Chaotic Disintegrate

Where chaos stops and more chaos ensues. Where Filia plays the electric keyboard.
Where anything goes.

-//o_O\\7 *Home of the Awful, Mediocre and Pathetic* -//u_u\\7

Wednesday, March 31, 2004

Finished, at last. That certainly took a long time ... but it was a week of distractions. By that, I meant that anything which would break me out of one craze to embark on another must be very distracting indeed. Anyway, as compensation for all those last incomprehensible ramblings (which shall be deleted in good time, fear not) I present a most considered and thought-out rant, which shall maintain its place on these daily postings ... unless it isn't bumped to a later date for any fitting purpose. Get it? Fitting? Haha ... oh never mind.

31st March, 2004 ... what does it mean to you? To many Singaporeans young and old out there, it will be remembered as a fateful day, a day when a place to enjoy oneself, to read, to research, to study, to engage in literary pursuits of some kind, was mercilessly and horribly erased from the face of Singapore. That's right, the National Library shut today. For good. You sad?
I'm fine, actually, because any feelings or sensitivity I had for the good old National Library kind of faded away after it was shut for a while to be refurbished. I refer to it now as the much depised Central Library, a place where lots and lots of books are that I will likely never get my hands on ... um, I mean, will have to go through a lot of bother to get my hands on, it being at Stamford Road and all instead of someplace nearby. And for some reason, the National Reference Library is located there (some very sensible reason, unfortunately ...), which means that the chances of finding a particular reference book there, instead of in your local library, are approximately 95%. Considering that most branch libraries have about 5 shelves of reference books and the Central Library has 95 of them ... as well as the central book storage for all those restricted material that aren't meant to be easily available to naughty, peering little kiddies browsing through the shelves. Okay, the hostility is unnecessary. For obvious reasons, I don't dislike the library, it's just that I'm not as emotionally attached as many other people. Of course, if you say that you hate the library most people will think that you are an illiterate heretic that deserves to be burnt at the stake. It's a wonderful place, and it's terrible that it has to go, but I'm not wading in tears over it.
Of course, I will remember for a very long time the distinctive architecture and layout of the beloved Central Library, and when it is eventually demolished it will certainly leave a scar on the sights of Stamford Road (not as if it is maimed enough already, with all the construction going on ...). But you only remember things ... and rant about them, when you realise it's the last chance. That's bad, friends. Feeling sentimental simply because it's the last chance to do so is merely proof that you never bothered to care on a consistent basis in the first place. I shan't commit that mistake, although of course anyone who does visit the central library regularly is welcome to voice their remorse ... not as if they need any instigation to do so.
If you're looking for sentimental humbuggery, et cetera, you can leave here. The rest of this is pure intelligent rationalisation. I am discontented at the demolishing of the Central Library, largely because of the way the government has handled the whole affair. I'm not saying the government shouldn't demolish it, if they wanted. Heck, we elected this government! If they did anything really unpopular, we could just vote them out (although, judging from the alternatives, that isn't the most intelligent thing to do). The government has the right to decree whatever they wish, no matter how unpopular it may be, simply because they have the power to.
Examine, however, the reasons the government gives for relocating the Central Library. Of course, bigger premises for our national libraries are always welcome, though if that was the only reason they could have simply added on to the existing infrastructure, constructed new stories or a new building adjacent to it altogether. Judging from the white elephants that are the National Museum, the Asian Civilisations Museum and the National Arts Centre (not too sure about the real names, but basically I'm referring to all those white-coloured, less patronised buildings nearby the Central Library). Utilising the land area for the construction of a new university is also yet another fallacious reason, since not only the aforementioned buildings, but the largely empty shopping districts around the massive construction site could be similarly amalgamated to form part of the new university's premises. And what justification is there for constructing a university right smack in the middle of the city, apart from the fact that construction work has already started on it? Either a foregone conclusion, or someone wasn't thinking straight when they first cut the turf for the Singapore Management University. In fact, the only legitimate reason for demolishing the Central Library building is the need for increased space for roads, for not only widening Stamford Road but extending it through the library premises to a new circuit around the National Museum (although I already dread seeing the sides of the National Museum, let alone the back of it), and as a connection to an underground tunnel which will form part of an enlarged network of expressways. And the land currently used for the construction of the SMU won't do ... it has to be the land of the Central Library. Point taken, accepted rather grudgingly by some, and greatly resented by others. With long term consideration of the road network in mind, the Central Library is an obstruction to the smooth flow of traffic.
Here, however, I list several obvious mistakes the government has made in opting for the demolition of the Central Library premises. For starters, the blatantly obvious error is in refurbishing the Central Library building, only to announce the demolition of it five years later, in the process wasting millions of dollars of taxpayers' money, money which could no doubt be spent better elsewhere or possibly even 'returned' to the public in the form of greater tax reductions. This clearly reflects a lack of long term planning or prioritisation among the members of the government responsible for this hideously unpopular decision. I'm not saying that the government of Singapore isn't entitled to make mistakes, but at least they ought to seriously admit that refurbishing the Central Library was a crucial error, instead of brushing it off with the excuse that it's a decision necessary to adapt to the New Economy, or the New Political Thinking, or whatever new-fangled hogwash political analysts are so fond of spouting. As I've said before, if you've made a mistake, admit it, and people will think you all the better for it. Or maybe they won't, but at least they'll know you're being honest. And what would the government of Singapore lose, except for contributing yet another issue for deboshed neighbourhood blokes to rant about while sitting at the void deck or at their local hawker centre? Electability? Credibility? Not a chance.
Secondly, we understand that the demolition of the Central Library is necessary for the expansion of the road network in order to ease increasingly strangled traffic flow in the city centre. Problem? What in the world is the government doing, commissioning the construction of a university right in the middle of a city centre bottlenecked with traffic snarls? Unless the SMU is planning on adding overhead walkways to allow their students to traverse the university and nearby buildings without taking a step onto the street (and they had better be wide walkways, mind you), locating a university in that location will do nothing to ease the tangled traffic situation, what with all the commuting of students and teachers. With easy access out of the question (mass transit not seeing any significant expansion in the area beyond existing networks), the only other plausible reason for siting a university right in the middle of the city would be to market Singapore as a 'University City' setting high standards in education. And how many other places can make such a claim? Cambridge and Oxford, that's how many, and to call these places 'cities' would be laughable in the eyes of any urban planner. And what's this about high standards? While Oxbridge boasts universities specialising in every aspect of academia, featuring the brightest of the bright from all around the globe, Singapore shall have ... ooh, economics consultants, political analysts, spin doctors, that kind of rabble that assaults civilised society all around the globe. I mean, not to dismiss these people, since they're obviously in the benefit of a university education, but specialising in a single area is certainly not a trait of a well-rounded university city. Even if one takes the small size of Singapore into account when considering what a 'city' is, doesn't the situating of the SMU in the middle of this 'city' shed some light as to what the government of Singapore considers the most important disciplines to be gained through university education? We have no choice but to shrug our shoulders and say how that's the way the government works ... it's a free market after all. Not to suspect the incorruptibility of Singapore's government, but it seems that the directors of SMU might have somehow won over the decision-makers, allowing their university to occupy such a prestigious place at the heart of Singapore. Unsurprisingly, I wish this new university the best of ill luck (myself being not in the comprehension of just what constitutes 'British' luck) ... each time I see a friend of mine, who is featured on the billboards advertising the new university, I'm tempted to voice my distaste for its construction. But what good will that do? The ground has been broken.
A last reason might just constitute exercise for the aspiring ranter and protestor in me, but does the demolishing of a building of national heritage for the expansion of the transportation network not constitute a rather disturbing mindset pervading Singapore's leaders? Productivity at any and all expense, and I don't disagree with it (heck, I agree utterly with it), and for the expedition of productivity an elaborate infrastructure is needed, infrastructure that includes an efficient network of transportation. Am I just being an unhappy environmentalist, or is the expansion of Singapore's already overgrown road network a sign that the government prioritises the ease of private transport over the efficiency and relative cleanliness of mass transit? So Singapore's roads are getting more crowded ... is expanding the road network the only solution? Sure, expansion work is being done on the current mass transit system, the number and quality of buses steadily (but surely, I exhort confidently) improving, as well as the introduction of more competition in the area of taxi services. The government has also imposed our famous system of Certificates of Entitlement and the Road Pricing system, both of which have become household words in Singapore and have been implemented by other countries across the world. But to expand a particular section of the road network, in the process sacrificing a building paramount to national heritage (not to mention one that is actually used and held dear by a large number of people)? It's a toss-up, and the free market dictates that sentimentality be sacrificed in the interests of productivity. If that is so, then I cannot dispute the government's decision, however, they ought to know that encouraging an increased traffic flow only exacerbates the problems it brings, and the expansion of the road network is only a short term solution. It's just the environmentalist (long repressed ever since my introduction to the education system) in me speaking out ... perhaps all that SimCity has done me some good after all? But the government has decided, and there is nothing we can do about it. Heh ... in fact, if it reversed its decision, more work would probably have to be carried out to redress the problems caused than to actually ignoring all the protests and go along with their plan. It's not the price of progress, that's just another clich? and banality the government throws in to make things sound a little sweeter. It's simply the manifestation of an unpopular decision carried out in a nation so entirely dependent on its government for direction it balks at the mere notion the government could do anything that was not in its interests.
I visited the Central Library for the last time, getting there at about 8pm (having left the house on a sudden surge of emotion at about 7.15pm), and proceeding to borrow two books before leaving again at 8.45pm. I don't consider it so much a visit offering the opportunity to sentimentalise and reminisce, as much as brigandery and pillaging in the form of grabbing ... er, borrowing whatever you can before it's gone (or more accurately, shipped off to Jurong Regional Library which I sure as hell don't ever want to visit in my life). I did not view any commemorative events or listen to any speeches, the closest I got to public events being myself doing my ardent best to avoid appearing on national TV, with all those television crews trawling about and fishing comments from unsuspecting readers. Souvenirs were on sale too, but since I don't believe in sentimentality the closest I got to one was a vertical mark across my borrowing receipt where the paper came out of the machine slightly folded (the station being the right one at the kids' section, by the way). I left early, as in, before official closing time, because I did not want to be caught in the insincere sentimentality that no doubt pervaded the library at 9pm. The newspaper reports that a group of people sang Auld Lang Syne at its closure, the song being one of the most hateful I have ever heard. In the process of eavesdropping (my specialty ... hehe) I also overheard some of the rather absurd plans of devotees of the Central Library. A couple wanted to hide for as long as they could at a corner of the National Reference Library, while another was persuading their children not to borrow their books immediately, hoping to wait until 9pm so that they could get their ticket recorded after the 'closing time' of the Central Library. Weird people, I say. If I missed anything by not staying back until the dying minutes, I'm not resentful, largely because I'm aware that there's some three million people out there in Singapore who also missed it, many of whom don't give a damn in the slightest, and I aspire to be one of them. I didn't meet anyone I recognised there ... if you wanted to be there, and want to know what you've missed, I guess you could ask me but I assure you there was nothing much special except an inordinate amount of people and noise (and several cheeky fellows taking photographs of a "no photography" sign ...). If you were there, then you were either hiding at some corner of the National Reference Library or I've never met you in my life.

Thus I conclude my rant. It will be staying here, so I hope you enjoyed it, because it's not going to be overwritten.
I'm aware that a large amount of this was written on April Fool's Day, but I assure you that I'm not joking about anything in this one. See the next post for my feelings about all this tomfoolery. Or, I suppose, you could presume that I was joking about all of it, in which case I challenge you to construct the argument which I had concealed behind the jokery of an unduly lengthy and elaborate April Fool's joke. Really. Let's see you try.

posted by Charlotte | 4:44 pm

Comments: Post a Comment

Disclaimer : The Slayers and Filia Ul Copt and all images thereof are the property of Hajime Kanzaka and Rui Araizumi. I don't own any of them, although if I had a choice I would want Filia ...
~//n_n\\7

Links

CURS

NationStates

FeministBioengineering
Gross Deutschland