Do we destroy buildings to destroy whole cultures? Is war at least partly an architectural practice? Read more at Building Design.
Destruction as cultural cleansing • Reviewed 3 February 2006 by Abe Hayeem
A new book examines how attackers use the tactical eradication of architecture.
"The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then you have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long the nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was."
Milan Kundera,
The Book Of Laughter and Forgetting
This quote opens the second chapter of Robert Bevan's timely and original book
The Destruction of Memory: Architecture at War
. As Bevan says, the destruction of symbolic buildings and the physical fabric of cities and civilisations is not merely collateral damage, but a deliberate intention by the attacker, to "dominate, divide, terrorise, and eliminate" the memory, history and identity of the opposing side. Cultural cleansing is inextricably linked to ethnic cleansing, genocide and holocausts.
Arranged thematically more than chronologically, the book shows the political forces at work that led to targeted destruction beyond military requirements, from the Roman erasure of Carthage in 146 BC, the elimination of the Aztecs, Mayas, Incas and their cities, to the "murdering" of aristocrats' houses during the French Revolution. But it is the 20th century leading into the 21st that is examined with forensic insight. From Guernica to Dresden, China's continuing "Sinification" of Tibet, Cambodia and the Yugoslav war, few countries escape the culpability of physical and cultural genocide.
Bevan details the Nazi "proto-genocidal" episode of Kristallnacht as the iconic destruction of memory, when hundreds of synagogues were destroyed, along with Jewish shops, businesses and institutions. Though Hitler was finally defeated, there were protests at the Allied bombing that wrecked virtually every city in Germany but most devastatingly the cultural treasure house of Dresden which contained no military or industrial targets. The old historic cores of cities like Lübeck "that burned like firelighters" were chosen.
The book details the sheer insanity of extremist leaders and warped dictators, often to their own people in Stalin's Russia, Mao's various Cultural Revolutions, and Ceausescu's Romania. In the interest of recreating proletarian states, ruthless killings of the intelligentsia and peasants were combined with levelling indigenous and religious architecture to re-create a "utopia on the ruins of the past".
The war in Bosnia saw an almost complete destruction of a unique and beautiful Islamic heritage, whose existence was simply denied by local Serbian dignitaries. While Israeli bulldozers and tanks during the Defensive Shield operation in 2002 were crushing historic buildings in the ancient casbah in Nablus, the aftermath of which was witnessed by Bevan himself, it was brazenly refuted by military chiefs and the head of the Israel Museum, who described the damage as "non-existent".
Partitioning a country and the construction of walls can also ensure the erasure or enclosure of a people. The Berlin Wall was a prime symbol, but is now nostalgically missed by some on both sides. Israel's "otherisation" of the Palestinians by the building of the Separation Barrier, while destroying thousands of houses, trees and farms, and creating what are in effect vast prison enclaves, has ironic echoes of the ghettos that European Jews experienced. Warring sides never seem to have learnt the lessons of the past. Despite peace being declared in Belfast, for example, the divisions continue, where the walls are being raised higher between Protestant and Roman Catholic communities.
In the rebuilding of post-war cities, Bevan says the "pitfalls of reconstruction in circumstances where there has been an attempt at forced forgetting by the destruction of material culture are particularly treacherous". Rebuilding or restoration of damaged buildings can never re-create their originality. It seems a vain hope to try and achieve reintegration with monuments.
The single minded re-creation of Warsaw's Old Town astonished the world. In Moscow, the Russian orthodox Kazan Cathedral was rebuilt from scratch, while genuine historic buildings are being torn down by rich developers for flats for the elite at an alarming rate. The unification of Berlin has created dilemmas as to whether to preserve the East German "Palast der Republik" or replace it with the schlock of the original 17th century Stadtschloss. Rebuilt synagogues in Eastern Europe are still being attacked. In Bosnia, the restoration of Sarajevo's National Library has a plaque: "Remember and Warn".
Now, the conflict between fundamentalist Islam and the west is in full swing. The targeting of the World Trade Centre by Al Qa'eda as the pre-eminent symbol of the world's prime superpower struck at the "collective self" of the US. The retaliatory war against the fabricated enemy Iraq, using "shock and awe", has lead to tens of thousands of civilians being killed and the devastation of historic cities, and ancient Babylon and Nineveh.
Both the Hague and Geneva Conventions consider the destruction of cultural heritage a war crime, unless there is "imperative military necessity". The US has refused to ratify the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, which the UK government reluctantly signed up to in 2005, after 50 years of prevarication.
In this indispensable and beautifully written first international survey of its type, Robert Bevan raises the importance of safeguarding the world's architectural record. The compelling subtext is a plea for heterogeneous, pluralist values, integration and human justice, and for cultural genocide to be made a punishable "crime against humanity".
Abe Hayeem is an architect and member of Architects & Planners for Justice.
6 Comments
wow. man, nice one. add it to the list.
though, it seems like we are reminded of the same statutes and definitions of urbicide, and just go on repeating them.
what about the other faces of urbicide? a developing post-modern narrative of urbicide, sub-architectural, no destroying of buildings even required. the damage is dealt institutionally, through policy, socio-politically, the thouroughly modern economic engineering of homeless people, dislocated, de-amnestfied, de-citizenized? squatter-made, architecturally disassociated?
im interested in building being as much a form as urbicide as demolition. what about building, the very act of architecture, or even the earliset urbicidal effects of ideas pre their architecture realization? from jewish setttlements to corporate chain stores, prison incarceration, McMansions or suburban house arrest, architecture is suspect in many cases. or the deprivation of access to buildings, rather than destroying the monuments of a culture, we deprive people of housing and prevent an access to any political basis in culture. no property = no rights. urbicide in the form of political disempowerment, or in the form of lobbying, or tightened border security, creating a cultural insulation. cultural fortressization.
urbicide has become so precise and insidious, so scientific that it will not even include buildings anymore, just spare the architecture altogether. instead conducting a much more surgical form of cultural butchering. urbicide that will no longer have a need for architectural removal. if today's buildings lack this historic value, and we, or history, conceivably moves closer to a landscape where buldings are vapid ephemeral vanishing magic tricks, money wisping across the surface in egotistical gestural draws, then the urbicide of military strategy has been executed from the time the buildings first went up, (devoid of any real cultural attachments), or the time they never went up. Or at least buildings considered so temporary that the justification for destroying them will meet absolute minimal resistence from memory.
Prevent any culture from recreating meaningful buildings, anywhere, and that is as much an urbicide as shock and awe'ing them to bits.
Found this article, where Hayeem calls out Safdie's hypocrisy. And these: Injustices of Occupation | No historic or social conscience?
And these by Bevan: Razing the past | And a link to the book: The Destruction of Memory: Architectural and Cultural Warfare (2004)
And another review of Bevan's book, which gets into Bevan's examination of construction and reconstruction as part of an "enforced forgetting", constuction as much part of the "war on architecture" as demolition. originally printed in FT.com.
Anthony Max Tung covers issues of selectively destroying architecture for political and religious reasons very thoroughly, e.g., to the point of saying that this IS the history of architecture in Rome. A fascinating book unfortunately buried under a 'preservation' title:
Preserving the World's Great Cities
Nice. I finally found this comment again. And if you ever see this post again, Steven, thanks, I will check it out.
Go here for follow-ups.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.