Towards a Conservation Movement in Malaysia (Part I) by Hajeedar bin Abdul Majid, 1976

In 1976, Dato' Ar. Hajeedar bin Abdul Majid penned down his views on the future of Conservation in the country. His article, 'Towards a Conservation Movement in Malaysia' was featured in Majallah Akitek, September 1976. Revisiting the article today helps us examine developments that has taken place since then in the field of heritage conservation.

____

1. Introduction and Definition

It is generally appreciated that man’s intellectual and physical abilities and his achievements throughout the ages are reflected and preserved in and through Architecture. The contriving and manipulation of the available resources in the most effective three-dimensional architectural forms is a manifestation of the interaction of current social, political, economic, religious, technological and philosophical factors of a particular period. It is not uncommon that either one or a combination of these factors may dominate the rest. For example the intense building of churches and cathedrals in Medieval Europe is an example of religious dominance as reflected in architectural forms. Society was then evolved around the mystical powers of the Christian faith and in the course of satisfying the religious objectives the rest of the environmental aspects are brought into play in varying degrees. We find here, embodied within one physical form, a wealth of cultural documentation. The same could be said of any other characteristic architectural era. In our own land, the built environment is influenced and flavoured by socio-economic, political and cultural situation and contacts throughout the Malaysian history. Apart from the indigenous contributions of vernacular architecture, foreign building forms and values were also introduced from time to time. Some were subsequently modified to suit local requirements and the use of local building materials. Townships such as Malacca, Muar, Taiping, Penang, Kota Bharu, Teluk Anson, Kuala Lumpur, Kelang, etc, contain a wealth of historical buildings of architectural merit in their own right. This cultural heritage includes the direct architectural influences from Chinese and Arab traders and the colonial lifestyle of the Portuguese, Dutch and British. To their contributions were added the acquired influences of Malaysian Architecture during the pre and post independence period. However, these historical and cultural values are constantly threatened by the inevitable drive change. The intrinsic values of generations of Architecture can often be neglected and the wealth of cultural origins be lost forever through the lack of wide considerations by those on whom the power to determine the fates of our architectural heritage has been bestowed. Against the accelerating pace of events in the fields of technological and intellectual development there is growing concern among the professionals and the public alike over the future of some of these architectural landmarks.

In an effort to counteract the unconcerned manner of current development and redevelopment programmes in Malaysia there is an immediate need for the emergence of a social and cultural movement whose objectives would be to preserve and develop our national heritage and create a pride for this heritage in the future generation.

The prime aim of such a ‘conservation movement’ would be to advantageously prolong the life of whatever architectural heritage there is within a given community and simultaneously advocate a more sensitive treatment of the adjoining areas and help maintain a continuity of character within the whole environment. Such objectives of the conservation movement may be grossly misjudged and misinterpreted by the public either through ignorance or lack of imagination and foresight of the inherent cultural values which the Malaysia Collection of Architecture provides for our society.

The definitions used to describe the word ‘conservation’ would only be meaningful when qualified by the context within which it is used. Conservation in the context of architectural and environmental control would not merely lead to the preservation of buildings of architectural and historic interest for its own sake. The ultimate aim is to retain for future generations a comprehensible record of the varied influences which has brought about the Malaysia of today. Our vast and varied collection of Architecture reflects and records the respective moods, needs, practices, styles and circumstances in our history. The variety and richness of the spontaneous contributions by the communities and races which make up our nation would be preserved and made available to provide a source of national pride and identity in the development of a truly Malaysian life-style.

The mortals who contributed to the physical realisation of the various buildings would perish when their time comes, but their works remain as testimony of their achievements and this would serve as a rich source of inspiration and general appreciation for the present and future generations.

Thus an awareness of the inherent values of these architectural ‘fossil’ goes far beyond the economic viability of the preserved and restored buildings but into the role of satisfying some basic psychological and emotional needs of the individual that leads to the development of identity and a ‘sense of belonging’ to a recognisable and established cultural pattern. The lack of exposure to our rich heritage is one of the factors which has inhibited the emergence of national identity and pride.

It should be stressed that the built environment is the product of history and culture. It is also a source of its own nourishment and acts as reference for its progressive growth towards a balanced development. In a primitive society no formal policy was required for such a control because society was closely linked by common and often undeclared objectives. The increases in population and human activities within society makes the situation more complex and it becomes impossible to co-ordinate the environmental aims and objectives of individuals without a central body acting as a ‘watchdog’ on behalf of its society. The national government has become this ‘watchdog’ for most of society’s needs. The Malaysian Government will have to take the initiative to form a department or committee to study the situation and enact statutes as guiding principles for any form of development and redevelopment that may be projected for a given environment. This need is most acute because any loss which occurs cannot be replaced. The task of conservation is also a responsibility of the architect and planners in particular and the public in general. Their civic obligation should be incorporated as one of the limitations within which planning and design solutions should be conceived. They must bear in mind that the value of such a contribution on the part of the architects and designers would go a long way towards satisfying the national objective in sustaining the distinctive characteristics of the built and natural environment and in so doing could well provide greater interest and even raise the quality of Architecture and Environment in this country. Although such an outlook is not yet in popular support, the growing awareness in society today is indeed encouraging and it is hoped that this awareness would grow in as effective way for the betterment of our society and our environment.

2. A Case Study: The Conservation Movement in Britain

A case study of the conservation experiment as carried out in Britain should provide us an insight into the subject. From this we may be able to adopt and adapt a programme to suit our situation. The conservation movement in England has its roots in the various local voluntary organisations that were formed in the late 19th century. These organisations were run by some far sighted groups of people who were well aware of the cultural and educational values of the English Architecture in their recognisable periods. These include whatever buildings of historic and architectural merits that may still remain that could provide a chronological record of the evolution of the English Architecture. Although it was the elites who were able to afford so indulge in these civic and moral ventures, there was growing public concern and awareness for the protection of the rich and varied cultural influences and heritage embodied within the English buildings. The distinctive phase of architectural development, as embodied in her buildings, is one of England’s most important and recognised contributions to the visual Art. In 1877, at the instigation of William Morris, the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, the first voluntary organisation was formed.

In 1895, the National Trust was established as an independent society with membership open to the public. The prime aim of the Trust is to acquire properties in the name of the society for the benefit of the public in future years. The properties would include buildings of architectural and historic importance and the much admired but reduced open countryside. The Trust’s success is shown by the amount of inalienable properties it now owns. To date the Trust has about 200 buildings of architectural and historic merit effectively preserved. Wherever possible the buildings are improved and restored and used as private dwellings. Most of these properties are also open to the public for viewing as museums. The Trust also owns approximately one percent of the total countryside which include woods, moorland, lakes and hills, about 2000 farms and about 300 miles of unspoilt coastline. Since then other voluntary societies were formed based on the common interest of the members. Among those were the Georgian Group who are keen in the preservation and upkeep of the Georgian Architecture in England. The Victorian Society was formed with similar respective objectives. In the midst of all this are the localised community groups who intend to protect the intrinsic qualities of their dearly-loved’ villages, townscapes and countryside and guard against ‘foreign’ intrusions. These intrusions could range from the undesirable establishment of industrial activities to the movement of the overall urban population into their rural setting which may cause drastic social changes within the community. The success or failure of such voluntary societies depended as much on the strength of the individual society to influence the inevitable forces of human desires for change, betterment and keeping up with the effects of economic, social and technological improvements. The difficulty of implementing the group-objectives had cost several buildings of character to be neglected an eventually left to ruin or destruction an occasionally replaced by new buildings that alter the continuity of the character in the streetscape and townscape. A statutory machinery was thought necessary to effectively protect the valuable buildings and their environment and to ensure a balanced growth of new developments in the rural and urban areas. The first Town and Country Planning Act was published in 1947 and to serve as a guide for development proposals in the country. In 1963, the Historic Building and Ancient Monuments Act was issued to protect such an interest. In the second Town and Country Planing act of 1962, and under Section 32 of the Act is the reiterated provision for a compressive national inventory of “…. buildings of special architecture and historical interest…’ and this acted as a fore-runner to the Civic Amenities Act of 1967. The 1967 Act stipulates that all Local Authorities should designate conservation areas as “…. areas of special architectural or historical interest; the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance…” and recommended that a conservation policy be conceived in three stages. First, a townscape study be done, followed by a definition of the conservation area and locating the ‘opportunity areas’ within it and finally, defining the courses of action i.e. traffic and development controls, renewal, rehabilitation and design policies.

The listing of buildings of historic and architectural interest is normally done by appointed investigators from the Department of Environment who work in close collaboration with the Local Authorities. Together they present a provisional list of nominated buildings with their appropriate descriptions. This list would become statute only when approved by the Secretary of State for the Environment. This time-tag, in some cases of up to two years, is often met with criticism because the unscrupulous developers who are more keen on the profit potentials of the site, could demolish and redevelop the site well within the time-lag. The provision for ‘spot-listing’ has lessened this threat.

However the selection of listed buildings is based on several considerations. They include buildings with special value within certain categories either for their architectural reasons or as illustrating social and economic history for instance home of the early industrial buildings, the early railway stations, schools, hospitals, theatres, town halls, market exchanges, almahouses, prisons and mills, just to name a few. Another basis for consideration is that of technological innovation or virtuosity as in the case of cast iron structures, prefabrications and the early use of concrete. Associations of well known characters and events is another consideration. Last but by no means least important, is the group value especially the classic examples of town planning as illustrated by the residential squares, crescents and terraces and model villages. These selected buildings are then classified into a tri-grading system. Grade I are buildings of outstanding interest, and Grade III are buildings of special interest so as to warrant every effort of preservation. While the Grade III buildings are normally not qualified for statutory listing, they are important elements to the streetscape and townscape for their desirable group values. Thus by the end of December 1968 there was a total of 111,016 buildings listed in England and 4,635 buildings in Wales. In view of the various short-comings a new legislation was included in the Town and Country Planning Act of 1968 with regard to the protection of historic buildings. Although it was already an offence to contravene the terms laid in the previous Acts, under the new terms the procedure and penalties were stiffened for an offender. When found guilty of unauthorised alternations and demolition of buildings protected by statutory listing or preservation notices the penalty could mean a fine in amount of up to the current market-value of the site or imprisonment or even both. However, where demolition and redevelopment is absolutely necessary, applications for Listed Building Consents and Planning Permissions could be obtained from local Authority concerned. Failure to obtain either of these the applicant could make an appeal to the Secretary of State for the Environment, using the similar procedure as in the case of a refusal for Planning Permission. When a Listed Building Consent is granted for alternations to a listed-building, s notice of the proposed works is advertised outside the building and a copy of it published in one of the local newspapers to invite reactions and comments are forwarded to the Local Authority and the Department of Environment for consideration. Should demolition be granted, the Royal Commission for historic Monuments shall be informed and also given a minimum of one month to make a record of the building. In this way even if the physical fabric of the building is lost a documented record of it remains.

3. Conclusion

“A city without old buildings is like a man without a memory”

-Konrad Smigleski

In order to develop and implement a programme of conservation in Malaysia there is need for action on three fronts:

Firstly, the basic and most important area for action is in the creation of public awareness and concern which would result in a popular movement through which opinions can be expressed and public pressure be brought to bear on all aspects of planning and development in our built environment. The existence of such a movement would bring about the necessary climate for the relevant legislation to be enacted and implemented.

The second front in which action will be needed is in the area of national and local governments and through the Federal and State Legislatures. Acts which include provisions similar to those provided in the U.K Town & Country Planning Act of 1968 and the provision of the Civic Amenities Act will have to be passed by the Federal and State Governments and enforced by the local authorities. Meanwhile national inventories of buildings of historic and architectural interest can be submitted for classification. A forerunner of this is the current PAM organised Measured Drawing Competition. The third front on which action has to take place will be within the professions concerned with the built environment. This will include planners, architects, economists, engineers, etc. A concern for conservation will have to be created and developed within these professions, so that all these specialists will each in his own way contribute towards the enrichment of our national heritage. The architects and planners have the professional duty of encouraging and development the potentials on all the three fronts. They can provide the professional leadership to the movement and help to formulate and express public opinion as a creative force. They can also be involved actively in the process for drafting and approving the necessary legislation. The architect as an active citizen can play his role in these two fields in addition to that within his profession.