Published on Archlosophy on 25 May 2024.
Context
I’ve recently finished reading The Great Reclamation by Rachel Heng. It is a book about the changing landscape and modernisation of Singapore set during the transition years from the Japanese invasion, through British colonialism, and into early independence, through the lens of a boy growing up into a man. A coming-of-age story, it touches on the governance of Singapore in the 60s and prompts the reader to draw their own connections and interpretations between the past and present.
Singapore Songlines by Rem Koolhaas was written in 1995, part of his compilation in his manifesto titled S M L XL. In the essay, he talks about the development of Singapore since its independence in 1965. In the essay he covered much ground and themes that relate indirectly to the built environment of Singapore. I’ll be referring to both Heng’s and Koolhaas’s works in this essay through quotes between paragraphs.
I’m not sure if studying architecture or being away from Singapore for long has made me more sensitive to the built environment, perhaps it’s a combination of both. How is it that every year when I come back there would always be a building that is slated for demolition? This essay will question the attitudes towards Singapore’s built environment. If anything, this is just a scratch on the surface. I intend to revisit this next year (2025) with deeper analysis, new insights, and hopefully, a fresh perspective.
Reclamation Begins
In one of my Master studio courses, the project revolved around an Aboriginal theme. The site was located near the Cape Banks area in Sydney. To give a bit of context, the site used to be filled with scrubland, low-lying vegetation teeming with coastal flora and fauna. Development happened in Sydney and now a huge portion of Cape Banks has been converted into golf courses, a pistol shooting range, and a helicopter hangar. All these developments are not conducive to maintaining a healthy functioning habitat.
So in the proposal, I wanted to create a contrast in themes between the book that I’ve read and the studio project I was doing. In Heng’s book, Singapore expanded its island through land reclamation. In contrast, the proposal I had for the studio was also on the idea of reclamation, but reclaiming the land mankind has used for their reasons and giving it back to Nature, to Country… This would set the tone trajectory for the rest of the essay.
… uncontaminated by surviving contextual remnants, it is managed by a regime that has excluded accident and random-ness: even its nature is entirely remade. It is pure intention: if there is chaos, it is authored chaos, if it is ugly, it is designed ugliness; if it is absurd, it is willed absurdity. Singapore represents a unique ecology of the contemporary.
Koolhaas, Singapore Songlines, 1995.
Commercial Reclamation
In February 2023, the news mentioned that JCube, a shopping mall in the West of Singapore would be demolished to make way for a 40-story residential development. JCube was opened in 2012 and closed in 2023. It lasted 11 years. Before JCube was built stood Jurong Entertainment Centre; opened in 1993 and closed in 2008, lasting 15 years. JEC was demolished to make way for JCube. And now JCube will make way for J’den (yes that’s what the high-density mixed-use residential apartment will be called).
We may never know the reasons behind such a wasteful decision, but I have my suspicions. Maybe it’s as simple as Singapore needing more housing, and the land the mall was standing on was in the way. Another reason is the Olympic-sized ice skating rink that was not enclosed within the mall. Such a design would mean that the coldness needed to maintain the ice would dissipate into the rest of the mall, causing the cooling system to work doubly hard thereby consuming more energy. It’s a huge energy guzzler if you think about it- imagine not having a fridge door.
But how can buildings be sympathetic to their environment if there is no environment?
Koolhaas, Singapore Songlines, 1995.
Another reason is presumably Covid-19. Perhaps footfall never managed to hit pre-covid numbers which resulted in the mall’s eventual closure. All these are just speculation and it doesn’t detract from the fact that it’s still a wasteful decision. Talking about waste, I found some statistics on JCube. It was marketed as a green building, with energy savings of about 8,793,984 kWh/year and water savings of about 3,419m3/year. It was even awarded the Green Mark Platinum, the best category under the Green Mark Certification Scheme by the Building and Construction Authority. The scheme is a building rating system used to evaluate a building’s environmental impact and performance, among other things. It aims to promote sustainable design; best practices in construction and operations in buildings. JCube will be demolished after 11 years. What Green Mark Platinum?
Even the earth itself was deemed malleable, the constraints of geography surmountable. A coastline was identified, a cost-benefit analysis conducted, a decision made. The rest was execution.
Heng, The Great Reclamation, 2023.
It’s unfortunate, JCube was a place that I was fond of. Meetups with close friends tend to be in Jurong due to its proximity to a multitude of malls and food options. Nothing beats having a meal while watching people ice skate over a conversation. Now it’s a thing of the past.
Institutional Reclamation
In March 2024, the news mentioned that the Singapore Indoor Stadium would be replaced by an arena with better facilities. Designed by Kenzo Tange and built in 1989, the Indoor Stadium is arguably one of Singapore’s more important institutional buildings. It was built using unique construction techniques. When walking around the building I noticed many design elements that revolved around triangulation/ triangles, in line with the diamond-shaped profile of the stadium. Everything was considered and designed. Small scale to big. From the doorknob to the building’s envelope. Streetlights, staircases, drop-off point, glass panels, ceiling reveals, lighting fixtures, etc. have similar motifs on them. Such meticulousness for detail at this scale is rarely seen in contemporary public architecture, which further underscores the importance of its preservation.
The new arena would host more sophisticated events and have greater flexibility and faster turnaround time. More hospitality suites and better seating. This would provide a better overall experience for visitors.
Singapore’s Minister for Culture, Community, and Youth had this to say, ‘The hosting of high-quality international events is valuable. Our competitors are not standing still and we, likewise, must continue to innovate and evolve if we want to continue to attract top-tier events.’
Singapore represents the exact dosage of “authority, instrumentality, and vision” necessary to appeal.
Koolhaas, Singapore Songlines, 1995.
The firm (now called Tange Associates) even has a restorative arm on its website that looks after their ageing projects designed by Kenzo Tange himself. It’s called TangeDNA+. Executive Vice President Tomohiro Kimura highlighted the importance of looking after built buildings, ‘It is a big mistake to think that architecture is something that is finished once a building is completed. Just as humans require maintenance as they age, it is important to regularly maintain buildings so that they are long-lasting.’
Although I don’t like the way the firm has marketed the name of the restorative process (starchitect fetishisation), it is a good reflection on the stewardship of the firm being conscious custodians of the planet, choosing to preserve rather than demolish.
Conclusion
As you can see, I have heavily referenced and punctured Koolhaas’s and Heng’s works with my own experiences, but allow me to borrow one last quote from Heng’s book that succinctly describes Singapore’s past attitude towards national development.
Future over past, progress over stagnation.
Heng, The Great Reclamation, 2023.
Fill it up, he would say, pointing to the swamp and the sea.
Bury it.
Make it new again.
In my opinion, this attitude still persists today, after almost 60 years of independence. It doesn’t mean it’s wrong, but it doesn’t make it right either, especially when Singapore is trying to do better in its green initiatives. It’s sad that we can’t have nice things, only nicer things. It’s not even a question. There’s no room for debate.
Leave a Reply