Bukit Brown - Oh what should we do?

Bukit Brown deserves bustle of life

By Andy Ho, The Straits Times, 3 Nov 2011

HORSE riders, bird watchers and dog walkers lament the fact that Bukit Brown will soon be re-developed.

Closed as a Chinese burial ground in 1973, tombs as early as 1833 can be found there. There are now plans to build a dual four-lane road through it from 2013. This road will cover an area of 24ha and affect about 10,000 of the reputedly 100,000 tombs spread over 86ha there. Housing is slated to come up only in another 10 to 15 years.

The largest tomb there - the double one of Mr Ong Sam Leong (1857 to 1918) and his wife - is 10 times the size of a three-room Housing Board flat. If a 40-storey block were built over it, the land it alone occupies now will yield living space for 400 households.

Individuals may have different values and these values can be incommensurable, but, to me, it is always wrong to sacrifice human interests on the Gaia Altar of Biodiversity - a main reason being trotted out by those vociferously urging that Bukit Brown be left pristine.

Space is always contested, all the more so on our little island. For me, humans will always trump flora and fauna.

As detailed in 'The remains of the dead' by Tan Boon Hui and Brenda Yeoh in Spaces Of The Dead (2011), edited by Kevin Tan, resistance to state acquisition of burial land in times past came largely from clan associations to whom cemeteries 'represented a major focal point for community-bonding'.

But clan affiliation is arguably a minor component of one's identity these days. Thus, even a clan cemetery would resonate little emotionally with many a (younger) Chinese here today.

Accordingly, Bukit Brown preservationists generally have no genealogical ties to those interred there. These heritage buffs just love its historical and cultural value.

To be sure, famous people like Mrs Lim Nee Soon, Mr Lim Chong Pang, Mr Chew Joo Chiat and Mr Chew Boon Lay are buried there. They did well in life and even now are immortalised in many a place, street or town name here.

If stones could speak, their tombstones and other artistic pieces can be preserved in a (geomantically favourable) corner of Bukit Brown. The whole space could also be preserved digitally, as indeed some have suggested.

But those touting the historical and cultural reason for preserving the whole site untouched assume without arguing for it that there is something sacrosanct about keeping every stone in its place.

Be that as it may, there was indeed something sacred about Bukit Brown - but only as long as it was functioning fully as a burial ground.

As Tan and Yeoh note, 'to the various Chinese sub-communities, the burial grounds were a sacred landscape of repose'.

Yet no space is intrinsically sacred.

When temples and churches are moved, it is the continuing worship by their faithful - comprising what may be termed a theo-drama - that makes their new spaces sacred.

Meanwhile, the old sites they occupied, which used to be sacred places, revert back to being profane spaces, fit utterly for bold redevelopment into sites useful to the living.

Cemeteries do not just house the dead but also serve as platforms for their related living to perform various religious rites and rituals of respect.

It is these culturally appropriate practices, if ongoing, that transmute mere burial spaces into sacred places for the living with ties to the dead.

In short, it is the living who make the dead's place of repose sacred for the living. But in another 10 to 15 years, very few will foreseeably come by Bukit Brown for the Chinese spring and autumn ancestral rites of respect and remembrance.

Most tombs there are now weather-worn and have obviously been neglected for a very long while, being overwhelmed by creepers and undergrowth.

There is no longer any living theo-drama here. Bukit Brown's sacrality has vanished. But if no longer a sacred place, it has no legitimate claim that only it can be the last place of residence for the specific dead interred therein.

Exhumed with care, respect and decorum, any remains could be housed in columbarium niches, which can become sacred if their related living come by again to worship.

No more a sacred place, Bukit Brown has reverted to being a profane space, by which I mean an open and neutral container to be filled by human activity. The unbounded space it has become connotes future possibilities.

It deserves to now be filled with the daily drama of the living instead. And for as many of us as possible, not just the elite given to the equestrian, ornithological or canine. Or heritage buffs.

Cemetery should make way for the living

THE leader of Taoist Mission (Singapore), Reverend Master Lee Zhiwang, states that preserving Bukit Brown cemetery also exercises filial piety towards Singapore's pioneers ('Taoist mission'; Tuesday).

But that is not the active and working understanding of filial piety, which is the practice of respecting and honouring one's parents while they are still alive; not when they are dead.

Preserving the cemetery will deprive the living in Singapore of a basic need they expect and deserve, which is comfortable housing.

Bishan was once a cemetery and so was part of Orchard Road, which is now a flourishing shopping belt and a key geographical icon of modern Singapore.

Dr Sam Kong San's alternative, which is to build a virtual Bukit Brown Cemetery, is the best way to document and preserve the site's history ('Build a virtual Bukit Brown if preservation is not an option'; Tuesday).

Another option may be to build a monument, like the war memorial remembering the victims of the Japanese Occupation.

Daniel Chia,
ST Forum, 3 Nov 2011

Taoist mission

'At least part of Bukit Brown Cemetery should be preserved.'

ST Forum, 1 Nov 2011

REVEREND MASTER LEE ZHIWANG, president, Taoist Mission (Singapore): 'As a religious, cultural and heritage group, our mission is not only to propagate Taoism, but also Chinese culture and tradition. It is vital to preserve Bukit Brown Cemetery because it contains a rich heritage which would be invaluable to Singaporeans. Preserving it also exercises filial piety to our pioneers. To support preservation, we recently took over the Keng Teck Whay building and the responsibility to restore this national monument which has been renamed Singapore 'Yu Huang Gong' Temple of Heavenly Jade Emperor. It was built about 170 years ago by a group of 36 Peranakan Chinese from Malacca. The grave of one of the founders was found in Bukit Brown and in time to come, we should be able to rediscover some other founders' graves in that area. Nevertheless, we understand that Singapore is land-scarce. If the area cannot be preserved in its entirety, at least part of Bukit Brown Cemetery should be preserved and efforts should be made to document the site's history and heritage.'

Build a virtual Bukit Brown if preservation is not an option 

I AGREE with Dr James Khoo when he describes the Bukit Brown Cemetery's gravestones as sculptural works of art and tablets of rich history ('Bukit Brown can be Singapore's Arlington'; Oct 24).

About 30 years ago, the Government required that all 100,000 graves at Peck San Theng Cemetery be exhumed to make way for the Bishan New Town development.

Apart from facilitating the affected families to work with HDB- appointed contractors on the exhumation, the Peck San Theng cemetery management committee formed a working group comprising 21 volunteers to document the graves of significance, including recording their title, location and erected date.

These were mainly clan graves, or resting places for the wandering souls who did not have family members to perform rituals of respect during the spring and autumn festivals.

The group spent more than a year combing through the 324 acre (131ha) cemetery, documenting and photographing a total of 291 clan graves.

This good deed led to the preservation of a complete and invaluable set of records on the lost Cantonese clan graves.

Two years ago, an examination of the photograph of the common grave for seven Cantonese heroes, collectively called 'Qi Jun Zi', clarified a century-old misconception about them.

Until then, the consensus was that these seven men had sacrificed their lives to protect the cemetery. Hence they had to be accorded respect during the spring and autumn festivals.

But from the gravestone of the seven heroes, we inferred that this common grave was transferred from another Cantonese cemetery and reinstalled at Peck San Theng in 1963.

More importantly, these men were killed in 1841, while Peck San Theng was established in 1870. Hence, the seven heroes were more likely to have sacrificed their lives to protect the interests of the Cantonese community during its early days, rather than to protect Peck San Theng.

This is only one example to illustrate the value of the gravestones. It would be best to preserve all the graves at Bukit Brown.

The second best would be to use the latest technology, something like Google Maps, to build a virtual Bukit Brown Cemetery to preserve the 'site' and literature of all the tombs of this historic place.

Dr Sam Kong San
FORUM NOTE: The writer was president of Kwong Wai Siew Peck San Theng, a columbarium that is managed by 16 Cantonese and Hakka clan associations.

ST Forum, 1 Nov 2011

Bukit Brown can be Singapore's Arlington

BALANCING the needs of development against conservation has always been a delicate act in this small island that is our home ('Keep Bukit Brown graves: Descendants'; last Wednesday).

However, our home is also our country and a country needs its memories.

Without Singapore's history and the stories of its leaders and pioneers - what they lived, fought and died for - the country will have no heritage and no soul - no spiritual sustenance. It will be much like the situation of an unfortunate rich man with Alzheimer's disease.

Our survival as a nation depends much on our spirit.

Bukit Brown is the most significant and important cemetery left, filled with memorial gravestones of many of our pioneers and ancestors. The gravestones themselves are sculptural works of art and tablets of rich history.

This estate is adjacent to MacRitchie Reservoir and part of this land can be considered as catchment area.

Can we not keep most of this estate as a memorial and heritage park, much like the Arlington Cemetery in the United States, for citizens who served Singapore with honour?

It can also be used for recreation while the rest can still be used for some development, as roads or homes.

The Conservation Advisory Panel visited this estate in 2009 and was told then that the consideration of the site would be left for the future generation.

Each time I drive under the Fort Canning tunnel, I wonder if the destruction of our old National Library building was worth it.

Once an important heritage site like this is lost, it can never be regained. Can we really afford to lose this priceless part of our history?

Dr James Khoo

FORUM NOTE: The writer was chairman of the Conservation Advisory Panel from 2002 to 2010 and the founding chairman of the Asian Civilisations Museum. He is also a former member of the National Heritage Board.

ST Forum, 24 Oct 2011

Bukit Brown: Room for some flexibility
Some requests can be accommodated but country's needs must prevail: Tan Chuan-Jin
By Yen Feng, The Straits Times, 6 Nov 2011

Bukit Brown will not be spared the bulldozers, but dismayed heritage groups and fans of the 89-year-old cemetery have at least some reason to cheer up now.

The good news: the promise of more room to manoeuvre when it comes to documenting the estimated 5,000 graves that will likely give way to a new road.

In an interview last week, Minister of State for National Development Tan Chuan-Jin said he would do his part to ensure that the affected graves would be documented in a thorough manner, even as the roadworks - slated to begin in 2013 - would proceed as planned.

'Dr Hui and his team will take the lead and work out the details, and we will support that,' said Mr Tan, referring to Dr Hui Yew- Foong, an anthropologist at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, who has been tasked by the Government to lead the cemetery's preservation effort.

There had been criticism that the Government should have consulted heritage groups before announcing the road plans. To that, Mr Tan said: 'We could have done better, a bit more of these conversations and briefings when we announced some of these things, maybe get more stakeholders, and earlier.'

The crux of his message - in his first media interview about Bukit Brown since the roadworks were announced on Sept 12 - appeared to be one of compromise. 'Going forward, we can do a bit more. I think that's quite doable,' he said.

Although Mr Tan, who is also Minister of State for Manpower, did not commit to specifics, heritage groups have in recent weeks made their wish list known publicly.

Top on the list is a re-alignment of the road, and more time for historians to document the graves; others include the storage, or relocation, of certain tombstones, and clusters of green areas to be kept as 'cemetery-parks'.

To these, Mr Tan was reluctant to say yes but he left the questions hanging, adding that he would consult Dr Hui on these matters.

On whether the road alignment could be altered if important graves are found to be in the way, Mr Tan said there would be 'some flexibility'.

He said that while he understood the public's desire to preserve what is historically meaningful, that desire must square with reality - that Singapore simply cannot afford to be overly sentimental when it comes to land.

Unlike countries like the United States, all of Singapore's needs - defence, housing, water catchment - have to be 'squeezed' into this tiny island.

'If I give up this space for this, it will be one piece of land less for something else... That's the reality that we need to contend with.

'The point is, how do we develop (land) sensitively,' he added.

It had taken the authorities three years to decide on the road at Bukit Brown, after throwing out more costly and complex alternatives such as tunnels and viaducts, he said. Plans to build the road were finalised only this August, and it was a decision not taken lightly, he emphasised.

In the coming months, Mr Tan said, he hoped the buzz about Bukit Brown will develop in constructive ways.

For its part, the Government would also work harder to engage the public sooner, and on more issues - although not on so many projects that policymaking 'grinds to a halt', he added.

'You can't always consult, but there is a lot of space that we can,' said Mr Tan, who has led talks with stakeholders of the Rail Corridor project.

'It will take longer... but I think you will get better-quality policies.'

He encouraged more people to come forward and work with the authorities in striking a balance between development and conservation for Bukit Brown, although he did not elaborate. 'I don't just want to listen, I am able to do something about it. Not everything, but quite a number of areas, I can.

'I think it will work out. I think it will work out okay.'

THE SAGA

May 30: The Straits Times (ST) reports that Bukit Brown has been earmarked for housing.

June 11: Responding to ST Forum writers expressing dismay, URA says Bukit Brown is needed for future housing, and that many such 'difficult trade-off decisions' are made in land-scarce Singapore.

Sept 12: URA announces dual four-lane road for Bukit Brown in 2013. Heritage groups say they need more time to document the graves.

Sept 27: Following more letters in ST, the LTA says the new road is needed to ease traffic in Lornie Road and serve the area's future road plans.

Oct 19: ST publishes a letter by descendants of famous pioneers, including Chew Boon Lay and Tan Tock Seng, who want Bukit Brown left alone.

Oct 21: Singapore Heritage Society issues a statement on how the group was not consulted over whether Bukit Brown should be developed.

Oct 24: Officials meet privately with heritage groups to explain the Government's reasons for developing a new road, and reaffirm plans to go ahead.

Oct 26: Heritage groups and the preservation project leader, appointed by the Government, raise concerns over insufficient time given to document the graves.

Nov 3: Minister of State for National Development Tan Chuan-Jin explains the reasons for developing Bukit Brown in a media interview.

Road through cemetery 'least impactful option'
By Royston Sim, The Straits Times, 6 Nov 2011

The Government could not consult the public on its road-building plans for Bukit Brown because it could lead to price speculation on local properties, said Minister of State for National Development Tan Chuan-Jin.

And it was a decision that took the authorities three years to arrive at, as it sought to find the least impactful way of dealing with increasing traffic congestion in Lornie Road, said Mr Tan.

One option was to expand Lornie Road, but that was ruled out, as cutting away trees for the widening would disrupt the ecological balance of MacRitchie nature reserve, he said.

Tunnels were a no-go as well, as building one using a cut-and-cover method would cause more damage than a surface road.

And tunnel-boring, the method used to construct MRT tunnels, has never been done on such a large scale here.

As for a viaduct, a stable platform would have to be built below before the structure could be constructed.

The cemetery would thus still be affected even if a viaduct was constructed in place of a new road.

The widening of Lornie Road in 2009 was a temporary measure before the authorities settled on a more permanent solution, Mr Tan said.

He noted that apart from Lornie Road, which has seven lanes, all other roads on the Outer Ring Road, a network around the city, have been expanded to dual four-lane carriageways.

The Land Transport Authority said there are between 6,000 and 7,000 vehicles an hour now using Lornie Road during peak hours. Traffic is expected to increase by between 20 and 30 per cent by 2020.