Entry details

Younghusband
Author

Younghusband

Date

December 15th, 2009

Tags

,

Comments

11 Comments so far.
Add yours.

Destroying Kashgar (to save it?)

KashgarOld Town sprawls behind People’s Square in Central Kashgar. The Han crowd in.

China Digital times features a photo essay of The Demolition of Old Kashgar from the French paper Le Monde. The old brick houses and streets have been declared vulnerable to earthquakes. The English translation of the accompanying article argues that the complete levelling of the town, rather than the clean up and protection of heritage buildings, shows that this is just another campaign in the war of cultural dominance between the Han and the Uighur. Human Rights Watch researcher Nicholas Becquelin sums it up: “… it is much easier to control the population in a modern city.” The NYT covered this last May as well.

During my trip to Chinese Turkestan in 2004 I visited Kashgar’s Old Town and took some (rather unworthy) photos myself. Check out the gallery to see some photos of:

  • Streets of Old Town
  • People’s Square and downtown
  • Yusup Has Hajip’s tomb
  • Sunday Market
  • Animal Market

Don’t forget to click on the IMAGE INFO in the bottom left corner of each pic for an explanation.

Comments to this entry

spandrell
December 15, 2009
1:52 pm
here is where I say good riddance

and Aceface cruficies me
tdaxp
December 15, 2009
2:25 pm
Definitely sad, though not unique in China. This summer when I tried to visit all of the major -si temples in Beijing, the Temple of the Moon was closed as it was now the base of a radio tower, the Temple of the Goddess of Silkworms appear to be some form of public housing, the Temple of Agriculture appears to be a spors-focused college, and the Temple of the Gods of Earth is a rather poor-quality recreation.
Thomas
December 15, 2009
4:49 pm
Not speaking to this instance specifically, but pushes at historical preservation more and more seem hollow to me. Perhaps this is because I live in the American south where pride of history is almost fetishized. Nearly every structure more than a few years in age has meaning to some group of people, or can be pointed to as an example of a particular architectural style or figures into local history. There was a push in my neighborhood a few years ago to save a blighted and decaying strip mall and the vacant lot next door because the city's largest disco club once occupied that space.

While it's hugely important to preserve the artifacts of our culture and history, it's also important to advance, culturally and economically, and in doing so, build new things.

Unfortunately, there's no workable litmus test for what has sufficient historical gravitas to be preserved or restored and what does not.
Curzon
December 16, 2009
5:38 am
Spandrell, care to explain? I think we're seeing only the beginning of a backlash to Hanification.

Thomas, sure, you can take historical preservation to the extreme, but that's pretty easy to remedy -- you can tear things down at any time, so while the disco example is absurd, generally speaking I'd tend to eer on the side of preservation, especially the older things are. Places like Saudi Arabia and China (and many others) are just awful in the way they are bulldozing and concreting their cultural heritage.
spandrell
December 16, 2009
10:09 am
I was just kidding.

If you want a serious opinion... nobody likes old cities being razed, it feels sad. About this being a purposeful attempt of the Chinese government to piss the Uyghurs, yeah I can believe that. It may also be an attempt to develop the city as a trade center with Central Asia and move tons of Hans there with time.

I don't see a backlash to Hanification going anywhere, what do you suggest is going to happen? Open Chechen style insurgency? I don't think anything else would cow Beijing.
Carl
December 16, 2009
2:34 pm
This type of behavior isn't limited to Uighur history. You'll also find in parts of China sections of the Great Wall being demolished under the authority of local officials as the rubble makes for good road surfacing, not to mention whole, historically-important neighborhoods in cities like Shanghai and Beijing bulldozed to make room for upscale apartment developments. Much like the environment here, historical preservation will always play second fiddle to constant, many times direction-less development.
Jing
December 16, 2009
3:04 pm
Curzon is wrong about the sinicization of Urumqi and a great many other things. The Uighurs in Urumqi are not being marginalized by the Han because the in truth they have always been the minority there . Urumqi was most recently a Mongolian city prior to the Dzungar's war with the Qing and their subsequent decimation due to war and smallpox. The Uighur population of the city are not natives in the Western sense of the word, but rather immigrants from further out west. Even before the Communist Revolution, Han Chinese were the majority population. After this years earlier riot, many of the Uighurs left the city for their hometowns. The Urumqi riot wasn't the result of the forced imposition of Chineseness on the Uighurs and their subaltern status, it was the result of a disaffected, distrustful, and crime prone minority lashing out in anger against "the Man".
Rommel
December 16, 2009
5:20 pm
Anybody got any theories as to why some cultures or nations (i.e. the examples given) place such little value on their architectural heritage?
I'm not saying this is a bad thing as every society has gone through periods of development where the old buildings were leveled to make way for the new (19th century Paris)
It does strike me as curious about China though, a nation where people's sense of self is often tied up in their familial or communal history. Its obviously not an East-West thing as I've been told Iran, among others, has gone to great lengths to protect its historical architecture.
yippo
December 20, 2009
11:43 pm
I think the stories about bulldozing old buildings in china is exaggerated in the western media, i think they are mostly written to jab the chinese government.

For comparison, you never hear about reports about the bulldozing of old buildings in Japan which is probably worse than in China. Most tourists to Kyoto, which was spared of bombing during WWII because of its cultural and historical significance, describe the city today as a concrete mess.
http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2986

I don't know why people think Iran is especially good at protecting its historical architecture, Wikpedia diagrees:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Tehran
yippo
December 21, 2009
12:23 am
And people say tokyo is ugly too
http://forum.japantoday.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4463&start=0&sid=687a4a6e502ca40aa82c5a1b9696e3c9
Aceface
December 22, 2009
7:33 am
"For comparison, you never hear about reports about the bulldozing of old buildings in Japan which is probably worse than in China."

Not really sure it's "worse than in China".but the truth is
a)It's been reported.I've done it a few times in Ueno and Yanaka area.
b)There weren't much "old building" in Tokyo to speak of in first place since most were demolished in Great Kanto Earthquake 1923 and Great Tokyo Air Raid in 1945.
c)Any destruction caused in Tokyo is being conducted by the Japanese themselves and usually conducted in democratic manner.Not so in China.

"in truth they have always been the minority there" "Urumqi was most recently a Mongolian city prior to the Dzungar's war with the Qing "

Empire of Dzungar was indeed an Mongolian empire,but also multithnic empire.East Turkestan was only conquered by Dzungars in 17th century and if my knowledge is correct,Mongolians(let alone the Hans) were never the majority in the cities,but Uyghurs were.