5 - (Answer to AQ - Provided by 24-14) Cultural Heritage - 2013 CULTURE COMPREHENSION

HIGHER 1 GENERAL PAPER (8807/01) Application Question-Setting Exercise (Report done by Yap Way Shen Russell, Tan Zhilong Gabriel, Yeo Bock Chow Brandon, Koh Ting Yew, after feedback and input in class 24/14)

NYJC Prelims 2013: Culture Preservation 11.

In this article, Irina Bokova presents some arguments about the importance of cultural heritage. How valid are her observations to you and your society? [10]

EXPECTATIONS OF CANDIDATES: 

Candidates should appreciate the fact that Singapore is a young nation – cultural heritage



can disappear if it is not taken care of. Singapore government is also very focused on economic growth and this would mean that



valuable heritage may be lost. Candidates should also recognise that Singapore has a very diverse society with many ethnic groups, and so the preservation of cultural heritage has to take such diversity into



consideration. Cultural heritage involves infrastructure too, such as houses as well as celebrations of festivals and folk songs, etc. Eg heritage preservation of Chung Cheng High School gate,



gazetted in 2014 Food for thought: Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s home is regarded by many as a heritage spot, but Lee Kuan Yew wants his house to be demolished after he has passed away. What does this suggest about Singapore’s position with regard to cultural preservation?

BROAD ARGUMENTS BY BOKOVA: 

Destroying culture hurts societies in the long term; deprives them of collective memory



banks as well as precious social and economic assets (lines 13-14) We need renewed leadership to strengthen national capacities and awareness; enhancing



work with museums, customs authorities, police and art dealers (lines 31-33) The best way to protect culture is to make the most of it so as to prevent conflicts; to harness the power of culture to bring together and foster reconciliation (lines 55-57)

STAND: 

Her observations are valid to a large extent, in Singapore’s context.

EXAMINER’S COMMENTS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 (along the lines of Cambridge examiners’ comments!!) 1. The scripts for this application question deal with the idea of culture heritage and its significance on the Singapore society on the whole. Examiners were surprised to observe a polarisation of responses in scripts submitted by students of 24/14 for this passage. 2. It was duly noted that the stronger scripts often displayed the traits of a good Paper 1 essay – with a clear structure, clear arguments and factually correct examples to back up the various claims to support/dispute the author’s observations. 3. Examiners noted that the weaker scripts showed signs of flawed analyses, which was exacerbated by the poor and careless usage of the language, that often impaired the understanding of the answer. Examiners thus often found it difficult to interpret the various arguments put forth by these candidates. 4. It was surprising to note that some candidates displayed obvious difficulty in analysing the arguments despite the high significance that the Singapore government places on the idea of cultural preservation as a whole (i.e. construction of new museums, the Oxley Road house in which Mr Lee Kuan Yew once resided). 5. Examiners were heartened to observe good grammar amongst some candidates with occasional slips in language, sentence structure and subject-verb agreement. 6. Significantly weaker candidates showed little awareness of the question on a whole, frequently due to a misinterpretation of the given question and ended up giving very superficial analysis backed by evidence that were not factually correct. 7. Holistically, the quality of the answers has been steadily improving over the years and the teachers in Singapore should be commended for the upholding of the high qualities of the English Language over the years. 8. Examiners reiterated that the key for success in the Application Question, especially in this question

that

deals

with

culture,

clarity

and

coherence

triumphs

flair

and

sophistication. Marked by:

Yap Way Shen Russell, Tan Zhilong Gabriel, Koh Ting Yew

Point of Argument 1: Issue

Destroying culture hurts societies in the long term; deprives them of collective memory banks as well as precious social and economic assets

(lines 13-14) Note: This issue and the corresponding example can be argued in two ways (refer to Point of Balance 1). This argument is supporting the Stand/Explanation

stand that the government cares about the preservation of culture. Valid in our society because our government often focuses on economic growth in favour of cultural preservation However, the government has also given allowance for considering the

Examples

impact of having some form of cultural preservation (PoB). Bukit Brown cemetery was one of the pioneer cemeteries in Singapore, regarded by many as an important heritage site. It was destroyed in order to make way for the construction of an expressway. Government funding for arts and culture has continued to grow from S$541.4 million in 2012 to S$677.3 million in 2013, reflecting the government’s commitment to developing the arts and cultural scene and achieving ACSR’s vision of a nation of cultured and gracious people, at home with our heritage, proud of our Singaporean identity. PoB There was one particular instance whereby the government made a rare decision to U-turn on its policy of going ahead with prioritising economic progress over preservation. The biodiversity of Tanjung Chek Jawa on Pulau Ubin was spared reclamation after a public forum chaired by the URA (Urban Redevelopment Authority) in 2001. As a result, this marine landscape of coral reefs and biodiversity was spared destruction and

Evaluation

reclamation. It would seem that the government would rather sacrifice than preserve heritage sites in order to allow Singapore to benefit economically. However, the decision to destroy Bukit Brown Cemetery was not a simple one; there was a lot of debate as the government had to weigh the pros and cons of destroying the cemetery. Therefore we can conclude that the government does lend consideration to the preservation of heritage sites as they are important social assets for our society.

Point of Balance 1 Issue

Destroying culture hurts societies in the long term; deprives them of collective memory banks as well as precious social and economic assets (lines 13-14) Note: This issue and the corresponding example can be argued in two

ways (refer to Point of Balance 1). This argument is about how the government chooses to destroy culture in order to reap economic Stand/Explanation

benefits. Not valid in our society because our government often focuses on economic

Examples

growth in favour of cultural preservation Bukit Brown cemetery was one of the pioneer cemeteries in Singapore, regarded by many as an important heritage site. It was destroyed in order to

Evaluation

make way for the construction of an expressway. It would seem that the government would rather sacrifice than preserve

heritage sites in order to allow Singapore to benefit economically. Possible Rebuttal + However, the decision to destroy Bukit Brown Cemetery was not a simple Example

one; there was a lot of debate as the government had to weigh the pros and cons of destroying the cemetery. Therefore we can conclude that the government does lend consideration to the preservation of heritage sites as they are important social assets for our society. Government funding for arts and culture has continued to grow from S$541.4 million in 2012 to S$677.3 million in 2013, reflecting the government’s commitment to developing the arts and cultural scene and achieving ACSR’s vision of a nation of cultured and gracious people, at home with our heritage, proud of our Singaporean identity. There was one particular instance whereby the government made a rare decision to U-turn on its policy of going ahead with prioritising economic progress over preservation. The biodiversity of Tanjung Chek Jawa on Pulau Ubin was spared reclamation after a public forum chaired by the URA (Urban Redevelopment Authority) in 2001. As a result, this marine landscape of coral

Point of Argument 2: Issue

We need renewed leadership to strengthen national capacities and awareness; enhancing work with museums, customs authorities, police and

Stand/Explanation

art dealers (lines 31-33) Valid to our society as the cultural and arts scene in Singapore is constantly

Examples

being revamped, with new exhibitions introduced on a regular basis Singapore Art Museum repositioned itself as a contemporary art museum and the development of The National Arts Gallery Singapore (to be launched in 2015) which will have a strong focus on Southeast Asian and Singapore art from the nineteenth century to the present. Prominent recent exhibitions by the Singapore Art Museum include the return exhibitions in 2010 of Ming Wong’s 2009 Venice Biennale Installation Life of Imitation, APB Foundation Signature Art Prize 2011, Amanda Heng’s solo exhibition Speak To Me, Walk With Me (2011) and the Collectors Show and Singapore

Evaluation

Show We can therefore infer that Singapore regards cultural heritage as an integral part of our society. These exhibitions are very costly; the fact that the Singapore government is willing to work with the Singapore Art Museum to bring Arts exhibitions to Singapore on a regular basis shows the need for revamp in order to raise the awareness of cultural heritage among Singaporeans.

Point of Argument 3: Issue

Best way to protect culture is to make the most of it to prevent conflicts; harness the power of culture to bring together and foster reconciliation (lines

Stand/Explanation

55-57) Valid to our society as Singapore is a multi-racial and multi-religious society. There is a need to maintain peace and racial harmony to prevent conflicts

Examples

from occurring between people of different cultures. The racial riots in Singapore were started due to racial disputes between the various ethnic groups. Dozens of people were killed and countless more injured and these were disastrous consequences for Singapore. The government has emphasized on the need for racial and religious harmony through the various public campaigns. Racial Harmony Day is celebrated once a year to emphasize the importance of understanding and respecting

Evaluation

the cultures of all Singaporeans. It is extremely necessary for all Singaporeans of different races to live together in harmony in order to protect its people and prevent conflicts from arising. There are many cases where people in Singapore face the issue of racial tension, especially since people of different races live in close proximity to each other. (For example, many Indians make use of curry in their recipes. In places such as Housing Development Board (HDB) apartments, the cooking of curry will release an extremely pungent aroma. There are some people who cannot tolerate such a smell and this would result in racial tension. Likewise, void decks in HDB blocks are used by Malays for weddings, while it is used by Chinese for funerals. This might result in some racial tension between the Malays and Chinese.) It is extremely important for people of different races to understand the cultures respect one another in order to protect all Singaporeans and prevent conflicts from arising.