NOHA NASSER

Redefining heritage and identity in conservation

No longer is heritage led by a single view of what is of value for conservation. Multiculturalism brings shifting perceptions of what buildings and places mean.

Pagoda and V Tower, Birmingham

When considering the significance of heritage, culture has always played a significant role. Culture, as an expression of the tangible and intangible attributes of a townscape, has developed over time. These attributes are expressed in the physical inheritance imbued with social values. If culture is fundamental to our understanding of heritage – that is to say, those inherited places, objects and traditions that have special value for future generations as well as for the community today – it follows that an appreciation of the more recent cultural palimpsest to this nation’s built environment is paramount.

A journey through any of our large industrial towns and cities, such as Leeds, Bradford, Coventry, Birmingham or London, exemplifies a rich diversity of cultural communities where their everyday lives have shaped distinctive townscapes. Since the 1950s, large numbers of workers from the Commonwealth and other parts of the world settled in this country. The settlement process has seen the addition of new typologies and aesthetics in religious and community buildings; the internal and external adaptations of historical buildings; and the establishment of distinctive commercial zones. Recognising multiculturalism as a force for change in the built environment is yet another chapter in the heritage of this country. Why has it not been recognised as such?

The issue of redefining the meaning of heritage was discussed a 2006 conference sponsored by English Heritage, ‘Your Place or Mine’. There is growing recognition that traditional definitions of heritage have long been constructed to portray a national story of wealth and power. This is demonstrated in the selective nature of historical interpretation, in the preservation of stately homes, castles and churches, and in museums, tourist attractions, heritage centres and preservation areas. This rather exclusive appreciation of heritage has made it very difficult to accept the smaller, but nonetheless copious, contributions of the more mundane agents of urban change.

It is true that in the past 10 years or so heritage has been democratising, to include post-1950 listings, as well as the celebration of the industrial revolution’s ‘working-class’ stories as worthy of being told. Nevertheless, when it comes to multiculturalism, there are barriers at the essence of heritage and conservation principles. They relate to the question of conservation and identity, examined through the lenses of ‘historical interpretation’ and ‘imbued value’. There is disagreement over value judgements about what is ‘fitting and appropriate’ in an urban context.

Heritage, in the form of buildings and sites, is essentially the tangible remains of the past transformed

by how it is viewed. The act of historical interpretation seeks to convey a message about the past. Interpretation is how we choose to communicate a building or place, what themes or storylines we tell, and who we want to convey this message to. But these messages are ideological – that is, they are often messages asserted by the intellectual elite as a means of legitimating their position. Therefore, heritage and conservation are political; interpretation is inherently biased in constructing history. This raises the question of whose views are being represented. The relationship between nationalism and conservation has been particularly intimate. The past is used as a construct – an instrument to create a sense of belonging to a common place with a homogeneous identity.

‘A loss of memory means a loss of identity,’ declared Valuing our Heritage (English Heritage et al, 2007). ‘History, personally and collectively, tells us where we came from, and who we are. Interpretation is an important concept when heritage has up until now been forged by nationalist interpretations of the past. The dominant culture is based on a white, Anglo-Saxon and Christian identity, asserting ‘Englishness’. Tensions will undoubtedly arise when new settled cultures challenge these purist notions. Within

CONTEXT 102 : NOVEMBER 2007

the current climate, increased recognition of the contributions of cultural communities allows for the redefinition of purist interpretations. Now is the time to acknowledge that history is not fixed but changing. The emerging history of a multicultural country is yet another layer in the narrative of this country’s heritage.

Interpretation is not only the remit of the elite. The act of interpretation also applies to communities in their need to know their past as a psychological reference point. An examination of the nature of buildings and places transformed by cultural communities demonstrates an internal – and sometimes fraught – dialogue about self-identity. There is a propensity of these communities to change their past to suit their new context. Cultural references, traditions and symbols from their places of origin have found their way into the new context. Authentic cultural references evolved over centuries to create indigenous vernaculars are simply reproduced.

One way of explaining this phenomenon is largely as a politicised gesture, asserting an identity which resists appropriation by the dominant culture. What is represented, in sometimes grand statements of buildings and places, is an idealised and romanticised repertoire of signs and symbols. The references are recognisable by the people within these communities, but more importantly communicate a recognisable identity to the larger society. The question is: how authentic are these identities?

One way of arguing for authenticity is by understanding the historical conditions which have led to this type of response. Decisions to select key symbols of identity are underpinned by the placement of ‘value’ on these cultural references. Little is known of the relationship new communities have with the historic environment. To what extent do we understand how cultural differences bring different attitudes toward buildings and places? What are those values that give meaning and significance?

Within conservation, there is the understanding that ‘value’ is what generates significance and meaning, deriving from the quality of architecture or design, from historical significance, or from a combination of these attributes. Within these new communities, these values may differ, with more significance

associated with people, events, and activities. Even when considering new build, the choices of typology, built form and style need to be understood within the evolving dialogue of self-identity.

At first, design responses appear to value a purist repertoire of architectural language. Over time, however, as new generations emerge, the values may change to create more indigenous responses to context. The key point is that ‘significance’ is not to be judged by the intellectually superior, nor the ‘value’ in relation to what belongs to an English narrative. Rather, these concepts are generated as narratives of self-identity and form part of the settlement process. It is this historical process that is the source of significance and authenticity.

Today’s shifting multicultural society requires a rigorous redefinition of heritage to include values and interpretations of places that communities will leave behind for future generations. ‘England’s historic environment helps define our national identity,’ Valuing Our Heritage said. ‘It helps shape how we think about ourselves and how other people see us. It is the mix of old and new, our interest in our past and our confidence in the future which defines our nation today.’

That comment refers to a future that defines a nation today. If the future is a more multicultural, multi-faith society, national identity also needs redefinition. Townscapes are undergoing change by the cultural and creative force of multiculturalism. What is being left behind is an inheritance for their children and, ultimately, the nation. This emerging heritage needs to be seen as worthy of enhancement, protection and management, rather than as an imposition on an already established and exclusive national identity.

The problem lies in the debate around national identity which still retains its conservatism. This is demonstrated in the ‘politically correct’ approach to multiculturalism, disguised through equal opportunities policies for ‘minority’ groups. The sub-categorisation of society into those who belong to a homogeneous culture and ‘newcomers’ with their own cultures, reflects the challenge that multiculturalism poses to national identity. Why is this important to heritage?

In short, it is the recognition of society’s meanings

Left: The Shree Swaminarayan Hindu Mandir Gate in Neasden. This is the largest Hindu temple outside India.

Right: The Imperial Arch, gateway to Liverpool’s Chinatown

ram

CONTEX T 102 : NOVEMBER 2007

and, ultimately, social exclusion. Can a place undergoing regeneration accept its strata of heritage(s) in its quest for improvement and progress? Does selectivity in ‘value’ and ‘interpretation’ determine what is acceptable or not? This was a question posed in relation to Eastside in Birmingham – a 170-hectare site east of the city centre undergoing £16 billion worth of regeneration and investment. Within Eastside are two conservation areas designated to protect the fine urban grain of a mainly industrial heritage.

For a long time this area received very little investment. In the past 40 years, new cultural communities have staked a claim in the low-rent buildings in the area. A plethora of community centres, churches, shops, pubs and businesses occupy old buildings, and add interesting forms and activities to the area’s distinctiveness. Now, as big money is moving in to Eastside, these spaces are under threat. The threat is generated by the mismatch between the current image of Eastside as a gritty, industrial zone and what the city’s marketeers are constructing as a place for business and investment.

One cultural community which lays historical claim to the area (with a local community centre, church and a number of businesses) has shrewdly partnered the city to avoid the threat of being excluded from the regeneration process. ‘The Irish Quarter’ is now earmarked for investment opportunities by the city.

‘Birmingham is clearly the most cosmopolitan and culturally diverse city in Britain and has become a magnet for investment from all over the world,’ says John Edwards, chief executive of Advantage West Midlands. ‘The Irish Quarter is a shining and vibrant example of the investment opportunities that exist in the city of Birmingham.’

The question remains whether the only means of cultural communities surviving regeneration is through the marketing machine. Ultimately, the act of ‘interpretation’ and the placing of ‘value’ will be subject to the rigours of power, rather than a recognisable part of Eastside’s heritage. The other cultures in Eastside – the Chinese, Italian and Asian businesses – may not be so fortunate. Their fate is uncertain amid the rapid appearance of slick apartment blocks and offices. Time will tell whether these cultures will find a way to survive in the face of regeneration.

It is evident from the changing urban landscapes in English towns and cities that heritage and identity are conservation concepts in need of change to keep up with the demographic shift. No longer is heritage to be singly led by a top-down approach to identifying what is significant and of value for conservation. Multiculturalism is a significant moment in the history of this nation. It brings with it shifting perceptions of what buildings and places mean. At a time when English Heritage is finding ways of broadening its audiences, accepting more than one set of memories, identities and histories in our understanding of the past and present can lead to an evolving and shared future.

Noha Nasser is director

of the Centre for Urban

Design Outreach and

Skills at Birmingham City

University.

and values inherent in the built environment, as a whole, which make up a nation’s identity. If we are accepting the new, why do we retain ‘minority’ status for culturally diverse groups, and contest changes wrought by new cultures? In the quest to answer these questions, the conference ‘Your Place or Mine’ attempted to open the debate to encompass diverse personal views through creative grassroots projects, to listen to what communities value about the past and the stories they want to tell. This is a fresh approach to defining heritage as part of the everyday to include the local streetscape, social history, family lore and memories.

What does broadening the definition of heritage mean in practice? The answer is two-fold. First, recognising the fragility of conserving cultures in a commercial world. Second, ensuring that heritage regeneration is socially inclusive. In the past 20 years or so as we have moved to a service-based economy. Culture and heritage have in large measure been underpinned by tourism and market-led development to enhance the historic setting for leisure, business and inward investment. In this case, the townscape is seen as an economic asset rather than interlinked with the social fabric and living memories of its occupants.

Under the rubric of regeneration, heritage areas have gradually slipped out of the reach of local people as property values have risen, excluding locals from the places they hold most dear. Where local cultures have been preserved to some degree, they have often been sanitised through open-air exhibition to meet the tourist expectation. Culture becomes yet another commodity to be traded for the tourist pound. The commodification of culture is evident in places like the Balti Triangle in Birmingham, the Golden Mile in Leicester, Banglatown in London and Manchester Chinatown. Regeneration has led to the smartening up of these areas with pastiche streetscape and building adornments to appeal to the tourist ‘experience’.

How authentic are these processes of interpretation and value? The answer is not very. Skin-deep adornments detach these symbols of difference from their inherent meanings. Examples include reproductions of Chinese gateways and pagodas, or street furniture with Mughal references and colours. Conservation is more than the creation of themed cultural zones of pleasure and exoticism.

Regeneration is fraught with dangers of gentrification

CONTEXT 102 : NOVEMBER 2007

nrrg



		and, ultimately, social exclusion. Can a place undergoing regeneration accept its strata of heritage(s) in its quest for improvement and progress? Does selectivity in ‘value’ and ‘interpretation’ determine what is acceptable or not? This was a question posed in relation to Eastside in Birmingham – a 170-hectare site east of the city centre undergoing £16 billion worth of regeneration and investment. Within Eastside are two conservation areas designated to protect the fine urban grain of a mainly industrial heritage. For a long time this area received very little investment. In the past 40 years, new cultural communities have staked a claim in the low-rent buildings in the area. A plethora of community centres, churches, shops, pubs and businesses occupy old buildings, and add interesting forms and activities to the area’s distinctiveness. Now, as big money is moving in to Eastside, these spaces are under threat. The threat is generated by the mismatch between the current image of Eastside as a gritty, industrial zone and what the city’s marketeers are constructing as a place for business and investment. One cultural community which lays historical claim to the area (with a local community centre, church and a number of businesses) has shrewdly partnered the city to avoid the threat of being excluded from the regeneration process. ‘The Irish Quarter’ is now earmarked for investment opportunities by the city. ‘Birmingham is clearly the most cosmopolitan and culturally diverse city in Britain and has become a magnet for investment from all over the world,’ says John Edwards, chief executive of Advantage West Midlands. ‘The Irish Quarter is a shining and vibrant example of the investment opportunities that exist in the city of Birmingham.’ The question remains whether the only means of cultural communities surviving regeneration is through the marketing machine. Ultimately, the act of ‘interpretation’ and the placing of ‘value’ will be subject to the rigours of power, rather than a recognisable part of Eastside’s heritage. The other cultures in Eastside – the Chinese, Italian and Asian businesses – may not be so fortunate. Their fate is uncertain amid the rapid appearance of slick apartment blocks and offices. Time will tell whether these cultures will find a way to survive in the face of regeneration. It is evident from the changing urban landscapes in English towns and cities that heritage and identity are conservation concepts in need of change to keep up with the demographic shift. No longer is heritage to be singly led by a top-down approach to identifying what is significant and of value for conservation. Multiculturalism is a significant moment in the history of this nation. It brings with it shifting perceptions of what buildings and places mean. At a time when English Heritage is finding ways of broadening its audiences, accepting more than one set of memories, identities and histories in our understanding of the past and present can lead to an evolving and shared future.
Noha Nasser is director of the Centre for Urban Design Outreach and Skills at Birmingham City University.	and values inherent in the built environment, as a whole, which make up a nation’s identity. If we are accepting the new, why do we retain ‘minority’ status for culturally diverse groups, and contest changes wrought by new cultures? In the quest to answer these questions, the conference ‘Your Place or Mine’ attempted to open the debate to encompass diverse personal views through creative grassroots projects, to listen to what communities value about the past and the stories they want to tell. This is a fresh approach to defining heritage as part of the everyday to include the local streetscape, social history, family lore and memories. What does broadening the definition of heritage mean in practice? The answer is two-fold. First, recognising the fragility of conserving cultures in a commercial world. Second, ensuring that heritage regeneration is socially inclusive. In the past 20 years or so as we have moved to a service-based economy. Culture and heritage have in large measure been underpinned by tourism and market-led development to enhance the historic setting for leisure, business and inward investment. In this case, the townscape is seen as an economic asset rather than interlinked with the social fabric and living memories of its occupants. Under the rubric of regeneration, heritage areas have gradually slipped out of the reach of local people as property values have risen, excluding locals from the places they hold most dear. Where local cultures have been preserved to some degree, they have often been sanitised through open-air exhibition to meet the tourist expectation. Culture becomes yet another commodity to be traded for the tourist pound. The commodification of culture is evident in places like the Balti Triangle in Birmingham, the Golden Mile in Leicester, Banglatown in London and Manchester Chinatown. Regeneration has led to the smartening up of these areas with pastiche streetscape and building adornments to appeal to the tourist ‘experience’. How authentic are these processes of interpretation and value? The answer is not very. Skin-deep adornments detach these symbols of difference from their inherent meanings. Examples include reproductions of Chinese gateways and pagodas, or street furniture with Mughal references and colours. Conservation is more than the creation of themed cultural zones of pleasure and exoticism. Regeneration is fraught with dangers of gentrification

22	CONTEXT 102 : NOVEMBER 2007		nrrg