two decades, is an excellent case in point. The modus operandi has been for the state to function as the principle authority on conservation matters. There has been minimal leeway for public participation. Paradoxically, the built environment is shared by all manners of people. The lack of interrogation into public preferences for conservation is inimical to the creation of a valued environment. The impetus for a study that seeks to identify the nature of a valued conserved environment within the existing socio-political milieu is of prime importance. This study has attempted to fill the void in the knowledge of what constitutes a valued environment by recourse to a social survey within a specific locality. Specifically, this study focuses on public symbols - places which are imageable and which connotes a symbolic dimension - within the context of the Civic and Cultural District of Singapore. To understand the dynamic nature of this conservation district, there is a need to proceed by articulating the sense of place experienced by both insiders and outsiders. In point, the perceptions and meanings endowed in the conserved district were solicited from Singaporeans and their tourists. From this inquiry, the identity of the Civic and Cultural District --- a place moulded by its unique architectural facade, its historicity and its embodiment of nationhood --- was called. Further, the interplay of power relations prevalent in urban heritage conservation demands an investigation into the intentionality of state authorities and the public towards the conserved area. Afterall, urban heritage conservation cannot he reified as a monolithic isue. In the case of conservation in the Civic and Cultural District, it can be discerned that conservation of this pertinent heritage area does not ensure that the public aspirations for the district have been met. Indeed, there seems to be dismay over the inauthentic products of some conservation projects. Despite such conflict, there is no overt dissension with regards to conservation matters. Rather, the state eventually persuades the public that they are acting out of national and public interest. Ideological hegemony is then evident. Finally, the creation of a valued environment in the long run, lies in interweaving the aspirations of the different social groups. It is argued that conservation efforts should he sensitive to the individuality of places since place is undeniably an integral and inextricable realm of human experiences.