Construction and Preservation of Heritage in Peng Chau

 

OUYANG Denian 53049835

 

Today, there is not much left in Peng Chau to remind one that this used to be an island once thrived for its industry. The relics of Sing Lei Hap Gei Lime Kiln Factory standing at South Bay and the boundary stone lurking in weeds, reflects the scale of the industry in the 19th century.  Based on the interviews we did with Peng Chau’ local neighborhood, no matter whether positive or negative the memory relevant to the industrial past is, the memories refer to the industrial past are still vivid. Those pieces of hardship and sweat, laugh and happiness partly constitute their collective memory, which bridge the past and present, providing a way of continuity. More significantly, it became obvious that it was important for the local people to record these memories, not at table or randomly chatting, but in their cultural territory and, where relevant, at the appropriate cultural site. Nevertheless, without proper systematic record, the intangible memory will become dusty wasteland like the tangible factory ruins. The current situation is that both tangible and intangible heritage of Peng Chau are in danger.

 

Some people may doubt that those ruins are not worthy enough to be preserved. However, local distinctiveness should not be limited to beautiful places, it is about details, patina and meaning, the things which create identity[1]. Place identity concerns those distinctive characteristics that historically more or less provide the place with a character[2]. Peng Chau’s industrial past characterize this fishing island as a self-sufficient community. Thus, even though Peng Chau’s people moved on after the industry decline, they still cherish the memory of industrial past when factories provide enough employment opportunities for most of locals to earn their bread. People appreciate difference and richness of places, especially when they are in danger of losing them[3]. At this moment, the nearly disappeared remains of industrial period, both tangible and intangible included, and the gap between the living quality of past and present, which generate a nostalgic feeling, all facilitate the construction and preservation of heritage in Peng Chau.

 

In the discourse of construction and preservation of heritage in Peng Chau, attentions are put on not only the tangible properties but also the sense of continuity and identity the place provides.

 

The relics can be viewed as the site of memory, provide a physical representation and reality to the ephemeral and slippery concept of identity. Based on Samuel (1994) and his theory about ‘theatres of memory’, the sites play a mnemonic role, more importantly, create a sense of occasion for those both passing on and receiving cultural meaning, knowledge and memories[4].  It was the use of these sites that made them heritage, not the mere fact of their existence. The distinctiveness of a place, is not simply rely on the elements within it, but how they relate to one another and how they link us with the past. The two-storied abandoned Lime Kiln factory is just lifeless barren land without certain connections people recall from the past. Uncle So (one of our interviewees, local residence and former factory worker) might know exactly how to protect the ruins of site, but he volunteered to prune the trees nearby to prevent the house from further damaging[5]. His action can be viewed as a proof that he feels an attachment or symbolic connection to this site: one of few survivors of factory buildings. Subsequently, the sites are important element to construct heritage, and it is the meanings attached to these tangible elements that provide a sense of continuity and identity[6].

 

Furthermore, the idea is not to preserve the past intact, but rather to conserve certain referents to the past[7]. The question is, what are these referents, and on what bases are they selected? According to Smith (2006), Heritage is a cultural process that engages with acts of remembering that work to create ways to understand and engage with the present[8]. Those cultural relics, which help us to recognize the historic development of a place or reflect the vicissitude of the society, are the certain referents of vital importance.

 

Heritage is not static; it is a process that while it passes on established values and meanings is new meanings and values generated[9]. Our currently construction and preservation of heritage in Peng Chau will also become history one day, but it is the history we involved, which we should cherish. Mrs Lee’s efforts on protecting the old factory building and relics, as well as her self-collection of remains of factory materials, add the vitality to the ‘wasteland’ and partly form the construction of heritage. Quote from Professor Siu Gwok Gin, ‘ The younger generations are taught to cherish, not to cherish the dilapidated walls of past, but to cherish what they are doing at present, which, after one hundred years, five hundred years, will be the history that they have engaged and witnessed.[10]’ Hopefully, more and more ‘Mrs. Lee and Uncle So’ will appear and promise a better future of Peng Chau’s heritage construction and preservation.

 

 

Reference

Common Ground. “Promotional Leaflet.” London: Common Ground, 1996.

 

Corsane, Gerard, Peter Davis, and Donatella Murtas. "Place, Local Distinctiveness and Local Identity: Ecomuseum Approaches in Europe and Asia." In Heritage and Identity: Engagement and Demission in the Contemporary World, 47-62. London: Routledge, 2009.

 

Deffner, Alex, and Theodore Metaxas. "Place Marketing, Local Identity and Branding Cultural Images in Southern Europe: Nea Ionia, Greece and Pafos, Cyprus". In Towards Effective Place Brand Management: Branding European Cities and Regions. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2010.

Heritage as a cultural process: Laurajane Smith, The Uses of Heritage, London and New York: Routledge, 2006

 

Prats, Llorenç. "Heritage According to Scale." In Heritage and Identity: Engagement and Demission in the Contemporary World, 76-89. London: Routledge, 2009.

 

Raphael, Samuel. Theatres of Memory. Vol. 2. London: Verso, 1994.

 

footnote

[1] Common Ground. “Promotional Leaflet.” London: Common Ground, 1996.

 

[2] Deffner, Alex, and Theodore Metaxas. "Place Marketing, Local Identity and Branding Cultural Images in Southern Europe: Nea Ionia, Greece and Pafos, Cyprus". In Towards Effective Place Brand Management: Branding European Cities and Regions. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2010.

 

[3] Corsane, Gerard, Peter Davis, and Donatella Murtas. "Place, Local Distinctiveness and Local Identity: Ecomuseum Approaches in Europe and Asia." In Heritage and Identity: Engagement and Demission in the Contemporary World, 47-62. London: Routledge, 2009.

 

 

[4] Raphael, Samuel. Theatres of Memory. Vol. 2. London: Verso, 1994.

 

[5] The Interviewee’s original words goes: “這個樓作為遺產現在沒人利用，我覺得可惜，就做義工，修剪枝條，讓房子不要那麼容易爛。” We accidently found Uncle So doing volunteer job together with another resident at the Sing Lei Hap Gei Lime Kiln Factory when we were doing site visiting.

 

[6] Corsane, Gerard, Peter Davis, and Donatella Murtas. "Place, Local Distinctiveness and Local Identity: Ecomuseum Approaches in Europe and Asia." In Heritage and Identity: Engagement and Demission in the Contemporary World, 47-62. London: Routledge, 2009.

 

[7] Prats, Llorenç. "Heritage According to Scale." In Heritage and Identity: Engagement and Demission in the Contemporary World, 76-89. London: Routledge, 2009.

 

[8] Smith, Laurajane. "Heritage as a Cultural Process." In The Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge, 2006.

 

[9] Smith, Laurajane. "Heritage as a Cultural Process." In The Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge, 2006.

 

[10] Prof. Siu Gwok-gin, in Ga-man Chan, "Destroy Ugly Historical Relics?" Ming Pao, 2014. Original words goes: “適當地保留，讓文物幫助我們看到整個城巿發展，看到演變。從發展經過，訓勉年輕人知道，前人在這個地方的居留，得來不易；讓他們珍惜，不是珍惜這些瓦片，而是珍惜他們今天所做的，在一百年後、五百年後，是今天他們有份寫、有份見證的歷史。” Translated by Jolie JIANG & OUYANG Denian