What was your impression of Singapore history and cultural heritage before going on the trail?
Prior to this project, I had done a Fort Canning learning journey trail where we had to plan a heritage trail for student teachers under one of my modules in Year 2. That project however reinforced my idea that heritage sites and heritage trails in Singapore have more or less been reconditioned to be more tourist friendly.
Place boards with information and nicely done up and well maintained sites felt very fake to me. During the Fort Canning trail earlier this year, we moved from place to place, regurgitating facts and visited places that once was but now is not. The one hectare field that used to be a cemetery for European pioneers in Fort Canning is now a place where they hold concerts and gig. The ‘keramat’ or tomb of Sultan Iskandar Shah has been shifted and rebuilt so many times that one needs to question the authenticity of its existence.
I felt then that if you want to respect culture and respect history, you should preserve it as it is. A cultural heritage, to me, should be about the preservation of genuine sites. Untouched, virgin and raw. I went for the Little India trail, knowing that I would be disappointed. This is Little India, a tourist attraction in Singapore. How authentic can the experience be?
How has your experience of the trail changed your perception of Singapore history and her cultural heritage?
I drove to Little India and parked near Tekka market. The first thing that hit me when I opened my door was the smell of spices from the shops and the hawker centre. I met my group and we then went about the trail, looking at buildings and reading information on the National Heritage display boards. We took a lot of pictures and got directions from shopkeepers when we were lost. In a nutshell, the trail felt jaunty but detached.
However, what differentiated this trail from my experience in Fort Canning was the sound of temple bells, the taste of the thosai that I had with my groupmates, the touch of the silk cloths and the colours that intoxicated us as we moved around the place.
The excitement of my senses was the main medium in which I then could start to relate to the history of this place. The excitement of my senses made me feel human that moment and it got me thinking about the human history behind the place.
I realised that it was not just about buildings long gone. It was not just about names of roads that had been preserved to tell a story about the place. It was more of a realisation that people actually lived and stood where I was 100 years ago.
Maybe they did not hear the same temple bells that I heard but the temple bells also rang during their time. Maybe they did not eat the same thosai beside the road with their friends but maybe they did. And who were they?
This to me was the most important take away of the Little India trail that day. Someone had lived here before and when you look at the trail from that humanistic perspective, you then get to appreciate the experience of the trail and empathise more with Singapore’s history.
For example, I began to see how people of different religions lived a stone’s throw away from each other. The Buddhist temple of Sakya Muni Buddha Gaya was just a few hundred meters away from the Hindu Sri Veeramakaliamman Temple. And as we passed by the restored building of Residence of Tan Teng Niang, you begin to appreciate how this was built by hand by a husband to his wife and not just a ‘building behind Tekka market’. The name ‘Buffalo Road’ also came alive as I pictured the cattle and buffalos roaming around in the field before me just as it might have in the 1800s.
As we ended the day, I was truly grateful for the experience. It changed my perspective that heritage trails were dry and staged. It made me appreciate the effort it takes in the selection and preservation of certain sites as heritage.
A heritage trail needs to create a narrative and help those experiencing it bridge across time to another place and I found that in Little India that day.
Share some insights (if any) about Singapore’s past and the way it is represented (symbolically and physically) that you have gained from the trail.
I learnt that with a history that dates to the early 1800s, Little India began as a colony set up by Indians who came to Singapore as prisoners of the British Raj. On their release, there were those who chose to stay back and there began this little colony called Little India. There were many others who were brought from Indian villages as indentured labourers who again chose to stay back in this new colony and that was how Little India was founded.
Located near the Serangoon River, Little India was the perfect location for cattle rearing and agriculture and therefore a land that initially housed Indian convicts soon became home to many who had served their time and chose to stay back in Singapore.
Etched onto street names like Belilios Road, Buffalo Road, Desker Road, and Kerbau Road are clues that cattle trade played a significant role in early Little India. These street names all bear legacy to the area’s former cattle trade past. Belilios Road was named after I.R. Belilios who was a cattle trader from the 1940s. Belilios recognised the importance of milk in a Hindu’s diet and saw the potential of cattle trade in Little India. The area’s natural pasture fed by the waters of Rochor River also suited cattle trade. Belilios Road is today a road flanked by the Sri Veeramakaliamman Temple and leads into a small housing estate.
A deeper connection can be seen in that it was the Indian labourers and prisoners who contributed greatly in building the colony's hospitals, major buildings, churches and many of the features that Singapore has to this day. As the British left the Southeast Asian peninsular, the Indian community chose to imbibe their own cultural backgrounds. A stark indicator that stands to this day is the number of temples built by the community.
After reflecting on my experience in Little India, I think one can arrive to many understandings of heritage and what can be included in heritage forms. The physical buildings that are still present are representatives of the people who are gone and the symbolism of the names in the roads tells us a bit of what was then.
Think of the names of the roads and the buildings in the area you are at. What significance do you think they hold?
The names serves to tell us the history of the place. It serves as a starting point and an interest point for travellers and historians to preserve a certain aspect of that place. The work comes in researching the origin of the name and its significance. For example:
The etymology of place names (e.g. Tekka. In Hokkien, the market was known as Tek Kia Kha, literally meaning "foot of the small bamboos", as bamboo plants once grew on the banks of the Rochor Canal) tells us about the geography of the place before it was developed.
Obscure anecdotes that connect the site to more famous events and people (e.g. ‘Hasting Road’ is named after Warren Hastings (1732-1818) Governor-General of British India) serves to inform about the colonial roots of Singapore and how our governance has changed hands since.
Brief details of legends and folktales associated with the site (e.g. stories of Ramayana and deities on the information boards in front of the Sri Srinivasa Perumal Temple) serves to tell us about the religious beliefs of the community during those day.
These and many more names of roads and buildings truly helped bring some sense into what was Little India in its former.
Look at the architectural styles. How different are the buildings and what do the styles suggest to you in terms of the ages of the buildings, the conservation process etc?
As we moved along Little India, you could tell the difference between the buildings of yesteryears and the ones that were recently built. Most of the preserved buildings that were still standing had survived because they had significant cultural or religious import.
The different styles of the temples had deep roots to the deities they were built in honour to. The deities the temples were built for consequentially showed the geographical significance to which part of India the worshippers were from (eg. The Shree Lakshmi Narayan Temple was different from other temples because this temple was founded by the North Indian communities and the architecture resembles the North Indian architecture.)
The different types of building and temples preserved shows the rigorous task in the conservation process of choosing the buildings that showed the different ethnicity, origin and class of people that came to Singapore. The selection made by the heritage committee showed diversity in the people that made Little India. Preservation of mosques, temples and churches were purposefully done to show religious tolerance existed even then.
Do you think the sites serve their purpose of educating the general public about the history of Singapore? At the end of the trail, did you come away with the feeling that you have learnt something or you just carried out a tourist jaunt around an area of no historical significance whatsoever?
I think heritage sites serves to inform, educate, entertain and also to encourage tourism towards places of interest. Encouraging people to visit Little India is in itself part of the education process. You cannot claim that a heritage trail is successful if no one comes to go through the heritage trail.
The challenge then is to find the balance of educating the general public without being overly informative that it becomes a turn off to them.
The digital age has made us become used to information coming in bite-sized, and varied ways. The national heritage boards that were available at the places in Little India achieves this.
Using photographs, drawings and diagrams, the information boards helped tell the stories associated with the images. In a precise format, it was interesting and generally gave trivia about people’s lives and the history of the buildings and the place.
Despite this, I think there is an underlying tension between the economic and 'social' or 'community' benefits that the trail provides. Although, as a history student, I could appreciate the narratives behind the buildings, protagonists of the ‘economic benefits’ might focus on how the trail can increase tourism and emphasize on how we can 'link the heritage trail to the local economy'. A tourist seeking only surface value of beautiful pictures and cheap shopping might overlook the education and information factor in such trails.
However a definite benefit of the heritage trail was the preservation of sites. This idea and the ability to protect sites for the future is important not only for the Indian community but the general public so that our understanding of the past are retained, and future generations are able to make their own interpretation of heritage sites. This links with ideas about education on the past, and is an integral benefit to enlightening the general public to the history of Singapore.
Prior to this project, I had done a Fort Canning learning journey trail where we had to plan a heritage trail for student teachers under one of my modules in Year 2. That project however reinforced my idea that heritage sites and heritage trails in Singapore have more or less been reconditioned to be more tourist friendly.
Place boards with information and nicely done up and well maintained sites felt very fake to me. During the Fort Canning trail earlier this year, we moved from place to place, regurgitating facts and visited places that once was but now is not. The one hectare field that used to be a cemetery for European pioneers in Fort Canning is now a place where they hold concerts and gig. The ‘keramat’ or tomb of Sultan Iskandar Shah has been shifted and rebuilt so many times that one needs to question the authenticity of its existence.
I felt then that if you want to respect culture and respect history, you should preserve it as it is. A cultural heritage, to me, should be about the preservation of genuine sites. Untouched, virgin and raw. I went for the Little India trail, knowing that I would be disappointed. This is Little India, a tourist attraction in Singapore. How authentic can the experience be?
How has your experience of the trail changed your perception of Singapore history and her cultural heritage?
I drove to Little India and parked near Tekka market. The first thing that hit me when I opened my door was the smell of spices from the shops and the hawker centre. I met my group and we then went about the trail, looking at buildings and reading information on the National Heritage display boards. We took a lot of pictures and got directions from shopkeepers when we were lost. In a nutshell, the trail felt jaunty but detached.
However, what differentiated this trail from my experience in Fort Canning was the sound of temple bells, the taste of the thosai that I had with my groupmates, the touch of the silk cloths and the colours that intoxicated us as we moved around the place.
The excitement of my senses was the main medium in which I then could start to relate to the history of this place. The excitement of my senses made me feel human that moment and it got me thinking about the human history behind the place.
I realised that it was not just about buildings long gone. It was not just about names of roads that had been preserved to tell a story about the place. It was more of a realisation that people actually lived and stood where I was 100 years ago.
Maybe they did not hear the same temple bells that I heard but the temple bells also rang during their time. Maybe they did not eat the same thosai beside the road with their friends but maybe they did. And who were they?
This to me was the most important take away of the Little India trail that day. Someone had lived here before and when you look at the trail from that humanistic perspective, you then get to appreciate the experience of the trail and empathise more with Singapore’s history.
For example, I began to see how people of different religions lived a stone’s throw away from each other. The Buddhist temple of Sakya Muni Buddha Gaya was just a few hundred meters away from the Hindu Sri Veeramakaliamman Temple. And as we passed by the restored building of Residence of Tan Teng Niang, you begin to appreciate how this was built by hand by a husband to his wife and not just a ‘building behind Tekka market’. The name ‘Buffalo Road’ also came alive as I pictured the cattle and buffalos roaming around in the field before me just as it might have in the 1800s.
As we ended the day, I was truly grateful for the experience. It changed my perspective that heritage trails were dry and staged. It made me appreciate the effort it takes in the selection and preservation of certain sites as heritage.
A heritage trail needs to create a narrative and help those experiencing it bridge across time to another place and I found that in Little India that day.
Share some insights (if any) about Singapore’s past and the way it is represented (symbolically and physically) that you have gained from the trail.
I learnt that with a history that dates to the early 1800s, Little India began as a colony set up by Indians who came to Singapore as prisoners of the British Raj. On their release, there were those who chose to stay back and there began this little colony called Little India. There were many others who were brought from Indian villages as indentured labourers who again chose to stay back in this new colony and that was how Little India was founded.
Located near the Serangoon River, Little India was the perfect location for cattle rearing and agriculture and therefore a land that initially housed Indian convicts soon became home to many who had served their time and chose to stay back in Singapore.
Etched onto street names like Belilios Road, Buffalo Road, Desker Road, and Kerbau Road are clues that cattle trade played a significant role in early Little India. These street names all bear legacy to the area’s former cattle trade past. Belilios Road was named after I.R. Belilios who was a cattle trader from the 1940s. Belilios recognised the importance of milk in a Hindu’s diet and saw the potential of cattle trade in Little India. The area’s natural pasture fed by the waters of Rochor River also suited cattle trade. Belilios Road is today a road flanked by the Sri Veeramakaliamman Temple and leads into a small housing estate.
A deeper connection can be seen in that it was the Indian labourers and prisoners who contributed greatly in building the colony's hospitals, major buildings, churches and many of the features that Singapore has to this day. As the British left the Southeast Asian peninsular, the Indian community chose to imbibe their own cultural backgrounds. A stark indicator that stands to this day is the number of temples built by the community.
After reflecting on my experience in Little India, I think one can arrive to many understandings of heritage and what can be included in heritage forms. The physical buildings that are still present are representatives of the people who are gone and the symbolism of the names in the roads tells us a bit of what was then.
Think of the names of the roads and the buildings in the area you are at. What significance do you think they hold?
The names serves to tell us the history of the place. It serves as a starting point and an interest point for travellers and historians to preserve a certain aspect of that place. The work comes in researching the origin of the name and its significance. For example:
The etymology of place names (e.g. Tekka. In Hokkien, the market was known as Tek Kia Kha, literally meaning "foot of the small bamboos", as bamboo plants once grew on the banks of the Rochor Canal) tells us about the geography of the place before it was developed.
Obscure anecdotes that connect the site to more famous events and people (e.g. ‘Hasting Road’ is named after Warren Hastings (1732-1818) Governor-General of British India) serves to inform about the colonial roots of Singapore and how our governance has changed hands since.
Brief details of legends and folktales associated with the site (e.g. stories of Ramayana and deities on the information boards in front of the Sri Srinivasa Perumal Temple) serves to tell us about the religious beliefs of the community during those day.
These and many more names of roads and buildings truly helped bring some sense into what was Little India in its former.
Look at the architectural styles. How different are the buildings and what do the styles suggest to you in terms of the ages of the buildings, the conservation process etc?
As we moved along Little India, you could tell the difference between the buildings of yesteryears and the ones that were recently built. Most of the preserved buildings that were still standing had survived because they had significant cultural or religious import.
The different styles of the temples had deep roots to the deities they were built in honour to. The deities the temples were built for consequentially showed the geographical significance to which part of India the worshippers were from (eg. The Shree Lakshmi Narayan Temple was different from other temples because this temple was founded by the North Indian communities and the architecture resembles the North Indian architecture.)
The different types of building and temples preserved shows the rigorous task in the conservation process of choosing the buildings that showed the different ethnicity, origin and class of people that came to Singapore. The selection made by the heritage committee showed diversity in the people that made Little India. Preservation of mosques, temples and churches were purposefully done to show religious tolerance existed even then.
Do you think the sites serve their purpose of educating the general public about the history of Singapore? At the end of the trail, did you come away with the feeling that you have learnt something or you just carried out a tourist jaunt around an area of no historical significance whatsoever?
I think heritage sites serves to inform, educate, entertain and also to encourage tourism towards places of interest. Encouraging people to visit Little India is in itself part of the education process. You cannot claim that a heritage trail is successful if no one comes to go through the heritage trail.
The challenge then is to find the balance of educating the general public without being overly informative that it becomes a turn off to them.
The digital age has made us become used to information coming in bite-sized, and varied ways. The national heritage boards that were available at the places in Little India achieves this.
Using photographs, drawings and diagrams, the information boards helped tell the stories associated with the images. In a precise format, it was interesting and generally gave trivia about people’s lives and the history of the buildings and the place.
Despite this, I think there is an underlying tension between the economic and 'social' or 'community' benefits that the trail provides. Although, as a history student, I could appreciate the narratives behind the buildings, protagonists of the ‘economic benefits’ might focus on how the trail can increase tourism and emphasize on how we can 'link the heritage trail to the local economy'. A tourist seeking only surface value of beautiful pictures and cheap shopping might overlook the education and information factor in such trails.
However a definite benefit of the heritage trail was the preservation of sites. This idea and the ability to protect sites for the future is important not only for the Indian community but the general public so that our understanding of the past are retained, and future generations are able to make their own interpretation of heritage sites. This links with ideas about education on the past, and is an integral benefit to enlightening the general public to the history of Singapore.
No comments:
Post a Comment