Authority and Locality: Preserving Living Urban Heritage in Sijie, China

Authority and Locality: Preserving Living Urban Heritage in Sijie, China

Yingwen Tao 1

Authority and Locality: Preserving Living Urban Heritage in

Sijie, China

Yingwen Tao Department of Archaeology

University of Cambridge [email protected]

Keywords: multivocality; urban heritage; community; China

Abstract: Urban heritage preservation practice in contemporary mainland China, which stems from the large-scale inner city urban redevelopment of the 1980s, entails a highly monodirectional mode of communication from authorities and experts to the ‘public’ and thus often sidelines local communities. The paper aims to explore the interaction among different actors involved in the formal planning system. It applies insights from urban geography to the heritage study of historic urban landscape preservation, drawing on research in China, including my fieldwork in Sijie. The article concludes that attention to multivocality in heritage preservation can yield insights into how spatial meanings can be understood more equally at the intersection of the past and the present.

Introduction Since the early 1990s with the opening up of China, the expansion of the real estate sector as well as the entrepreneurial re-orientation of urban governance in contemporary Chinese cities has led to the prevalence of property-led urban redevelopment (Hyun, 2010). This often results in the demolition or gentrification of traditional neighbourhoods. Property-led conservation has become a tool for local authorities to accumulate political capital and obtain profit—while local inhabitants are increasingly marginalized and excluded from their homes and neighbourhoods. This paper first critically reviews the major preservation approaches adopted in urban heritage preservation in China. Based on the case study of Sijie historic quarter, the paper examines the way in which different actors, such as planners, heritage industry professionals and community members with different identities, yield competing as well as overlapping narratives of place, which are of vital importance in preserving different dimensions of urban heritage. It concludes by proposing a bottom-up living heritage approach that would coordinate the different actors and safeguard the neighbourhood as a living heritage site.

1. Multivocality and urban landscape preservation in China Whether concerned with the built environment or other heritage practices, the key issue always has been: who gets to define historic environment/heritage. Since the birth of urban renovation in contemporary mainland China, it has entailed a highly monodirectional mode of communication from authorities to the ‘public’ and thus often sidelines other actors of heritage preservation. When the central Communist government decided to locate its new capital in Beijing, the Maoists adopted the plans provided by Soviet advisers that stated that the new government administrative headquarters ‘should be established within the old city walls through the utilisation and renovation of existing structures’ (Sit 1995:93). In turn, they overrode the objections from a group of local architects who argued that the ancient walled city of Beijing should be preserved by locating the new administrative

YOUNG ACADEMICS NETWORK


Yingwen Tao 2

headquarters outside of the historic core. The historic spatial grid of the capital was consequently adapted to suit the requirements of the new Communist regime (Bray, 2005:127). In 1965 when the first railway system was constructed in Beijing, the government chose to follow the route of the ancient walls. The decision resulted in the irreversible demolition of the walls as well as the nine historic gates of the city.

The 1980s saw the opening up of China to the world after three decades of isolation. Since then urban renewal schemes in China have moved increasingly towards international modes of practice and embraced multiple facets of heritage. Today, three major approaches of ‘reconstructing’ or ‘preserving’ historic urban landscape prevail- the construction of faux historic streets [fangujie], gentrification and values based approach – which each denote different scales of social inclusion.

Profit-driven projects which aim to create tourist attractions by rebuilding no-longer-existing heritage sites have been increasing in popularity with its strong capacity of attracting tourists (Jia, 2007). In the case of Qianmen Street in Beijing, the demolished lanes [hutong] were replaced by the newly reconstructed Qianmen Gate and faux historic streets [fangujie] (Ruan, Wang & Wang, 1999:125). The ‘reconstruction’ scheme called for the commercialisation of the whole area and thus led to the relocation of local low-income families. Although recent imitations can produce a physical simulacra of the destroyed past and contribute to local tourism incomes, it can never restore the broken social network which destruction and reconstruction entail.

(Re)constructed structures are regularly criticized as simple replicas without any historic value (see Xia and Wang, 2010; Wang, 1999; Wang, 2010), for many, preserving old buildings in situ is a better alternative. Historic quarters which normally consist of deteriorated structures with a high-density population first started to become gentrified through rejuvenation practices in Shanghai Xintiandi at the beginning of the 21st century (Shui On Group, 2004). This process was subsequently replicated across China after the commercial success of the Shanghai case. However, only the ‘old bottle’ of urban heritage remains while the original ‘wine’, the established communities, has been drained and replaced by wealthy buyers. As residents from the higher social strata displace former residents (Wang and Lau, 2008:57), the evictions have caused social fragmentation particularly among relocated elderly residents who find it difficult to adapt to life in other neighbourhoods.

In comparison to the reconstruction and gentrification approach, the values-based made a great leap in recognizing multiple stakeholders of a heritage site and acknowledging ‘all values attributed to a place and the physical or living resources that best represents these values’ (LeBlanc, 2010:8). This approach was promoted in China by the Getty Conservation Institution which applied it in the Principles for the Conservation of Heritage Sites in China (Getty Conservation Institution, 2004). It has subsequently been adopted in the Pingjian Street Project in China through the revitalisation of local intangible heritage and preservation of community network (see Lin and Ruan, 2010). Theoretically, all stakeholder groups, or interest groups (Getty Conservation Institution, 2004:3), are supposed to be given equal status when the values-based approach is applied. Yet, heritage expert’s opinions are normally given primacy in practice (Liu, 2006). Protests organised by local residents have exposed its weaknesses by arguing that the professionals acted arrogantly and indifferently towards demolished heritage sites in ongoing values-based preservation projects.

2.Authority and locality: the case of Sijie Through the shift from a ‘(re) construction’ to a ‘values-based’ approach, it is apparent that safeguarding the built environment as well as the intangible elements that produced the environments is now considered worthy of preservation in China. The boycott of the ongoing values-based project demonstrates that complete preservation of urban heritage can be better achieved through a bottom-up approach highlighting the issue of multivocality (Cheuk, 2013) instead of prioritising professionals’ opinions.

2.1 Unpacking the Master Plan of Sijie Sijie (Figure 1) is a historic quarter about to undergo redevelopment in Nantong (southeast China). It covers 69, 751 sq. kilometres with a population of 4, 625 (Master Plan, 2011:32). It consists of an outstanding assemblage of wood-framed vernacular buildings dating back to the 9th century. Community members residing in Sijie have formed a social network that is unique to this traditional neighbourhood. Together, its tangible and intangible elements constitute a ‘living’ heritage site (Poulios et al. 2009). In the Republican Era of China (1911-1949), the main street was dotted with blacksmith’s workshops, embroidery stores and traditional street food stalls. Today the slow tempo of


Yingwen Tao 3

life in Sijie stands in sharp contrast with the rapid-pace of the rest of Nantong (Figure 2). Automobiles are left outside of the neighbourhood due to the narrow alleys and retired senior residents play traditional card game together along its narrow alleys. Historical wells drilled in the 19th century are still operational and remain important sites of female social interaction as housewives gather to dry their clothes under the sun in shared courtyards.

Figure 1: Map of Sijie. (1) Top left - Location of Jiangsu Province in China (Googlemaps 2012), (2) Bottom left - Location of Nantong in Jiangsu Province (Googlemaps 2012), (3) Bottom Right - Location of Sijie in central Nantong (based on Googlemaps 2012). The boundaries of Sijie (at the top left of the map) are marked with dashes.

Figure 2: A group of senior female residents chatting in Sijie (photo taken by Yingwen Tao, 20 March 2012). A rare scene seen in modern neighbourhoods in Nantong.


Yingwen Tao 4

The Nantong Planning Bureau (NPB) published the Sijie Master Plan in 2011, which provides a compelling example of the way in which the authorized narrative of urban reconstruction envisions heritage space. The document views each structure, whether old or new, in its physical as well as historical context rather than simply evaluating it as an isolated object (Figure 3). The NPB has made the decision to completely preserve the 18th century urban spatial layout of the neighbourhood. The document additionally highlights that the restoration of traditional buildings in Sijie, will be employed to sustain the aesthetic qualities of the built environment (Master Plan, 2011:15). Although new structures will be built in order to revitalize the district, the decision to emphasise aesthetic continuity will encourage developers to build in the traditional style. When constructing new green space and squares, they will avoid introducing ‘alien forms’ and materials that would erode the traditional landscape (Master Plan, 2011:12).

Figure 3: Plan of Sijie (Master Plan, 2011:56). The area marked in yellow will be reserved for residential purposes, whilst the areas marked in orange, green and red will be transformed into ‘cultural clusters’, recreational zones and commercial areas.

Although the Plan aims to establish a comprehensive approach to preserve this unique urban heritage site, it fails to do so. Most chapters of the document repeat the rhetoric and focus on the aesthetic and built environment. Six out of the seven ‘most important objects to protect’, that the document defines, have not changed since the first edition of the document. These include the former dwellings of well-known intellectuals, religious buildings, and structures with ‘outstanding architectural character’ (Master Plan, 2011:12).

The bureau added a separate list of ‘intangible heritage’ practices to protect which is a great leap forward (Figure 4). Yet, most of the residents I interviewed were unfamiliar with the types of intangible heritage listed. On 14 March 2012, Nantong TV posted a call to ‘Collect the Old Memory of Nantong’ (Figure 5) on its local online forum in response to the Sijie redevelopment scheme (Haobin Forum, 2012). There is no overlap between the list produced by the forum and the one produced by the planners. Nearly 68% of the online replies list traditional street food vendors in Nantong, while the


Yingwen Tao 5

bureau’s list focused solely on the ‘serious’ cultural phenomenon such as religion and artistic performances and remains based on expert opinion of what to preserve and consequently overlooks the voices of the citizens.

Figure 4: A collage of the intangible heritage of Sijie designated by the NPB (Master Plan 2011)

Figure 5: A collage of Siije’s heritage as identified by selected replies to the post ‘Collecting the Old Memory of Nantong’ (Haobin Forum 2012).

There are currently 4, 625 residents living in Sijie. In order to lower the population density in the area, 1, 190 families will be relocated to reach the ‘ideal’ – as defined by the Master Plan— population size of 1850. However, the document emphasised that in reality the project will only relocate 450 residents as the population figure includes renters temporarily residing in Sijie (Master Plan, 2011:21). A manager of a government-owned corporation specialising in commercial real estate affairs in Nantong sighed and explained to me:

‘We know the size of relocated residents now, but who shall we move? It is naïve to describe it as a simple task because you ignored what is hidden behind the data. The parents of officials with bureaucratic power live in the district. The relatives of well-known intellectuals live in the district. Those


Yingwen Tao 6

who moved out of the district but keep the property rights still want to exploit the resources nearby due to its location at the city centre. We say that it is important to promote good conversation and further establish a transparent system. But it is impossible to build a utopia which can satisfy everybody as the Master Plan depicts [itself to be]. Injustice and overwhelming power is everywhere.’ (Zhang Xing, 26 March 2012)

His statement touched upon the ‘dark side of planning’ (Flyvbjerg, 1996: 383), which implies that it often has negative impacts on marginalized communities. A Master Plan is more than a blueprint for urban redevelopment and heritage protection. It channels the flow of capital and defines who can live in a particular place (Zhang, 2006:467). Whilst the redevelopment scheme which currently exists in the form of a Master Plan only emphasises the number of people who will be relocated, the marginalization of low-income residents seems to be inevitable. Although the document argues that the project will ‘meet both the need of commercial development and community improvement’ (Master Plan 2011:5), it is not clear how it will meet the needs of all local residents.

2.2 Multivocality in Sijie Those visiting Sijie as tourists might be surprised to mainly see groups of senior citizens sitting around in narrow alleys, cracking melon seeds and chatting about their grandchildren. Over 70 percent of local residents (labelled as ‘long-term residents’ in my research) I interviewed in Sijie were over 65 years old, and a majority of them have resided there for over 40 years. The ‘empty nest syndrome’ (Long and Martin, 2000:311) is the norm in Sijie and thousands of other historical quarters which have yet to undergo redevelopment in China. Adult children ‘leave the nest’ due to the area’s decaying facilities.

Migrant workers (labelled as ‘short-term residents’) seeking low-priced rental accommodation have moved into the properties vacated by the middle-aged inhabitants of the area. More than 50 percent of these migrant workers I interviewed have resided in rented accommodation in Sijie for three years. The majority (88 percent) of the interviewees migrated from relatively impoverished areas such as Anhui and Sichuan Province in search of the higher incomes available in Nantong which is a prominent port city.

A cognitive mapping exercise was undertaken as part of a series of semi-structured interviews. The exercise yielded 53 cognitive maps displaying the interviewees’ perspectives of the meanings of Sijie as both a residential area and heritage site. A total of 25 cognitive maps were produced by short-term residents while 28 were made by long-term residents. I sought to analyse how each group perceived key features such as landmarks, paths and districts which form the basis of mental maps (Lowe, 1983:29)

Nearly 68 percent of the interviewees began their map by illustrating the location of their house (23 long-term residents and 13 short-term residents). When asked why she started by drawing her house, Xu Yi, (see Figure 6) a 62-year-old retired teacher replied:

‘I did not even realize it until you mentioned it. It might just be an unconscious behaviour. Perhaps it is because I am most familiar with my home and the area around [it]. Since then my retirement has centred on the interaction between me and my old friends in the neighbourhood.’ (Xu Yi, 27 March 2012)


Yingwen Tao 7

Figure 6: Drawn by Xu Yi. The black dot identified the location of her home.

However, short-term residents tended to use public buildings as their starting points, e.g. the post office (see Figure 7) and the Nantong Middle School. Wang Ming, a Shopping Mall security guard who moved to Sijie two years ago, explained why he began his map by drawing the post office:

‘I hesitated about how to illustrate Sijie at the beginning because I just moved in. Two years is far from [long] enough to become fully familiar with the area. Maybe you can easily find the way out, but the maze of these narrow alleys really keeps confusing me. I follow the same route to work and pass the post office twice every day. To me it is the entrance and exit of Sijie.’ (Wang Ming, 5 April 2012)

Figure 7: Drawn by Wang Ming. The black dot identified the location of the Post Office.

The composite map (Figure 8) compiled from the sketch maps drawn by the interviewees, show the frequency with at which various landmarks (interviewees’ dwellings excluded) in Sijie were identified. The 8th- century Tianning Temple and the 14th- century clock tower are frequently drawn by both the groups. The interviewees’ interest in the sites not only derived from their outstanding historic values, but also from their spatial locations at the entrances of Sijie.

Although the interviewee groups both showed interest in historic buildings, the long-term residents paid more attention to less-known heritage sites ‘hidden’ inside Sijie such as the Tongzhou Female Teacher Training School (now a residential house). They were more familiar with both the architectural and social network of the area than the migrants. Liu Dehai, a retired factory worker who identified the building as a landmark, explained that a resident residing in the building was one of his close friends with whom he played changpai (a traditional card game popular in Nantong).


Yingwen Tao 8

Figure 8: A composite map of Sijie. Routes and landmarks drawn by the interviewees are identified in the map. The frequency with at which various landmarks were noted is identified. It can be observed that the interviewees paid great attention to the buildings at the entrances of Sijie. However, most of the less-known heritage sites such as former dwellings of intellectuals were mentioned by the long-term residents rather than the short-term residents.

Complicated street networks composed of narrow alleys is one of the most important characteristics of a traditional Chinese urban district (Ruan et al, 1999:12). To the short-term residents, this network became a barrier to their mapping of Sijie. This was caused by the problem of ‘wayfinding’ (Lin, 2010:224) in the maze of traditional Chinese intersecting streets. The problem was represented on the maps by the short-term residents’ random distributions of buildings connected by the wrong alleys or unconnected by any route.

Sijie is not bounded by a wall. The only way to define the boundaries of the neighbourhood is to follow the distinction between the traditional vernacular buildings in Sijie and the wide boulevards dotted with skyscrapers which surround the neighbourhood (Figure 9). Several open-ended alleys constitute the entrances of Sijie. On their maps, the short-term residents emphasized the routes and buildings which served as the ‘gatekeepers’ of Sijie such as the post office and the Tianning Temple. Common ground can be found between the community members and experts regarding the conservation of individual historic buildings and the identification of routes in Sijie.


Yingwen Tao 9

Figure 9: The division between Sijie and the modern primary school situated to the east of Sijie. (Photo taken by Yingwen Tao, 3 March 2012)

Paths connect landmarks and other landscape features; together these elements constitute districts. Starting with their homes, 15 out of 23 long-term residents tended to sketch the space in front of their houses in detail while none of the short-term residents did. The ‘key door’ space (see Figure 10) is a typical characteristic of vernacular dwellings in Nantong. In order to minimize burglaries, the entrances of residential buildings were usually located in a relatively covert position on a sub-alley; each entrance is shaped like a traditional Chinese key (Master Plan, 2011:35). Though these spaces gradually lost their original functions, they remain primary sites for social interaction. ‘The point is about sharing, sharing the public space together, sharing our lunches together in one dining room’. (Liu Darong, 26 March 2012)

Figure 10: The ‘key door’ space of Liu Darong’s House. The shaded area ressembles a traditional Chinese key.

The short-term residents, in comparison, illustrated the barbershops they frequented, the post office they passed every day, the heritage sites at the ‘gateways’ of Sijie, and the shopping mall outside the area. They forged a sense of place centred on their own personal life rather than on the social interaction between them and their neighbours. Yet, a sense of place has been developed over time


Yingwen Tao 10

within the group. Many short-term residents residing in Sijie for less than two years tended to focus on a larger area which extended over the border of Sijie. In comparison, the interviewees residing there for more than three years depicted more details within the neighbourhood itself (see Figure 11).

Figure 11: The map (left) drawn by Ge Xiaodong, a construction worker residing in Sijie for one year, and the map (right) drawn by Zhang Qin, a postman residing in Sijie for three years. The mark on the left identified no landmark, while the map on the right identified both landmarks and routes connecting the landmarks.

Heritage is not only past-based but also present-centred. It is created and shaped, in response to the demands of the present (Graham and Howard, 2008:13). As such, certain individuals or groups perceive heritage through a series of lenses such as class, wealth and personal history. In the case of Sijie, heritage sites not only serve as landmarks on routes, but also contribute to the building of a sense of place. In comparison to the Nantong Planning Bureau which concentrates on the scientific or historic values of heritage, the residents pay more attention to the role that heritage plays in their daily life. The interviewees deepened their understandings to Sijie over time, by recognizing designated heritage sites as route markers, gradually including less- known sites as part of their socio-spatial network.

3. Living heritage preservation and social inclusion Living heritage refers to ‘a manifestation of people’s spiritual and physical needs in a given space and time, which continues to influence the life of specific communities’ (Wijesuriya, 2007:60). The living heritage approach is a community-based approach which seeks to empower communities to enable them to set their own agenda, make their own decisions and manage their own cultural heritage whilst meeting their current needs (Poulios et al, 2009:26). The term living urban heritage site in this research is precisely defined as a historic quarter which is still in use by community members whose way of life constitutes the intangible aspect of the site. In living urban heritage sites the tangible and the intangible are inseparable. The former refers to the natural setting and spatial layout of the site, including individual historic buildings that constitute the layout, whilst the latter is not solely limited to intangible heritage rooted in the quarter such as traditions and performances, and can be further extended to the emotional connection with heritage that is developed by residents residing in the area through generations.

3.1 Defining core-community As the living heritage management approach is a people-centred approach, it is important to demarcate ‘core-community’. A core-community normally refers to a group of residents living locally and sharing emotional associations with a place where heritage is located (Poulios et al, 2009:43). I propose that Siije’s core-community consists of long-term residents, short-term residents who have developed a sense of belonging to the community, and teenagers residing or studying in the area.

In the case of Sijie, the term ‘core-community members’ can be applied to the residents who have developed a sense of belonging to Sijie as a ‘living heritage site’ rather than solely a residential neighbourhood. The long-term residents form the backbone of the core-community and act as the caretakers of Sijie as a heritage site. Unlike their counterparts who tended to call the landowners for building repair, these retired senior residents conserve the traditional buildings by continuing to


Yingwen Tao 11

practice simple repairs such as changing roof tiles and mending timbers eaten by termites. Due to their deep commitment to the area, a protest against the proposed gentrification scheme for Sijie was organised by the long-term residents in 2009.

As the relatively ‘young’ generation in Sijie, the short-term residents fill the age gap in the community caused by the relocation of middle-aged long-term residents. Although many short-term residents only recognised the heritage sites in Sijie as physical landmarks, those residing in Sijie for over three years have gradually developed a sense of belonging to the community and participated in many community. As the municipal government has gradually implemented Residence Permits which allows migrant workers with stable jobs for over six months to enjoy equal welfare since April 2012 (Nantong Government, 2012), the government now uses the term ‘new citizen’ instead of ‘migrant worker’ to refer to the short-term residents in its documents since July 2012 (the HURC, 2012a). In August 2012, a great number of the short-term residents volunteered in community building programmes such as hanging posters about building a ‘new Nantong [joining in hands with new citizens]’ in Sijie (the HURC, 2012b).

Students enrolled in the schools located in Sijie, e.g. the Nantong Middle School and the Shiyan Primary School, often get involved in community activities although they may reside elsewhere in the city. The Nantong Middle School has run a voluntary programme since 2001, aiming to help retired senior citizens whose adult children have moved out of Sijie. The voluntary work includes regularly visits the senior citizens’ homes, cleaning and chatting with them. Although many of the migrants consider themselves to be alien to the community, their children have forged a bond with the neighbourhood by participating in local activities. Along with students studying in local schools, the youngest generation does experience a sense of connection with the neighbourhood that their parents lack; the youth have become the third ‘pole’ of the core-community.

The living heritage approach is not only concerned with physical changes to heritage but also with the ‘invisible’ changes which affect traditional life. Thus coping with change is the key issue in terms of the process of sustaining cultural continuity. Introducing descendant communities (Singleton and Orser, 2003) could be useful in tackling the problem. In the case of Sijie, some core-community members who have already developed an emotional connection with Sijie may face the fate of relocation due to the high population density in the area. Most of these residents could be short-term residents without home ownership or long-term residents without political power. In addition, the middle-aged long-term resident already relocated were previously community members of Sijie just as the youth contemporarily studying or residing in the area. Many of them regularly revisit their parents in Sijie. It can help to maintain cultural continuity of Sijie by considering these people as the descendant community and working in partnership with the core-community members who would stay in Sijie.

3.2 The Urban Residents Committee: a cohesive core In the Chinese context, urban heritage management falls into the remit of either the Division of Construction or the Division of Culture (Wang and Zhu, 2006:40). Each division is represented at central, regional, municipal and borough government levels. At the municipal level, a range of bureaus like the Nantong Planning are in charge of various aspects of heritage such as redevelopment planning, project construction and community organization. There is fragmentation within the system, however. Each institution merely focuses on its own specialized affairs. The system thus lacks a strong cohesive core to act as the connection between the local government and community. In order to encourage a bottom up approach, I argue that a reformed Urban Residents Committee is the best choice as the connection between the local government and community.

Initially developed in 1949, the Urban Residents Committee [chenshi jumin weiyuanhui] (the URC) is a ‘mass organization for self-government at the grassroots level, in which the residents manage their own affairs, educate themselves, and serve their own needs’ (State Council 2005:31). The Haoyang Urban Residents Committee (the HURC) was initially developed in June 2002. As the URC administrating Sijie, the only remaining historic quarter in Nantong, the Committee emphasizes the need of building a ‘community with a great sense of culture [renwen shequ]’ (Chongchuan District Government, 2011). It is made up of two groups: 14 staff members elected from the community or appointed by the local government, and over 100 civic representatives of the community. They provide a wide range of services which cover almost every aspect of the local populations’ daily needs such as sanitation, health care and employment consultation.


Yingwen Tao 12

In April 2012 the HURC launched a series of activities highlighting the relationship between the past and the present of the area (Nantong Wang, 2012), such as essay competition, a photography contest and a film contest, which offered local residents a chance ‘to re-explore the district we are living in by connecting the past and the present together’ (Yuan Yunzheng, 1 April 2012). Unlike the Master Plan which focuses on the ‘serious’ heritage phenomena such as former dwellings of outstanding elites, the HURC plays a significant role in uncovering popular narratives of Sijie as a living historic quarter and welcomes every community member to document and depict their own vision of Sijie. The three-dimensional living heritage site was thus revealed from a variety of angles. The complicated social network deeply rooted in Sijie has also be revealed.

Coordinating between different actors, the community representatives facilitated the mapping for the Sijie redevelopment scheme. It was these representatives that knocked at the doors of the local residents and introduced them to the officials from the Planning Bureau. Living in Sijie for several decades, they are trusted and respected by the local residents who depend on the representatives to help them solve problems such as family disputes. The HURC organizes quarterly meetings with these representatives, usually before traditional festivals such as the Spring Festival. During these meetings the staff members report to the representatives about recent community work and future plans.

However, it has been widely argued that the URC system, as many other administrative systems in communist China, represents a paternalistic type of neighbourhood organization (Lu and Li, 2007). Closer examination reveals that the façade of the ‘self-governmental’ nature of the HURC is false as the funding is strictly controlled by the local government. All the mentioned heritage programmes were promoted and directed by the local government. Communication is not always efficient. The director of the HURC was totally unaware of the details of the Master Plan (2011). In addition, although the HURC effectively assists the government with its detailed knowledge of local affairs, it is not able to fully convey the residents’ opinions to the government.

A reformed HURC is thus necessary for the future of Sijie. Firstly, if it could become be financially independent, the HURC as well as the community would better maintain the social continuity of Sijie in the future preservation by innovatively organizing relevant community cultural programmes. The creation of a community fund can be helpful in this sense. Second, as most of the core-community members only have a very basic knowledge of architectural preservation, the HURC can enhance their understandings of heritage conservation by regularly organizing relevant workshops. The workshop can arrange various themes in order to target different age ranges of the core-community members. Third, the HURC could play a cohesive role in defining and sustaining the core-community in Sijie before and after the redevelopment. The HURC could develop a contact list before the possible large-scale relocation and thus invite the descendant members and relocated core-community members to come back and engage in community activities.

Conclusion From (re)construction to the values-based approach, the China is trying to recover from the loss of traditions through the salvage of heritage that is still preserved. However, as heritage has gradually become a buzzword in China in recent five years, people residing in historic quarters are increasingly aware of their own heritage, and are willing to safeguard it. Today, urban heritage preservation is no longer just a business of professionals. It is time to let core-community members gain the right to be heard and taken seriously. Sijie is amongst thousands of historic quarters waiting to be redeveloped in China, which all have URCs. Developing a living heritage approach which emphasises the role of core-community members not only as custodians but also as creators of heritage can help to cope with potential loss of traditions caused by relocation. By having a local URC working as an organization for self-government in the community, Sijie has the potential of democratizing heritage management at the local level. The approach proposed in this paper has a chance to be successful not only in Sijie, but also in many other cases in China.


Yingwen Tao 13

Bibliography

Baillie, B. (2006), Conservation of the sacred at Angkor Wat: further reflections on living heritage. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 8: 122-131.

Baillie, B. (2010), The Wounded Church: War, Destruction And Reconstruction of Vukovar’s Religious Heritage. [unpublished PhD thesis], Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge.

Baillie, B., Poulios, I. & Wijesuriya, G. (2009), Living Heritage Handbook. [unpublished], Rome: ICCROM.

Bing, A. (2012), 谁给阮仪三们拆毁桃花坞旧建筑的权力？[Who authorized Ruan Yisan to destroy the historic buildings in Taohuawu], [blog] 17 July 2012. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4a34d53501014lsa.html 20120717 [Accessed 3 August 2012] (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Bray. D. (2005), Social Space and Governance in Urban China: the Danwei System from Origins to Reform. California: Stanford University Press.

Chen, M. & Gu, Y. (2007), 江苏南通聘请市民规划师 [The Nantong Government has invited the citizens as consultants of urban planning]. The Yangtze Evening 4: 15.

Chen, Y., Q. Yao, P. Zhao & Sun, M. (2002), 寺街历史文化街区保护 [Protection and reconstruction of the Sijie Historic District]. Journal of Nantong Institute of Technology (Social Science) 18: 63-6. (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Cheuk, Y. (2013), Bargaining demolition in China: A practice of distrust. Critique of Anthropology 33: 412–28.

Fitzjohn, M. (2010), The use of GIS in landscape heritage and attitudes to place: digital deep maps. In M. L. Sorenson & J. Carman (ed.), Heritage Studies: Methods and Approaches: 237-52. London: Routledge.

Fullilove, M. T. (2004), Root Shock: How Tearing up City Neighborhoods Hurts American, and What We Can Do about It. New York: Ballantine Press.

Getty Conservation Institution. (2004), The Principles for the Conservation of Heritage Sites in China. CA: Getty Conservation Institution.

Graham, B. & Howard, P. (2008), Heritage and Identity. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Haobin Forum. (2012), 作为南通人，您对寺街的印象 [What is your memory of Sijie as a Nantonese],

[online] 8 March 2012. http://bbs.0513.org/thread-1560309-4-1.html [Accessed 12 June 2012] (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Haoyang Urban Residents Committee. (2012), 新市民积极参与南通文明行动 [New citizen actively participated in building a new Nantong], [online] 7 August 2012. http://www.chongchuan.gov.cn/Department/qzfbm/showDetial.aspx?id=299b3e81-5a4f-4481-9ce0-d890cdf2baa4&colId=327dc793-3780-4929-9f99-06f97d4fd46d [Accessed 15 August 2012] (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Haoyang Urban Residents Committee. (2012), 关爱流动妇女，共建平安家园 [Care floating women and build a peaceful home], [online] 25 July 2012.

Herzfeld, M. (2009), Evicted from Eternity: the Reconstruction of Modern Rome. London: University of Chicago Press.

Holston, J. (1989), The Modernist City: An Anthropological Critique of Brasilia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. http://www.chongchuan.gov.cn/Department/qzfbm/showDetial.aspx?id=46637c23-ff8b-4adf-b5e8-1e86d39aca76&colId=327dc793-3780-4929-9f99-06f97d4fd46d [Accessed 15 August 2012] (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Hyun, B. S. (2010), Urban conservation and revalorization of dilapidated historic quarters: the case of Nanluoguxiang in Beijing. Cities 27: 43-54.

Jia, H. (2007), 中国历史文化名城保护通论 [The Preservation of National Historic Cities in China]. Nanjing: Dongnan University Press. (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Jokilehto, J. (1999), A History of Architectural Conservation. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. LeBlanc, F. (2010), What is heritage? - And introduction to values-based management. In Hiroshima-

UNITAR, Series on the Management and Conservation of World Heritage Sites 2010, [online] 15 July 2010. http://www.icomos.org/~fleblanc/projects/2007-FLB/p_flb_2010_UNITAR_Hiroshima.pdf [Accessed 18 July 2012]

Lin, J. (2010), The Power of Urban Ethnic Places: Cultural Heritage and Community Life. New York: Routledge.

Lin, L. & Ruan, Y. (2006), Conservation planning and practice for the Pingjiang Historic District of Suzhou City. Urban Planning Forum 3: 45-51.


Yingwen Tao 14

Lin, Y. & Shen, M. (ed.). Ming Dynasty (1573-1620), 万历通州志 [Wanli Tongzhou local gazetteer]. In 天一阁地方志集成 [Selected Ming Local Gazetteers in Tianyige Collection], Volume 10. Reprinted by Shanghai Classics Publishing House (1981). (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Liu, C. (2006), State and social capital accumulation: the politics of Neighborhood Council system in Shanghai. Chinese Public Affairs Quarterly 2: 225-67.

Long, M. V. & Martin, P. (2000), Personality, relationship closeness, and loneliness of oldest old adults and their children. The Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences 55: 311–19.

Lowe, J. & Pederson, E. (1983), Human Geography: an Integrated Approach. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Lu, H. & Li, J. (2007), 中国城市居民委员会工作的比较研究：上海与沈阳 [Exploring the role of Urban Residents Committee in China: Shanghai and Shenyang]. Social Science 6: 59-61. (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Nantong Planning Bureau. (2009), 南通市寺街历史文化街区改造规划 [The Master Plan of Sijie]. Nantong: Nantong Planning Bureau. (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Nantong Planning Bureau. (2011), 南通市寺街历史文化街区改造规划 [The Master Plan of Sijie]. Nantong: Nantong Planning Bureau. (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Nantong Wang. (2012), 小记者拍寺街，留下城市档案 [The primary school students took photos in Sijie in order to document the old memory of Nantong]. [online] 12 April 2012. http://www.zgnt.net/content/2012-04/12/content_2033154.htm [Accessed 21 August 2012] (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Nantong Wang. (2012), “寺街印象”主题活动启动 [A serious of heritage events ‘Sijie Impact’ were launched in Sijie], [online] 17 April 2012. http://www.zgnt.net/content/2012-04/17/content_2036096_6.htm [Accessed 5 July 2012] (Translated by Yingwen Tao)

Poulios, I. (2010), Moving beyond a values-based approach to heritage conservation. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 12: 170-85.

Ruan, Y. Wang, J. & Wang L. (1999), 历史文化名城保护理论与规划 [Regulation on the Protection of Historic Cities, Towns and Villages]. Shanghai: Tongji University Press.

Shui On Group. (2004), Introduction of Shui On Group, [online] 15 April 2004. http://www.shuion.com/eng/SOL/pptdev/xin.asp [Accessed 19 July 2012]

Singleton, T. A. & Orser, C. E. (2003), Descendant communities: linking people in the present to the past. In L. J. Zimmerman, K. D. Vitelli & J. H. Zimmer (ed.), Ethical Issues in Archaeology: 143-52. Walnut Creek, California: AltaMira Press.

Sit, V. F. S. (1995), The Nature and Planning of a Chinese Capital. Chichester: Wiley. Wang, F. (2010), 南京历史文化街区保护 [The protection of historical and cultural blocks in Nanjing].

Shanxi Architecture 36: 26-7. Wang, J., Siu. S. & Lau, Y. (2009), Gentrification and Shanghai’s new middle-class: another reflection

on the cultural consumption thesis. Cities 26: 57-66. Wang, S. (2009), 徘徊的灵魂 [The Wandering Soul]. Shanghai: Zhongxin Press. Wang, X. & Zhu, H. (2006), 中外文化遗产资源管理体制的比较与启示 [A study on comparison and

analysis of Chinese and foreign cultural heritage management system]. Journal of Xi’an Jiaotong University (Social Sciences) 26: 40-3.

Wijesuriya, G. (2007), The restoration of the Temple of the Tooth Relic in Kandy, Sri Lanka: a post-conflict cultural response to loss of identity. In Price, N. S. (ed.), Cultural Heritage in Postwar Recovery: 87-97. Rome: ICCROM.

Wikimap. (2012), Location of Nantong City 31°59′N, 120°54′E, [online] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ChinaJiangsuNantong.png [Accessed 2 July 2012]

Xia, Y. & Wang, Y. (2010), 从重置到重生：居住性历史文化街区保护分析 [From the replacement to the rebirth: the protection of the living authenticity preservation of the residential historic blocks]. Urban Sociology 17: 134-9.

Zhang, L. (2006), Contesting spatial modernity in late-socialist China. Current Anthropology 47: 461-84.

Authority and Locality: Preserving Living Urban Heritage in Sijie, China

Documents

Transcript of Authority and Locality: Preserving Living Urban Heritage in Sijie, China