top of page

Repair or Replace?


In the last two decades, Thailand has seen a rapid (and unplanned) development. Our so called modern buildings lack identity and looks more like buildings in the other parts of the world. Our traditional buildings are being demolished (and the historical layers erased) almost every day to give way to buildings constructed using the new technologies and design that is sometimes alien to our country. Before I proceed further, I would like my readers to reflect upon the following three questions:

  1. What is more important – traditional or contemporary architecture?

  2. What is the role of historic buildings in constructing the Thai identity?

  3. Is it necessary to erase the past for the development of a nation?

There are few contemporary buildings in Thailand except for its capital, Bangkok. However, there are many historic cities/ countries that have been rapidly transformed into modern cities such as London, Tokyo, Shanghai, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Why does architecture in cities change? I think is it directly related to the new generation’s needs and aspirations. And, the political will to be a developed nation to attract more people and businesses. Although, the contemporary architecture may not always provide comfortable spaces, but they often attempt to achieve an iconic status at the expense of environmental, financial, and cultural sustainability. Nonetheless, this type of architecture style may be perfect for tourism. Whether it is Shanghai or Singapore, most developed cities/ nations still preserve a small percentage of their “significant” (as per the authorities) built heritage. This is for several reasons, as per the authorities responsible for their maintenance, such as historical, and socio-cultural significance. However, in my experience, they have mostly survived due to their tourism potential. It is unfortunate, but true that most of the built heritage in developing nations such as Thailand, is seen only as a money generator and not as the soul of historic cities.

In my opinion, the historic Asian developing cities/ nations should aspire for a balance when it comes to conservation of heritage and development. The conservation should not be regarded as anti-development or for tourism alone, rather it should be the process of managing change in responsible ways that will best support the values of the place in its contexts, and which recognises opportunities to discover and reinforce those values.

Based on my arguments above, I sincerely believe that both traditional and contemporary architecture is critical for a city as it furnishes a singular identity for its occupants. The past provides a link to the present, which then inspires the future. By disregarding the traditional heritage, we would not only destroy the soul of a city, but also lose its local distinctiveness. I am sure that many of us travel large distances to experience the authentic culture of the place rather than eating the same McDonalds burger and sipping Starbucks coffee.

“The past is not dead, it is living in us, and will be alive in the future which we now helping to make.” ~ William Morris

bottom of page