Hgvhb

Why is it important to preserve heritage buildings?

Heritage conservationists in Kuala Lumpur have frequently accused Malaysian authorities of favoring commerce over heritage. In 2006, activists mourned the demolition of a stately downtown Kuala Lumpur mansion, known as Bok House, built in 1929 with a mix of Chinese, Malay and Western architectural forms.

In 1996, this century-old building was retired of its purpose when the new Sungai Buloh prison was completed. Efforts to reopen the Pudu Jail as a museum in 1997-1998 did not gather momentum and despite another attempt in 2004, it was finally shut down for good.
Even with the ravages of time and Malaysia’s tropical weather, the murals painted by the inmates of this historical prison have remained as a tourist attraction for many years

What is the important of prisan in a county As a heritage conservation advocator based in Sabah, living an ocean away from Kuala Lumpur, I have to admit to having mixed feelings about the demolition of Pudu Jail. Yes, it’s a historical building that has seen many momentous (albeit grim) incidents during its century-old stint as a prison. However, conservationists and the Malaysian public alike have not been able to successfully convince the 1Malaysia government about the financial viability of preserving Pudu Jail. This does not in any way mean that I support its demolition – hardly! (we all know that the demolition was lobbied and approved so that someone’s commercial project could be built on top of the historical site) – but the fact of the matter is that heritage conservationists in KL advocating for its preservation did not could not present a strong enough case to ensure Pudu Jail’s continued existence.

Deaths sentence should be abolished discuss The excuse that heritage enclaves or heritage properties have to provide the same economic viability viz new development in adjacent areas is surely passé. Everywhere else in the world, communities are striving to retain their heritage structures as physical, tangible evidence of their history and identity. Would this decision to demolish have been made were the building to have been the Bangunan Sultan Abdul Samad? Both these buildings were built at the same time, and the design credited to the same engineer, C E Spooner. And yet one is retained, despite having had extensive changes made to its interior, while the other has largely retained its original form.
If the decision to retain or demolish one or the other was based on which has the higher levels of authenticity, Pudu Jail would come out on top. Unfortunately, Pudu Jail does not have the "wow" factor. It does not have the wholesome appeal being a building with a brutal and insalubrious story. But is this not a legitimate part of the story of Kuala Lumpur? It would be useful to know what criteria a building or site needs to possess before it can be considered a heritage building by our government. In the case of Pudu Jail, is it not heritage just because it is a jail, with all its negative connotations?
Surely jails are a part of the tangible evidence of our penal history which is part of our justice system. I think that we should also not forget that in its over 100 year