e-magazine arsitektur. ruang 08|2014 Vol.2: Preservasi (Aksi)

0 8 | 2 0 1 4
PRESERVASI
V O L U M E 2 : A K S I
RUANGkreativitas tanpa batas

2
”Preservasionis” adalah seseorang pragmatis yang sadar akan tugas ”waktu” untuk memakan
umur sebuah bangunan atau kebudayaan, sementara ”konservasionis” adalah seorang
romantis yang ingin menghadirkan sisa masa lalu dalam kemasan yang baru. Dua-duanya
harus sadar dengan apa yang dilakukan serta konsekuensinya terhadap kota, arsitektur, serta
penghuninya.
Setelah “Abstraksi” menawarkan konsep, nilai, atau pemahaman tentang ”Preservasi”,
kini ”Aksi” akan membuka pencarian, aktualisasi, dan implementasi dari nilai-nilai tersebut
melalui tujuh buah kontribusi. ”Aksi” akan dibuka oleh Kenta Kishi yang akan berbicara
mengenai “preservasi” sebagai hak dan representasi identitas mayoritas pada wajah kota
lewat “The Rightfulness of Preservation”. Kemudian hal-hal teknis mengenai aktor, biaya dan
fungsi terkait sebuah warisan arsitektur kolonial, khususnya benteng, akan dibahas dalam
“A historic legacy, former Forts in Indonesia today” oleh Cor Passchier. Restorasi (konservasi)
bangunan dan kawasan kolonial yang dapat membentuk identitas sebuah kota akan dibahas
oleh Johannes Widodo lewat “Conservation in Singapore”.Adapun solusi alternatif melalu
strategi urban akupuntur untuk mengaktivasi kawasan KotaTua yang telah mati, diusulkan
oleh Diana Ang dan Daliana Suryawinata lewat “Event Space as a Solution for Kota Tua
Jakarta”. M. Ichsan Harja Nugraha akan mengilustrasikan beberapa ide intervensi Budi Lim
dalam upaya mengaktivasi KotaTua.Yusni Aziz kemudian berusaha menggali realita arsitek
konservatoris di Indonesia dalam artikelnya “Mencari Arsitek Konservatoris”. ”Aksi” akan
ditutup oleh sebuah pencarian dalam usaha mempreservasi arsitektur tradisional dalam
“Yori Antar: Perjuangan untuk Nusantara”.
Pada akhirnya, seperti seleksi alam, yang bertahan dan terus dimaknai akan tinggal, yang lain
akan menjadi reruntuhan bahkan terkubur dalam-dalam. Kita sendiri yang akan memaknai
preservasi. Dan pada gilirannya, apa yang seseorang preservasi akan memaknai dirinya
sendiri, begitupula apa yang dipreservasi di kota akan memaknai penduduknya.
“If you don’t know where you’ve come from, you don’t know where you are.” (James Burke)
Selamat menikmati ruang | kreativitas tanpa batas
ruang arsitektur
PEMBUKA
RUANG

3
the rightfulness of
preservation
Kenta Kishi
intervensi budi lim
untuk kota tua
M. Ichsan Harja Nugraha
a historic legacy,
former forts in
indonesia today
Cor Passchier
conservation in
singapore
Johannes Widodo
event space as a
solution for kota tua
Daliana Suryawinata & Diana Ang
mencari arsitek
konservatoris
Yusni Aziz
yori antar:
perjuangan untuk
nusantara
Yusni Aziz
ISI vol.2: Aksi
lukisan
esai
esai
esai
esai
esai
wawancara
RUANG
editor:
ivan kurniawan nasution
mochammad yusni aziz
web-blog: www.membacaruang.com
tumblr: ruangarsitektur.tumblr.com
email: akudanruang@yahoo.com
twitter: @ruangarsitektur
segala isi materi di dalam majalah elektronik ini adalah hak cipta dan
tanggung jawab masing-masing penulis. penggunaan gambar untuk
keperluan tertentu harus atas izin penulis.
Lukisan pada sampul depan oleh Sri Suryani
Lukisan pada sampul belakang oleh M. Ichsan Harja Nugraha

4
edisi #8: Preservasi. volume 2: Aksi
Pintu masuk dari sisi utara Plaza Fatahillah, anta
sejumlah karya seni dan monu
- Moch. Ichsan

5
ruang | kreativitas tanpa batas
ara gedung Kantor Pos dan Gedung Jasindo, dengan
umen berlantai kaca di tengahnya.
Harja Nugraha -

‘R i g h t f u l n e s s o
Rightfulness and Two Questions
In many case of ‘preservation’ in the city, there are controversies of the application of
‘rightfulness’ as fundamental condition required for the attitude towards preservation, as well
as its implementation. As such, the ‘rightfulness’ needs to be answered by many ‘questions’,
for example,“what can be preserved?”,“why it needs to be preserved?” and “how it should
be preserved?”.
However, in order to understand the ‘rightfulness’, we need to identify the nature of those
questions. One of the ways is by categorizing them into two broad types. Some related to
‘the questions about meanings’ (for example, “What is the preservation?” and “Why do
we preserve things?”).The others related to ‘the questions about values of instrument and
purpose’ (for example, “What is the purpose of preservation?” and “What benefit can be
expected by preservation?”).
In the‘questions about meanings’, we can recognize diverse types of question asked in order
to construct a common vision of a city.For example,in the context of urban (re)development,
people will ask about the meaning of ‘preservation’ based on their own experiences and
interpretations of the history of the built environment. However, in reality, the ‘questions
about values of instrument and purpose’ are more often asked. It is practical.And it seems to
represent the desire of the ‘majority’ in the society who shares similar identity and interest.
Nevertheless, the bases of such questions are opportunistic, i.e. how much contribution and
benefit that preservation can give to the ‘majority’.
When historical buildings and/or urban spaces are recognized as social resources by the public,
memories and experiences are celebrated nostalgically in order to reinforce the‘rightfulness’
of the majority’s identity.At the same time, the ‘rightfulness’ will also be recognized as a tool
to generate benefits for the ‘majority’. Preserved landmarks/landscapes, and its nostalgic and
glorious images, will create opportunity to (re)develop its surrounding areas, while expecting
new and massive influx of people and money from outside the area.The answer for the
‘questions about values of instrument and/or purpose’ in urban preservation acts as medium
that directly connects the majority’s identity and their economic activity.Yet, such premise
does not considering to find an alternative definition and meaning of preservation.As such,
the notion of the ‘right preservation’ today can be understood as a realization of ‘theme-
parked identity’. However, we must imagine and discuss possibilities of alternative concept of
the ‘rightfulness’ in urban preservation.

f P r e s e r v a t i o n’
Some references should be introduced. One example is the redevelopment of shop-houses
area in Chinatown in Singapore that re-applies colorful paintings on building facade and
constructing huge weatherproof canopies in between buildings. For Chinese descent citizens
who are the actual majority of Singapore society, such attitude is accepted as the ‘right one’
that reinforces majority’s identity and brings economic advantages.This also supported by
tourists as global consumers. However, for minorities who are not sharing same background
and behavior, such preservation project seems to propose ‘empty urban space’ where none
of them able to project their identity onto it. Another example of the ‘right’ preservation
could be found in small local cities in Japan. In order to revitalize economically depressed city,
an idea of “Retro-Town Program” is applied into the planning strategies of redevelopment
project.The effort to revive urban environment is supported by ‘rightfulness’ for majority,
but minorities, such as both foreign and domestic migrants and recent generations, perceive
difficulties to maintain and sustain this ‘someone else’s history’. In fact, they are the ‘prisoners
of unreal past’.
Through understanding above references, we can recognize a similarity between practical
way of preservation that answers the ‘questions about values of instrument and purpose’
and ‘master planning’-type of urban (re)development. Both have a tendency of fitness for
purpose and exclusiveness.Yet, on the contrary, city has been (re)produced organically and
sustainably by accumulation and network of small actions of people’s daily life. For such
condition, what is the ‘rightfulness’ of preservation?
Micro-Projects vs. Master-Planning
In recent years, I have been focusing on the urban settlement in Asian cities as important
reference to answer those questions. If we step into any settlement, we will be able to
recognize small actions of residents that are constantly performed to maintain and improve
the quality of their daily life. Even though most of the residents in those settlements are
belong to lower-middle class, the place is rich with realities and dynamics.
In 2010-2011, I directed an urban study project ‘Camp-on Kampung’ in Surabaya, Indonesia.
This project covers living environments of Kampung–urban settlements that spread
throughout the city.It focuses on social structures,living environments and local daily activities
of the settlement at specific site.The project emphasizes on their system of self-organization,
as well as to “how the identity is sustained”.
by Kenta Kishi

8
We observed many small programs done by the residents to maintain the continuity of the
built environment, which I call ‘micro-projects’.We considered them as strategic materials for
an alternative way of urban re-production. Furthermore, through the study of possibilities of
linking and networking of the ‘micro-projects’, we tried to propose ‘methodology of urban
design system and/or urban management that can contain a potential of complexity of urban
ecosystem’. As such, we hoped that the analysis would be able to overcome the risk of
negative impact and singularity of the quality of the built environment in ‘master-planning’-
type of urban development, which rapidly growing in many Asian cities recently.
For the purpose of this study, it was necessary to understand the potentials and possibilities
of Kampung and the city itself. Instead of depending on objective analysis of measurable
data of the city, we went through various cooperative study activities with diverse local
actors from Kampung, government officials, academic societies, business, civic groups and
mass media.‘Master Planning’ seems to be considered as exclusive method of investigation
that carried out by a specific team, while we opt for cooperative method that can suggests
an open-system process to explore possibilities of spontaneous and dynamic urban activities.
Preservation:Visual Interface of City
In the first phase of project,‘micro-projects’ were gathered. Diverse facts and possibilities of
the connections and relationship were analyzed and translated into visual information. Daily
Sample of “micro-project” at Kampung Ketandan (top) and Kampung Ampel (bottom). ©Orange House Studio

9
life activities in Kampung were diverse; and their complementary forms were also complex.
In order to understand the complexity of Kampung’s system, we developed a technique to
visualize the urban information. A specific icon was given for each ‘micro-project’, and their
specific relationships were carefully mapped in, so called, the landscape photo.
Icons for ‘micro projects’ (top).Visual interface of Kampung’s ecosystem (bottom) ©Orange House Studio

10
The visual information was not a tool to understand physical and measurable information of
an environment, but rather a tool to recognize the quality of an environment. For us, it was
important to step back from the conventional attitude of using measurable urban data that
can be applied for ‘master planning’.
Preservation: Cooperative Behaviors
In this phase, this urban study project was geared to design and apply a Kampung’s urban
system to an actual city.A public exhibition was operated by various participants (Kampung
residents and their communities, government officials, academic societies, business, civic
groups and mass media). It was considered as a prototype of alternative way of urban
preservation.
The theme and title of the exhibition is ‘Refugees of Future Cities’. In this time of massive
economic growth ofAsian city,we tend to imagine a future vision of city with‘master-planning’.
But should we challenge to look for a new future vision of city instead of compromising
ourselves to choose and live in a ‘master-planned’ city, we might end up become refugees of
a future city.All residents in this world have a potential to be a refugee in the future.
The exhibition became a platform to recognize, consider and share critical issue of our built
environment. We wanted to stress that this “refugee” is not necessarily negative or tragic
terms, as we imagine that in order to survive in the future city, a person will be forced
to produce positive actions and search for various possibilities.This exhibition delivered a
message to all residents in Surabaya that everybody should be an active producer instead of
being an active consumer.

11
Icons for ‘micro-projects’ (image: Orange House Studio)
A military tent was provided by city government and it used for a main exhibition space ©Orange House Studio
A poster of exhibition ©Orange House Studio

12
The aim of this exhibition was to provide a public space to share and discuss the possibilities
of urban system of Kampung. It consisted of three parts: architecture, design and art. Each
part offered various activities, such as art exhibition, performing arts, movie screening, craft
workshop and conference.The structure of program was produced through an extensive
and comprehensive discussion among the stakeholders of the city. In a way, it was also an
experiment to apply urban systems of Kampung into public and social activities.
Three Kampungs in the city joined as the main collaborators of this exhibition. These
Kampungs are facing different types of critical issues that conflicted with ‘master-planning’
of Surabaya, particularly in this transition period. Specific problems of each Kampung were
introduced to the public through various activities that offer the participants to consider
these problems as their own problems. Each activity in the exhibition was programmed as
a ‘micro-project’ in Kampung. Each exhibition meant to be independent, yet had a certain
connection and intersection to each other.
Audiences from Kampungs at movie screening by local cultural organization ‘Kinetik’. ©Orange House Studio

13
In the end, the collaborators and participants realized that the quality of exhibition would
depend on a degree of their participation.They also recognized how much hidden problems
and possibilities of city they could found, if they were deeply committed to cooperate in
urban activities. Such interactive experience should be considered and even suggested as
a methodology to re-produce our built environment, as it also suggests us to try to apply
‘questions about meanings’ for both social and physical environment of city in order to
discover ‘rightfulness’ of preservation of city.
The city that encompasses variety of issues and area of expertise can be defined as a
platform to receive simultaneous issues to be considered. As long as the investigation and
study are proceeding by the proper induction technique, urban activity can be a public
intellect, and it should be a clue to preserve a motivation of urban residents, hoping for the
future of the city and encouraging participation in their own built environments.
Public discussion with residents of Kampungs and other cooperators, such as students, designers, architects,
educators, government officer, journalists, owner of broadcasting company, and etc. ©Orange House Studio

14
a historic legacy, former
The meaning of urban-architectural heritage
I was born and grew up near the sea side of the village Noordwijk in the Netherlands. On
one day, in 1951 and six 6 years old , I stood on the beach, watching a spectacular blow up of
a big German ”Atlantic wall” bunker located at the south side of our boulevard; just a month
later there was only a sand dune left.A significant evidence of German occupation in the
Second World War was vanished completely and years later it felt to me as I was robbed of a
specific reminder, only a picture and a history book remained.
Probably it was a governmental policy to skip the era of German occupation out of the
people’s minds; a form of urban planning by destroying, creating a ”correct” environment
without any tangible uncomfortable memorial. It sounds like an ultimate post-colonial issue,
pointing a question like: is the architectural-urban historic legacy from the colonial past
logically and automatically accept as heritage by the former colonised people as well?

15
Fort Otahiya, Gorontalo (±1590) (photo: Cor Passchier/PDA)
forts in indonesia today
by Cor Passchier
With reference to the example of the destroyed German bunker, I tend to
affirm such; although the perception may have a different emotional load.
The preservation of the German bunker might have contribute to the
collective memory of later generations as a memorial landmark on the sea
side, but apparently it did not fit the conservation policy of the government,
which envisaged the image of a fashionable seaside resort.
Where does the term preservation stands for?
At least it should be based on a question like: ”what are the challenges for
the building or structure today” and how we intent using it? By ignoring such,
there is hardly any prospect for a historic building to survive.

16
got not immediate affected by modernity; the young state at the start suffered under political
and economic instability. The capital, Jakarta, was undergoing a tremendous grow in population
and the answers were found in an enormous increase and condensing of inhabitants captured
within the limits of the colonial city Batavia. Simultaneously combined with the power and the
flush of independence which causes a creative whirlpool, where politicians, writers, painters
could launch their statements in an overwhelming and optimistic mainstream.
Meanwhile, dealing with the reality, the government focused to transform the archipelago in
one nation; common symbols were needed with a clear and straight message, strengthen the
national awareness of the people.They create an Indonesian layer over the colonial town, street
names were changed, sculptures from the colonial era removed and new symbolic sculptures
FortVan den Bosch, Ngawi (photo: Cor Passchier / PDA)
Preservation is a logical part of the urban planning process, a holistic approach dealing with
the characteristics determining the identity of the city, considering the physical and economic
possibilities and opportunities for survival; these in balance with growth and expansion plans
of the city including the related infrastructure. The latter is not meant as a pure technocratic
statement,there is more.Probably the main reason for the presence of architectural heritage on
the agenda is enclosed in the thesis that ”historic and modern buildings are both an exponent
and product of the same dynamic society”.The mix of continuity and change give significance to
human existence and conditions for hope in the future. Considering modernity as the opposite
of historic is to me just a created forced contrast, tomorrow we will define today as yesterday.
Obviously,in the first decades of the young state Indonesia,the architectural- urban environment

17
arose often reflecting the struggle of freedom and independence. For instance, in Jakarta the
former Koningsplein (Kings square) became Medan Merdeka (Freedom square), making it clear,
the times were a changing.
The architectural-urban legacy, after regime change, could not suddenly disappear or
demolished, the latter seemed quite unrealistic. Former colonial offices got overcrowded by
more employees than ever and the new elite went to live in the homes of the former colonial
elite, while some Jakarta people (until the present) called themselves ”orang Betawi”.
Streets, squares, parks, buildings and all that together, create the environment and décor, which
is known as ”identity”.
Say ”Bandung” and one will react ”Gedung Sate”, ”ITB”, ”Hotel Homann”, the first two built
in 1921 and the last in 1939. Mention ”Jakarta” and one will respond with ”Monas”, ”Jalan
Sudirman” or ”Kota”; the first two are after war references, but the last dated from the early
days of the founding of the colonial town. That’s the way people react proudly and in their own
way. It is my town; I live here identify myself with the décor, which stands for my neighbourhood
– or town. Even expressions of nostalgia became famous and already subject of heritage itself.
In my mind comes up the song Bandung selatan di waktu malam, the original by Ismail Marzuki
(1948), I do regard it as an ultimate expression of intangible heritage.
FortWillem,Ambarawa (± 1835) (photo: Cor Passchier/PDA)

18
Forts in Indonesia
An article is necessarily limited in size, also
in content; I will spend some attention to a
particular legacy and heritage, the many forts
built in Indonesia in the course of the centuries
are a reflection of the turbulent history.
The project ”identification and inventory of
Forts” (2007-10) in Indonesia is developed
by the NGO’s PDA Indonesia and PAC the
Netherlands; behind both NGO’s were
the governments of Indonesia and the
Netherlands. This ambitious project covered
the entire Indonesia archipelago. In the
field survey, we operated with two teams,
supported and assisted by the local offices
of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, in
cooperation with several local universities and
heritage organizations, support by numerous
volunteers. Soon we experienced, the legacy
of historical forts and fortifications in Indonesia
was of an exceptional extent. Originally, the
government hand over a list about 270 forts
but soon we discovered and determined
more than 440 and numbers additionally built
objects, such as small bunkers, etc.
In the Indonesian archipelago, forts and
remains are everywhere. From the 15th to the
18th century,the Portuguese and the Spanish,
followed by the Dutch and English and also
the local rulers had their fortifications. Forts
were built at strategic locations, usually at the
sea, with some smaller forts in the hinterland
protecting trade routes. Except as defence
against enemy attacks, forts also served as
warehouses of herbs and spices. Within the
walls lived soldiers-, merchants- and artisans,
often an inner garden and a small hospital,
sometimes a church were built. Forts
were as foreign stations in the country and
storage places of merchandise; spontaneous
settlements arose around such sites. Coastal
forts have often become the cradle for the
establishment of later big cities.
The later forts, from the 19th century served
more strictly military purposes, while in the
20th century,the fortress as a defence bastion
lost its significance and strategic defences
were more dispersed, while the older forts
Bunker from SecondWorldWar,Tarakan
(photo: Cor Passchier / PDA)
Makassar – Fort Rotterdam (±1670) (photo:
/ PDA)

19
Cor Passchier
forts are used in various ways, sometimes
they are slowly demolished and the old brick
reused by the people. Also a large number of
forts are placed on the national- regional lists
of monuments. A very few are still in use as
military barracks, others having a new function
like: museum, cultural centre, or as leisure and
tourist objects.
In Gombong, central Java, the octagonal fort
(about 1820) has undergone a technical
maintenance;nowadays it is now used as a sort
of amusement park. In the immediate vicinity
of the Fort, one can find are all kind of funfair
attractions, even plastic dragons; above on the
octagonal wall drives a small fair train on rails;
they actually did not make any meaningful
use of the building space and structure and I
guess this kind of function will not prove being
sustainable.
In Banten, west Java, the remains of the former
Fort Surosowan (around 1680) undergone a
consolidating restoration and is as part of the
landscape an archaeological park.
only served as military barracks. Forts were
built according to European functional military
regulations and an architectural style is no
question; except perhaps in the gatehouses,
where sometimes an architectural accent is
shown,baroque,classicism we may encounter.
Nowadays, there are many forts disappeared
or merged in nature, certainly this applies to
the former wooden blockhouses- and beach
reinforcements. However a number of forts
survived often felt into decay, losing their
original function since long. About some we
only know they exist ones and some ruins are
preserved as a fixed in stone as a memorial
of history.
In the history of the Indonesian built heritage
like former forts occupy a special place. They
are tangible reminders of the past and still
of significance in everyday life. Sometimes
the built environment is part of the identity
in the everyday decor, sometimes to found
far away from human settlement. Ancient
Model Fort Rotterdam (image: Cor Passchier / PDA)

20
In Makassar, Sulawesi, the big Fort Rotterdam (about 1670) is since
centuries the identity carrier of the town on the seaside. It is recently
restored and has a main cultural function; one finds here the regional
museum Galigo, the inner space is a fairground for the city dwellers
and the branch office of the ministry of Education and Culture is
established here.
In Ambon, the small tower fort Amsterdam (about 1633), is restored
to its former glory,on beautiful location near by the sea;unfortunately
one did not paid serious attention to establish a new meaningful
function after the rehabilitation; so for some time it was still an empty
witness of history.
Yokyakarta - FortVredeburg (±1760) (photo: Cor Passchier / PDA)

21
Recommendations and conclusions
It is clear that the national and regional governments are willing to invest in the
conservation and reuse of built heritage, such as forts. However, not all stakeholders,
architects and investors, have knowledge and information about the conservation
and reuse of old forts. In November 2013, an international European conference
(ArtFort) was held and also an Indonesian delegation participated. The information
exchange regarding to the reuse of this category built heritage was considered as
very positive and it is an actual subject of thoughts to organize such an international
workshop also in Indonesia. Which I would highly recommend; beside the share of
information, it may broaden the scope how to treat historic Forts as useful heritage,
how to organize the approach and with references to economic benefits and
integrating in urban planning.

22
Sketsa ini menggambarkan konsep ‘perlambatan jalan’ yang
diterapkan tahun 2008 pada segmen utara Jalan pos, pe
gedung Museum Senirupa yang menyimpan koleksi lukisan
Dengan memperbaiki kondisi di sekitar Museum, JOK berh
kreatif yang diharapkan bisa me
- Moch. Ichsan

23
g awalnya direncanakan JOK (Jakarta Old Town Kotaku) untuk
ersis di sisi timur Plaza Fatahillah. Di latar belakang nampak
n dan keramik karya seniman-seniman terkemuka Indonesia.
harap bisa menjadikannya sebuah ikon bagi kalangan pekerja
enghidupkan kembali kawasan ini.
Harja Nugraha -

24
“While Singapore continues to transform, it is important to enhance our sense of
identity and identification with our city. Singapore is our home. People must feel
this in themselves and in their surroundings. URA’s role is to make Singapore a
city with character and identity through our physical landscape. So far, more than
6,500 buildings and structures across the country have been conserved, despite
our limited land and a relatively short history. Retention of our identity through
conservation will become more important as more of our city becomes developed
and redeveloped to cater to the needs of a larger population.” 1
The Central Role of the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA)
Soon after the separation from Malaysia and became an independent nation, Singapore was in a
dire condition physically and economically.Two most important institutions were set-up in 1965
to deal with the most pressing physical and economics issues and to develop Singapore, namely
the Housing Development Board (HDB) and the Economic Development Board (EDB). In
1967 the Urban Renewal Department (URD) was set up under the HDB to tackle the physical,
social, and economic regeneration of the Central Area, until 1974.
On 1 April 1974 the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) was created as an independent
statutory board under Ministry of National Development (MND) to take over the URD
responsibility, with primary task to redevelop the Central Area and resettle residents affected
by the redevelopment. Within the period of 1967-1989 a total of 184 hectares of land were
cleared, assembled and sold under the URA Sale of Sites Program, resulting in the development
of 155 projects.Through this program, Central Area was transformed from an area of slums and
squatters into a modern financial and business hub
In 1980 URA prepared a comprehensive long-term plan for the Central Area including the
development of Marina City on 690 hectares of reclaimed land. Three years later in 1983
the Urban Design Plan for the Central Area was created and aimed to guide ”an orderly
transformation of the city skyline and the creation of an environment interwoven with the
historical, architectural and cultural heritage of the older parts of the city”, followed by the
announcement of Central Area Structure Plan in 1985.Thus URA was exercising its power to
”develop”and at the same time to ”conserve”the central area of Singapore.Although the URA’s
1
From the speech by Mr Mah BowTan Minister for National Development at URA Corporate Plan Seminar
conservation in
singapore*
by Johannes Widodo

25
conservation policy seems comprehensive in
adhering good conservation principles, but in
reality the results are not satisfying. It focuses
too much to the physical and economic
aspects of gentryfiyng most of the remaining
heritage buildings in the central area, and not
giving enough attention to preserving the
existing community or social-cultural fabric.
The ”demolish and rebuild” policy during
the 1970-1980s has cleared or destroyed a
large stock of old shop-houses and town-
houses in a vast area of the central area of
Singapore, and its communities have been
displaced from the historic mixed-used
settlement areas and dispersed elsewhere.
Some of the reasons for demolition and
population-removal policy were to sanitize
the social diseases (like overcrowding,
prostitution, gambling, gangsters), to improve
the environmental problems (bad utilities,
unhygienic sanitation, structural dilapidation),
and to reclaim unproductive area for new
commercial development with much higher
values and returns. Vast shop-house area
inside the old central area, like Kampong
Glam, Middle Road, and Kereta Ayer areas
were re-developed and replaced by high-rise
housing-cum-commercial blocks to house
some of the existing inhabitants, and the
original communities have been relocated
somewhere else.
The extent of demolition and re-
development was so large, until finally the
government realized the irreversible loss
of tangible cultural heritage and intangible
identity of place especially in the central area.
Therefore since 1990s the conservation plans
have been drafted and implemented, to save
the remaining stocks of this valuable urban
heritage – although it was mainly driven by
the tourism industry and the speculative
property re-development schemes.Many old
shop-houses were given second lease of life
by ”adaptive re-use” approach, from empty
Singapore street market in 1960s (Source: old postcard of Singapore)

26
buildings they were turned into new shops,
restaurants, cafés, hotels, or offices. Mayor
changes in the interior space to adapt the
new functions and to comply with stringent
building safety regulations were permitted,
while façade features or style should be kept.
The original white-indigo lime-based plaster
was removed and replaced by stronger
PC-based plaster, often with new weather-
proof and colorful exterior paints.The dying
traditional craftsmanship and the usage of
traditional building materials are not revived,
but replaced by modern contemporary
technology and materials, and resulted in the
loss of authenticity and discontinuity in the
production of material culture.
URA Conservation Plan was announced in
1989. Historic districts like Chinatown, Little
India, Kampong Glam, Singapore River -
including Boat Quay and Clarke Quay - as well
as residential areas like Emerald Hill, Cairnhill,
Blair Plain, and secondary settlements like Joo
Chiat and Geylang were given conservation
status.The naming or labeling of these areas
followed the Singapore Tourism Board
“branding” strategy to sell Singapore, which
turned the central areas of the city into
“theme parks”.
URA Early Conservation Approach
In 1993 URA together with the Preservation
of Monuments Board (PMB) published
”Objectives, Principles and Standards for
Preservation and Conservation”. Here it
is stated that the objectives, principles and
standards have been specifically written with
the Singapore context in mind, and they are
derived from local experience, and where
appropriate are drawn from international
sources (among others are Venice Charter
1964, Burra Charter 1988, etc.).
URA prescribes ”3R Principle”: maximum
Retention, sensitive Restoration, and careful
Repair.This principle is further elaborated as:
1) Building should not be altered,or parts of it
demolished, if they can be preserved in their
original condition.
2) When upgrading and adapting a building
to a new uses, the existing structure must
be retained. This can be done through
strengthening and repairing the structural
elements in the most sympathetic and
unobtrusive way, and using original methods
and materials, wherever possible
3)Selective replacement should only be
considered when absolutely necessary.
4) Total reconstruction goes against accepted
international conservation practices
5) A thorough research of the conservation
building will also facilitate the proper
execution of works on site.
6) The technical aspects and process of the
various activities must be documented at
every stage.
To implement the principles, URA defines
”7 Levels of Conservation Activities” and
”Top-Down Approach”. The seven levels
of activities are: 1) Maintaining the essential
character of the building,2) Preventing further
deterioration, 3) Consolidating the fabric
of the building, 4) Restoring the building to
original design and material, 5) Rehabilitating
the building without destroying its character,
6) Replacing missing significant features of the
building, and 7) Rebuilding severely damaged
parts of the building.
The ”Top-Down” Approach literally means
that works start from the top (roof) and
progress downwards, while retaining the
floor(s) and roof. This enables the lower
elements of the building to be repaired
or replaced without affecting the existing
structure.The benefits from this construction
method are: the building remains structurally
2
URA & PMB (1993), p. 12

27
stable, the work can proceed under all
weather conditions, and deterioration due to
weather is minimized.
In shop-house conservation, URA endorses
“facadism” and prefers to retain the façade
and allows alteration of the rest of the
building.To facilitate this façade classification
was defined according to linear periodization,
with meticulous stylistic description of its
parts:
1) Early Shop house style (1840-1900)
2) First Transitional Shop house style (early
1900s)
3) Late Shop house style (1900-1940)
4) SecondTransitional Shop house style (late
1930s)
5) Art Deco Shop house style (1930-1960)
Similar stylistic classification and approach was
applied to different conservation areas, like
Chinatown, Kampong Glam, and Little India,
with some adjustments to match with the
special ”theme” assigned for those particular
areas. Three books elaborating the historical
background of the place and special physical
features of shop-houses typology for each
conservation area, with very little attention
given to the existing social-cultural significance.
To encourage and to give incentive to private
conservation initiatives, The Architectural
Heritage Awards was created.3
It was started
in 1994, when URA gave ”Good Effort”
Award for well-restored buildings.The annual
”Architectural Heritage Awards” was first
introduced in 1995 to replace the previous
award. In 2003, the awards category was

28
further refined: ”Category A” for national
monuments and fully conserved buildings,
and ”Category B” for old buildings with
new, innovative and sensitive interventions.
The judging is conducted by an Assessment
Committee appointed by the URA.
The policy and the guideline are profoundly
inclined towards physical conservation of
multi-racial, colonial, and national heritage of
Singapore – while the conservation of social
fabric of community is noticeably missing. It
became apparent later that the conservation
policy which is focused mainly on the tangible
aspect has created problems in the intangible
aspect of heritage.
Holistic Urban Heritage Conservation
and Regeneration
Cultural purification and elimination of parts
of our layered or hybridized identity which
have been formed for generations are not
truthful to our own history and to our future
generations. Buildings and elements from
various cultures and influences from past to
present have become indispensable parts of
our cultural heritage, and it will continuously
evolve into the future. Inhabitation aspect is
always related to the articulation of the built
forms or the material culture.When the social
fabric (community, inhabitants) is gone, then
building and settlement will turn into empty
shells where deterioration will take place. In
this critical stage, the choices are demolition
or re-development, especially when it takes
place in the central urban prime locations.
Conservation, preservation, restoration,
revitalization efforts of our material and
living heritages should be aimed towards
the community cultural continuum. The
community’s cultural continuum can be kept
and nurtured by preserving the community’s
tangible and intangible cultural heritages
through faithful and careful restoration, and
through sensitive and sensible care and
URA façade classification &
Stylistic description (Source: URA, 1995)

29
interventions.The dying or missing traditional
skills and craftsmanship can be revived and
restored through training and education, and
to be updated with the current technological
advancement. Following the principles of
traditional medicine to cure the sickness
by invoking good energy for holistic healing
process of body and soul, effective and
affirmative actions can be developed in the
spirit of good will and good faith in order to
preserve our memory and identity through
conservation of our cultural heritage in
entirety and holistically.
The community should be empowered by
technical skills and sustained by economic and
institutional infrastructure, through holistic
conservation and preservation strategy in
mobilizing all stake holders. Recognitions
such as awards and status should be aimed
to generate greater impacts towards a
more sustainable and effective heritage
policy, planning, and management of the
community’s tangible and intangible cultural
heritages, and not for the sake of marketing
or branding for the sake of mass-tourism
money.
Good conservation projects and practices
are those which successfully demonstrating
the following points:
1) articulation of the heritage values in
order to convey the spirit of place through
conservation,
2) appropriate use or adaptation of the
structure,
3) interpretation of the cultural, social,
historical and architectural significance of the
structure(s) in the conservation work,
4) understanding of technical issues of
conservation/restoration in interpreting the
structure’s significance,
5) appropriate use or adaptation of the
structure,
6) interpretation of the cultural, social,
historical and architectural significance of the
structure(s) in the conservation work,
7) understanding of the technical issues of
conservation/restoration in interpreting the
structure’s significance,
8) use of appropriate materials,
9) how well any added elements or creative
technical solutions respect the character and
inherent spatial quality of the structure(s),
10) manner in which the process and the
final product contribute to the surrounding
environment and the local community’s
cultural and historical continuum,
11) influence of the project on conservation
practice and policy locally, nationally, regionally,
or internationally,
5
Refer to UNESCO Asia Pacific Awards for Culture Heritage Conservation criteria. Detail information about the
awards can be found in: http://www.unescobkk.org/culture/our-projects/empowerment-of-the-culture-profession/asia-
pacific-heritage-awards-for-culture-heritage-conservation/
Former Shop Houses in China
Square after redevelopment

30
12) ongoing socio-economic viability and
relevance of the project, and provision for its
future use and maintenance, and
13) technical consistency, complexity and
sensitivity of the project methodology.
Changes in Singapore Urban
Conservation Approach
Recognizingtheneedtoinvolvethecommunity
in the urban planning process URA started to
embark on public consultations exercise in the
urban planning process since the drafting of
Concept Plan 2001 (Aug 2000 – May 2001).
The ideas and feedbacks from public were
gathered through public forums, exhibition,
and public dialogue before the Concept Plan
was finalized at the end of 2001. In 2002
similar process was repeated again when
Master Plan 2003 was drafted.Three Subject
Groups were appointed by the Minister of
National Development to study proposals
on: 1) Parks & Water-bodies Plans and Rustic
Coast, 2) Urban Villages and Southern Ridges
& Hillside Villages, and 3) Old World Charm.
The ideas and recommendations were to be
incorporated into the draft of Master Plan
2003.
The Subject Groups comprise professionals,
representatives from interest groups, and
laymen. They felt that a shift in the balance
between conservation and re-development
is required, and a new framework is needed
for holistic conservation – an integrated,
synergistic approach that goes beyond
physical structures to include communities
and activities that contribute to the old world
charm. Holistic conservation encompasses
the whole neighborhoods, including
contemporary and less architecturally
significant buildings. It is multi-dimensional, to
include buildings, road patterns, streetscapes,
open spaces and vistas; demands multi-
disciplinary involvement across local and
national levels; and incorporates all stake
holders (users, owners, heritage-supporters,
decision makers) of the conservation
process.
Besides specific recommendations for
different places across Singapore, the
Subject Groups also suggested the following
proposals to take conservation efforts in
Singapore to the higher level:
1)Valuing the priceless:conserving areas with
rich heritage, charm, and social value, even
though there may be loss in development
potential at the local level.
2) Different levels of conservation:conserving
significant exteriors, interiors, and details of
selected buildings; and controlling the use
of selected buildings with strong social and
historical values.
3) Act fast: preparing a comprehensive list of
buildings for safeguarding.
4) A Network of heritage assets: linking
up areas of the conserved area with the
new developments that serve as heritage
connectors.
5) Differential expectations and planning:
adopting different performance and planning
standards that are sensitive to the urban
fabric of areas identified with the conserved
area.
6) Beyond efficiency, embracing new
solutions: exploring alternatives to widening
of roads within the conserved area, and
exploring the use of different transportation
modes.
7) Recognizing our heartland heritage:
6
MND (2002), Parks & Waterbodies Plan and Identity Plan - Subject Group Report on Old World Charm, p.8

31
keeping blocks of public housing architecture and townships that encapsulated the range of
public housing from the 1950s to the present.
8) Wish list: retaining more built heritage for future generations, including the more recent
building that depicts the history of Singapore’s path towards independence and efforts in nation
building process.
9) Heritage economy: recognizing conservation’s contribution to the economy by providing
funding for conservation initiatives and efforts.
10) Money talks: introducing more incentives for owners of conservation buildings
11) Private sponsorship: encouraging the setting up of a privately-run heritage trust.
12) Getting insights: commissioning a study on property value of conserving buildings
13) Promote traditional trades: developing ways to recognize owners of traditional trades
that are valued by the public.
14) Active citizenship: precipitating the formation of local business improvement groups.
15) Renaissance people: developing a heritage education program that takes a more active
and concerted form to inform, educate, and inspire people about their city.
Living heritage: traditional trades in the shop-house in Serangoon area (“Little India”)

32
Recognitions and the Future of
Conservation in Singapore
InOctober2007,SingaporerejoinedUNESCO
after 22 years of absence. But even before
this historic turning point, UNESCO had given
Singapore three awards in recognition of the
achievements of individuals, private sector
organisations and public-private initiatives in
successfully restoring and conserving heritage
structures in this small city-state.
UNESCO aims to promote the stewardship
of the world’s cultural resources, including the
built heritage which constitutes our collective
cultural memory, and the foundation upon
which communities can base their future.
In Asia and the Pacific, UNESCO supports
conservation activists at all levels, and
particularly seeks to encourage the role of
the private sector in preserving the region’s
cultural heritage. The UNESCO Asia-Pacific
Heritage Awards for Culture Heritage
Conservation is one of the regional initiatives
that support the organisation’s global strategic
objective of promoting the localisation and
empowerment of the culture profession to
develop and implement the best conservation
standards.
Since 2000 the Heritage Awards committee
hasreceivedmorethan300entriesfromacross
Asia. Many of the entries have set technical
and social benchmarks for conservation in the
region, while simultaneously acting as catalysts
for local preservation initiatives. Over the
years, the projects illustrate the increasing
momentum and level of conservation in
Asia and the Pacific. Four Singaporean
conservation projects have so far won
UNESCO Heritage Awards: the Thian Hock
Keng Temple (Honourable Mention Award
in 2001), the Convent of Holy Infant Jesus
(Award of Merit in 2002), Old St. Andrew’s
School (Honourable Mention Award in
2006), and finally the Hong San See Temple
restoration project won the highest Award for
Excellence in 2010.
On the community level, recently some
individuals have registered themselves to
become individual members of ICOMOS,
which is the first important step towards the
formation of ICOMOS National Committee.
Government is also interested to look into
the possibility of submitting some sites in
Singapore for UNESCO World Heritage
listing. Although these developments seem
preliminary and still very early to generate
real impacts, but these are significant steps
towards better approach to preservation and
conservation of heritage.
In Singapore both land and heritage are
scarce. These constraints should drive better
and more effective conservation strategies
and methods so that the full positive impact
of conservation may contribute to strong
economic development, nation-building, and
a sense of home. In working towards these
ends, it is essential to form a civic coalition, a
community network and an alliance among all
stakeholders to maintain a balance between
conservation and development, and to ensure
an orderly and healthy evolution of the built
environment and the community that lives
within it.

33
We are obliged to prolong the lifecycle of our tangible and intangible heritages for the sake of
the future generation, to ensure the link with their roots and the transmission of memory from
the past into the future. Conservation means nurturing the community’s cultural continuum.
By prolonging the life of our heritage for future generations, we can ensure their link with their
roots and the transmission of memory from the past to the future.
References
1.Engelhardt,R.(editor).”Asia Conserved: Lessons Learned from the UNESCO Asia-Pacific Conservation
Awards”. Bangkok: UNESCO, 2007
2. ICOMOS Charters, http://www.international.icomos.org/charters.htm
3.Ismail,Rahil,Shaw,Brian & Ooi Giok Ling (editors).”SoutheastAsian Culture and Heritage in a Globalizing
World – Diverging Identities in a Dynamic Region.” Surrey:Ashgate, 2009
4. MND (2002), Parks & Waterbodies Plan and Identity Plan - Subject Group Report on Old World Charm,
Ministry of National Development, Singapore
5. MND (2002), Parks & Waterbodies Plan and Identity Plan - Subject Group Report on Urban Villages and
Southern Ridges & HillsideVillages, Ministry of National Development, Singapore
6.Tan, Sumiko (1999), Home.Work.Play, Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore
7. URA & PMB (1993), Singapore - Objectives, Principles and Standards for Preservation and Conservation,
Urban Redevelopment Authority & Preservation of Monuments Board, Singapore
8. URA (2004), Architectural Heritage Singapore - Architectural Heritage Awards 1994 to 2004, Award
Winning Projects by Singapore-registered Architects, Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore
9. URA (1995), Chinatown Historic District, Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore
10. URA (1995), Little India Historic District, Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore
*This paper was presented at the serial talk on Capitals’ Archaeology: Urban Origins and Conservation,
organized by The Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization Regional Centre for Archaeology
and Fine Arts (SEAMEO-SPAFA), 29 April 2011, at Siam Society, Bangkok,Thailand. It was then published
in SPAFA JournalVolume 21, Number 3, September-December 2011 (ISSN 0858-1975), published by the
“A nation must have a memory to give it a sense of
cohesion, continuity and identity.The longer the past,
the greater the awareness of a nation’s identity”

34
Sebuah ilustrasi yang menggambarkan penerapan lain
dari upaya perlambatan jalan oleh JOK pada segmen
Jalan Pintu Besar Utara (sisi barat Plaza Fatahillah)
untuk mendorong tumbuhnya keramaian. Perlambatan
jalan ini dicapai dengan menerapkan lajur zig-zag pada
jalan yang dahulunya lurus dan ramai. Bollard (batu
pembatas) dan bangku yang didesain dengan artistik
turut menciptakan karakter unik dari segmen ini.
- Moch. Ichsan Harja Nugraha -

35

36
Jakarta as a capital city suffers many aspects, yet it beholds hidden treasures such as Kota
Tua. Especially on the subject of Kota Tua, there has been a high level of desperation. For
more than four decades since the first preservation program commenced in 1970s1
, several
revitalization plans have failed to be implemented, resulting in piecemeal projects that have
fallen short to create substantial positive impact.
The problems in Kota Tua are layered and intertwined. Dilapidated infrastructure and polluted
environment have created an undesirable living and working environment, encouraging
businesses to move out and squatters and street vendors to move in. Those interested in
investing in the area are quickly discouraged by the rigid yet insufficient heritage building
regulations, lack of incentives, and lack of priority and coordination within the government
to carry out the revitalization plan. Not to mention that the master plan has not been made
public or accessible. There are 182 heritage buildings2
in Kota Tua, most of which are located
Town Hall Renovation in 1973 (photo: James Cobban)
event space as
for kota t
by Daliana Suryaw

37
within the core area of Fatahillah Square.3
For privately-owned buildings, which comprise
70% of building ownership (Tambun, 2013), the cost of renovating and maintaining a heritage
building outweighs its benefits, while for state-owned buildings; the condition is further
restricted by limited lease duration to private investors.4
While the owners are waiting for a
promising change, the centuries old buildings continue to decay and fall apart.
Recently, however, the current city administration takes Kota Tua revitalization plan into its
12 Priority Programs 2013-20175
and announced that Special Economic Zone be planned
starting 2014.6
The SEZ will allow for the 160 hectares historic area to be managed by a
single authority to ensure efficiency and flexibility. While the Special Economic Zone may
take several years to be formed and the master plan 20 years, this has shed a new hope for
the area.
Visualization of Kali Besar after revitalization plan 1973. (source: Cobban, 1985)
s the solution
tua jakarta
winata & Diana Ang

38
which involves notable international and
local architects and landscape architects7
to collaborate with local government and
building owners to reprogram 6 heritage
buildings and 1 landscape area located
along Kali Besar and Fatahillah Square.8
At
the same time, Jakarta Old Town Reborn
Corporation has pioneered a pilot project of
the conversion of Post Office building into
Museum of Contemporary Art and Visitor’s
Center, to be opened in March 2014.9
Second, creative festivals act as catalyst to
revive the soul of Kota Tua. Beyond gaining
substantial tourism and redefining the image
of the city, festivals can be a powerful tool
to cultivate the communities of interest
Kota Tua aspires to accommodate and be
identified with.InThe Death and Life of Great
American Cities,10
Jane Jacobs states that ”a
city’s very wholeness in bringing together
people with communities of interest is one
of its greatest assets, possibly the greatest.”
Creative festivals in Kota Tua can be the
center where the city’s young and creative
minds come together.11
Learning from Venice and Malaka
Venice is Europe’s largest car-free urban area.
Tourists come for its architectural-urban
spatial quality, and mostly the festivals. In the
1980s, the Carnival of Venice was revived
and the city has become a major centre of
international conferences and festivals.12
Venice hosts three of the world’s most
prestigious festivals:The Venice Art Biennale,
The Venice Architecture Biennale, and the
Venice Film Festival where all the world’s
greatest artists, architects and filmmakers
celebrate with a backdrop of elegantly
decaying historical buildings and canals.
Jonker Walk, a popular tourist area in Malaka,
started with regular weekend festivals
Immediate and collective actions
In the meantime, two agents of change are
needed to complement the long-term plan.
First, a group of pilot projects that can acts
as exemplary urban magnets for the area.
This needs to be done immediately as the
heritage buildings are becoming increasingly
difficult to save with time, and collectively,
so that the diversity of owners, users, and
programs create engaging, vibrant points of
interests and communities within the area.
Such initiative is being proposed through
the Jakarta Old Town Reborn Program
led by Rumah Asuh and Erasmus Huis,
Jakarta Old Town Reborn Program Archipunctural
Strategy 2013-2014. (source: JOTRW Curatorial
Team )

39
can greatly affect the authenticity of the
cultural aspect of the district.
KotaTua Creative Festival (KTCF), supported
by Indonesian Diaspora Network, the City
of Jakarta, and the Ministry of Tourism and
Creative Economy, aspires to be a festival
that brings contemporary creative affairs
and engage them with the social and physical
spaces of KotaTua.The event is proposed to
takeplacein2014astherevitalizationprogram
commences. Held in open public spaces and
decaying heritage buildings around Fatahillah
Square and Kali Besar, the festival programs
are designed to provoke discussions and
reflections in broad disciplines, as well as
propose alternative ways of enjoying spaces
in the city. The program of the festival tests
the long-term plan to turn the district into
creativity and innovation center.13
Arts and
culture programs have been enduring aspect
of the masterplans, evolving from proposed
traditional handicrafts outlet in 1973
(Cobban, 1985) to proposed Museum of
Modern Art Jakarta, contemporary galleries,
and relocation of Institut Kesenian Jakarta
(IKJ) in 2004,14
to the realization of Museum
of Contemporary Art in 2014 (Ida, 2013).
from 18.00-24.00 initiated by the Malaysian
government. Soon, it became a new tradition.
Even though urban critics point out that
Jonker Walk has become overtouristic and
overcommercialized, it has achieved several
points in preservation with a new spirit.
Kota Tua can foresee a revival by means of
great festivals with contemporary affairs
that measures up to international standards.
Jakarta has already regularly hosted such
events,only they are typically held in shopping
malls or conference centers. Festivals
such as Jakarta Food and Fashion Festival,
Jakarta International Film Festival, Jakarta
Architecture Triennale, and Java Jazz Festival
can benefit from relocating to the abundance
of diverse public and private spaces in Kota
Tua.
It is important to note that festivals, if to
become a powerful tool in reconstructing
the identity of a district, must include
participatory and community building aspects
to it in instead of only accommodating
spectators and consumers. Today, there are
regular festivals taking place in Kota Tua, but
most are traditionally themed and geared
towards spectatorship. In the long run, this
Art Biennale,Arsenale,Venice (photo:AudreyH)

40
KTCF also works with LWG DMO KotaTua (LocalWorking Group & Destination Management
Organization)15
to develop programs that engage the existing creative communities in KotaTua.
The festival hopes to create for its participants a sense of openness and involvement in the
larger revitalization program. As mentioned in The Image of the City by Kevin Lynch, ”moving
elements in a city, and in particular the people and their activities, are as important as the
stationary physical parts. We are not simply observers of this spectacle, but are ourselves a
part of it, on the stage with the other participants.”16
The revitalization of Kota Tua can benefit
from ideas and responses of its diverse citizens and visitors that feel a sense of belonging to
the historic district.
City as Event Space
In The Manhattan Transcripts, Bernard Tschumi states that ”architecture is not simply about
space and form, but also about event, action, and what happens in space.”17
Architecture and
urban spaces are inseparable from events that take place within it. Millions of events construct
the daily narratives and meaning of citizens’ lives in a city,18
and architecture and urban space
are underutilized tool to construct events that can bring vitality to the city. Festivals are just
one form of this.While Jakarta has recently witnessed a rising number of public events, the city
could tap into this and use events as a tool to improve the social and physical conditions of
dilapidated spaces in a city. For example, the city could establish a policy where incentives are
given for events that take place in the places designated for urban change within a given time.
Jakarta Old Town Kotaku
2004 plan to“revive kota for
artist & creative community
within walking distance”
(source: JOK document)

41
Evolution of Preservation
In Kota Tua, the concept of preservation
has always been motivated by tourism. A
supporting motive may also be ”not so much
of what is being preserved as fear of what
will replace it”,19
since several of Jakarta’s
beloved historic urban fabrics, such as Senen,
have given way to modern developments
insensitive to its unique economic and
cultural history. The preservation concept
of Kota Tua has evolved from a focus on
adaptive reuse buildings for tourism in 1973
(Cobban, 1985) to include a place to live and
work in 2000s (JOK, 2004), to become ”a
town of creativity and innovation” in 2012
(Ministry of Tourism and Creative Economy
of the Republic of Indonesia, 2013).Although
the implementation of the master plan(s)
has been painstakingly slow, the evolution of
the concept is positive. A city district should
not be mummified for tourism, but allowed
to flourish into genuine culture by having
communities whose livelihood revolves in the
area and overseen by urban managers.20
While the guidelines concerning preservation
in Kota Tua are constraining and may need
revisions so it can be beneficial to the district
revitalization in a timely manner, the most
important aspects that need to be preserved
and allowed to evolve are the unique intangible
qualities that is not commonly found in many
public places in Jakarta, such as diversity
of users (tourist, students, locals), cultural
activities (photo-shoots/filming), and leisure
(biking, playing chess outdoors) that create a
heterogeneous space unique to KotaTua.
Although the preservation of Kota Tua
will be mostly judged in the success of the
revitalization of its physical spaces, the process
to reach such state involves many aspects

42
that are not architectural, mainly in creating systems to simplify complex bureaucracy, provide
incentives for building renovation and target groups to occupy the district.
Hitting its fourth decade of revitalization attempt, it is too early to say this time the attempt
will not fall short.Yet, so far, positive changes have rapidly taken place in the past year, namely
the reorganization of street vendors, creation of LWG DMO, formation of Jakarta Old Town
Revitalization Corp, Jakarta Endowment for Art and Heritage, inclusion in city administration’s
12 Priority Projects 2013-2017, the plan to create Special Economic Zone, the upcoming
completion of Jakarta Contemporary Arts Museum, and the upcoming Kota Tua Creative
Festival.
Meanwhile, complex problems need creative solutions. Perhaps the problem of Kota Tua itself
is one episode in the city that allows for diverse community with common interest to come
together and join forces: all stakeholders, from the building owners to street vendors, from
government bodies to architects and urban designers.
References
[1] Cobban, James L. “The Ephemeral Historic District in Jakarta.”Geographical Review. 75.3 (1985): 300-318. Web.
<http://www.jstor.org/stable/214487>.
[2]Tambun,Lenny.“A New Hope for Jakarta’s KotaTua.”Jakarta Globe [Jakarta] 24 Feb.2013,Web.21 Feb.2014.<http://
www.thejakartaglobe.com/archive/a-new-hope-for-jakartas-kota-tua>.
[3] Sugiantoro. Appendix 2: Jakarta Case Study. 1st ed. Mandaluyong:Asian Development Bank, 2008. 105-162. Print.
[4] Anderson, Charles, and Jennifer Blake.“Saving Batavia.”Jakarta Globe [Jakarta] 4 Apr 2009, weekend ed. Print.
[5] Sak.“12 Program Prioritas Jokowi-Basuki 2013-2017.”Ahok. 4 Dec 2013.Web. 21 Feb 2014. <http://ahok.org/berita/
news/12-program-prioritas-jokowi-basuki-2013-2017>.
Interior of Rumah Akar (photo: Diana Ang)
Kali BesarTimur (photo: Diana Ang)
Interior of FormerTjipta Niaga (photo:Windo Salomo)

43
[6] “Kota Tua Akan Dijadikan Kawasan Ekonomi Khusus.”Kompas [Jakarta] 26 Apr. 2013, Web. 21 Feb. 2014. <http://
megapolitan.kompas.com/read/2013/04/26/15291755/Kota.Tua.Akan.Dijadikan.Kawasan.Ekonomi.Khusus>.
[7] The architects and urban designers include Dutch architecture practices OMA, MVRDV, KCAP, Niek Roozen +
Wageningen University, and Indonesian architecture practices Han Awal & Partners + SHAU,Andra Matrin Architects,
Djuhara + Djuhara,and Citra Konsulindo Utama.
[8] Jakarta OldTown Reborn Workshop CuratorialTeam Document (2013)
[9] Nurcahyani, Ida.“PT Pembangunan KotaTua Jakarta diluncurkan.”Antara News [Jakarta] 13 Nov 2013, n. pag.Web.
21 Feb. 2014. <http://www.antaranews.com/berita/404742/pt-pembangunan-kota-tua-jakarta-diluncurkan>.
[10] Jacobs, Jane.The Death and Life of Great American Cities. 1st Vintage Books ed. New York: Random House, Inc. ,
1992. 119. Print.
[11] The idea of Kota Tua as a center for creative industries was first proposed in 2000s. Source: Jakarta Old Town
Kotaku (JOK) Document (2004)
[12] Ciancio,Antonella.“New “kings” ofVenice revel in carnival.” Reuters [NewYork] 20 Feb 2012, n. page.Web. 21 Feb.
2014. <http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/20/uk-italy-carnival-idUSLNE81J00T20120220>.
[13] “Old Batavia revitalized through Destination Management Organization (DMO).” Ministry ofTourism and Creative
Economy of the Republic of Indonesia, 21 Apr 2013. Web. 21 Feb 2014. <http://www.indonesia.travel/en/news/
detail/940/old-batavia-revitalized-through-destination-management-organization-dmo>
[14] Jakarta OldTown Kotaku (JOK) Document (2004)
[15] Pratawisari, Fitri. “Pengembangan Pariwisata Perlu Peran Warga Sekitar.” Kompas [Jakarta] 10 Apr 2013, lipsus
n. pag. Web. 21 Feb. 2014. <http://lipsus.kompas.com/gebrakan-jokowi-basuki/read/xml/2013/04/10/11505024/
Pengembangan.Pariwisata.Perlu.Peran.Warga.Sekitar>.
[16] Lynch, Kevin.The Image of the City. 1st ed. Cambridge: Joint Center for Urban Studies, 1960. 2. Print.
[17]Tschumi, Bernard.The ManhattanTranscripts. 2nd ed. London:Academy Editions, 1994. Print.
[18] Livesey, Graham. “Deleuze, Whitehead, the Event, and the Contemporary City.” Event & Decision: Ontology
& Politics in Badiou, Deleuze, and Whitehead. Calgary: University of Calgary, 2007. 18. Web. 21 Feb. 2014. <http://
whiteheadresearch.org/occasions/conferences/event-and-decision/papers/Graham Livesey_FinalDraft.pdf>.
[19] Semes,StevenW.The Future of the Past:A Conservation Ethic forArchitecture,Urbanism,and Historic Preservation.
1st ed. NewYork:W.W. Norton & Company, 2009. 140. Print.
[20]The idea of“urban manager” was mentioned by Jakarta OldTown Kotaku (JOK) members during a meeting related
to workshop held in Erasmus Huis in December 2012
Visualization of Fatahillah Square during KotaTua Creative Festival 2014. (source: KTCF CuratorialTeam)

44

45
Bangunan ini berlokasi di Jalan Pintu Besar Utara di sisi barat
Fatahillah. Desain teralis dari besi tempa-nya sangat cantik dan
menarik, menjadikannya satu dari beberapa bangunan disini yang
disukai para fotografer. jendela di lantai kedua dihiasi kaca patri
dan menggambarkan simbol-simbol kota yang dikuasai Belanda.
- Moch. Ichsan Harja Nugraha -

46
Waktu tidak dapat meruntuhkan semangatnya. Meski telah aktif berprofesi sejak era
pemerintahan Sukarno, Han Awal seperti tidak mengenal kata berhenti. Di usianya yang
ke-83, Ia masih tetap aktif berprofesi sebagai arsitek konservatoris. Belum lagi beberapa
tanggung jawab lainnya, seperti anggota dewan pengawas Pusat Dokumentasi Arsitektur
(PDA) dan yang terkini, sebagai anggota Board of Advisor dari Jakarta Endowment for Arts and
Heritage (JEFORAH).
Tiga hari setelah perayaan Imlek, saya berkunjung ke rumahnya bersama puluhan pertanyaan
akan realita arsitek konservatoris di Indonesia.Profesi yang bergerak khusus dalam konservasi
bangunan bersejarah ini seperti masih belum banyak memiliki peminat. Han Awal yang
berpengalaman selama lebih dari dua dekade tentu akan memiliki cara pandang tersendiri
terhadap hal ini.
Sore itu, Ia menyambut saya di pintu ruang tamu. Mengenakan kemeja batik merah dan
celana kain hitam, Han Awal langsung mengundang saya duduk di teras belakang.
“Rumahnya bagus pak”, ujar saya spontan melihat rumahnya yang sangat hangat, khas garis
desain Han Awal.
“Ini rumah gaya lama kok. Hahaha”, jawabnya ramah.
Kami berhenti di depan meja kayu bundar yang dikelilingi kursi-kursi plastik berwarna
putih. Kicauan burung peliharaan bersama bising suara pembangunan apartemen di dekat
rumahnya mengiringi kedatangan kami. Beberapa saat kemudian, satu cangkir kopi susu dan
piring kecil makanan ringan diantarkan oleh seorang wanita paruh baya. Setelah Han Awal
meminta satu cangkir lagi kopi susu untuknya sendiri, kami segera memulai diskusi.
‘MENCARI ARSITEK
KONSERVATORIS’
oleh Yusni Aziz

47
Kiprahnya dalam dunia konservasi diawali pada tahun 1980-an ketika Uskup Agung
menawarinya memperbaiki kerusakan pada gereja Katedral. Han Awal yang saat itu tidak
pernah mempelajari ilmu konservasi,tetap kukuh untuk mencoba dan belajar secara otodidak.
Kelak hal itu membuatnya tersadar bahwa di praktek konservasi profesi arsitek dapat
disamakan dengan seorang dokter. Han Awal harus melakukan diagnosa terhadap penyakit
bangunan dengan sangat hati-hati. Melalui riset mendalam terhadap sejarah, teknis dan
metodologi cara membangun pada masa itu.
“Lama-lama akhirnya menjadi passion. Bukannya saya tergila-gila, tapi saya sangat empati
dengan pekerjaan saya. Seperti ada kekayaan yang terpendam. Sesuatu yang tadinya tidak
tahu akhirnya jadi memahami bahwa di belakang itu ada semacam kearifan. Tidak analisa
bangunan saja, tetapi juga jiwa dan cara membangun pada masa itu. Ini luar biasa.”
Dia melanjutkan dengan pentingnya pemahaman sejarah.“Saya yakin bahwa kearifan sejarah
perlu kita miliki. Karena di situ kita banyak gali jejak sejarah kita sendiri, untuk akhirnya sampai
ke masa kini. Berpijak pada apa yang diberikan oleh sejarah.”
“Sejarah yang mana?”, tanya saya.
“Entah itu tentang kolonial, Majapahit atau bagaimana pedagang Islam masuk kesini. Tidak
usah menolak diri, karena itu kenyataan untuk bangsa.Dan tanpa kenyataan itu, kita tidak akan
timbul budaya seperti sekarang.”
“Kita juga harus melihat masa kolonial membawa sesuatu yang positif, tidak selamanya negatif.
Memang banyak penindasan,tapi juga banyak yang dikenalkan seperti cara berpakaian. ‘Masak
kita jadi bangsa sarungan?’ kata Soekarno. Akhirnya, bangsa Indonesia baiknya menata masa
depan dari kearifan lokal seperti Soekarno”, lanjutnya
Bangunan bersejarah memang seperti sebuah laboratorium hidup. Mereka menyimpan
kearifan masa lalu dan sejarah secara gamblang, terbuka untuk interpretasi lebih lanjut.
Dokumentasi melalui buku tidak bisa menggantikan suasana ruang, bukti aplikasi teknologi
terhadap lingkungan, dan jejak autentik sejarah yang hadir di sebuah bangunan.“Pemahaman
ini sangat penting untuk dimiliki para mahasiswa dan praktisi arsitektur”, ujar Han. Sehingga
semakin banyak arsitek konservatoris yang bergerak aktif, semakin banyak ilmu dan memori
bangsa yang akan terselamatkan untuk kita dan generasi mendatang.
Namun kenyataan berbicara lain. Franky Liauw dalam “Konservasi masih Minoritas1
”
menekankan bahwa kegiatan konservasi masih belum memiliki banyak peminat di Indonesia.
Manfaat konservasi telah banyak dikemukakan, tetapi banyak yang masih melihat konservasi
sebagai penghambat kemajuan.“Kemajuan”masih diidentikkan dengan membangun bangunan
modern yang ada di negara“maju” dalam kecepatan tinggi.Yang jika diteruskan akan merusak
budaya dan identitas sebuah kota, membawanya menjadi semakin generik.
1.Tulisan dapat ditemukan dalam Prosiding Seminar Nasional Perkembangan Teknologi VS Konservasi Arsitektur. Jurusan Arsitektur
Universitas Merdeka Malang, 28 Agustus 2008.

48
Franky juga berkata tuntutan ekonomi juga lebih mendorong para pemberi ijin meloloskan
penghapusan bangunan bersejarah. Mayoritas arsitek sendiri masih belum terlalu peduli
terhadap pentingnya mereka,.Terlalu sibuk mencari nama dengan menciptakan sesuatu yang
baru dan berani, dan kurang menoleh ke belakang.
Padahal arsitek-arsitek besar yang menciptakan pembaruan juga adalah sosok yang sangat
menghargai pekerjaan konservasi dan sejarah. Kurator Vennice Biennale 2014, Rem Koolhaas,
memberikan tema “Fundamentals”, yang akan mencoba mengangkat evolusi arsitektur
nasional sebuah negara dalam kurun waktu 100 tahun. Pada tahun 2012, delapan pemenang
Pritzker Prize, dan beberapa arsitek ternama lain mengirimkan sebuah surat terbuka2
kepada
walikota Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, untuk menghentikan penghancuran Rumah Sakit Prentice
karya Bertrand Goldberg, yang akan digantikan oleh bangunan riset medis Universitas
Northwestern.
Setahun kemudian, Rem Koolhaas, Peter Eisenman, Steven Holl, dan beberapa nama besar
lainnya juga menandatangani surat terbuka3
untuk preservasi rumah Konstantin Melnikov
di Moskow, Rusia. Surat tersebut menyatakan pentingnya preservasi rumah tersebut untuk
menjadi sebuah museum publik. Segala dokumentasi tentang Melnikov juga sebaiknya
dikumpulkan di sebuah museum yang terletak dekat dengan rumahnya, dan terbuka untuk
pembelajaran arsitek, akademisi dan masyarakat.
Bangunan kolonial di KotaTua Jakarta rubuh di awal tahun 2014 karena kurangnya sentuhan konservasi
©YusniAziz

49
Lantas,
kenapa kita seperti masih kekurangan arsitek konservatoris? Apakah kita butuh lebih banyak
arsitek konservatoris? Bagaimana sebetulnya realita yang terjadi di Indonesia?
Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan (Kemdikbud) merupakan kementerian yang
bertanggung jawab terhadap pelestarian Bangunan Cagar Budaya (BCB) dan Kawasan Cagar
Budaya (KCB). Nadia Purwestri, direktur PDA, menyampaikan kondisi yang sedang terjadi,
“Nah, Kemdikbud itu didominasi arkeolog. Mereka memperlakukan bangunan yang bukan
candi seperti candi.Akhirnya bikin dead monument, bukan living monument.”
Menurut Arya Abieta, anggota Tim Sidang Pemugaran (TSP) DKI Jakarta, realita yang terjadi
ini bukan sesuatu yang salah. Namun memang sering terjadi perbedaan pola pikir dalam
pelaksanaan konservasi.“Sederhananya, teman-teman arkeolog ingin mengajak masa kini ke
masa lalu. Kita arsitek ingin mengajak masa lalu ke masa kini.”
Konservasi bangunan di Indonesia memang dipelopori oleh profesional di bidang arkeologi.
Pada era kolonial, banyak masyarakat Eropa yang tertarik kepada kebudayaan nusantara.
Karena hal ini dapat mengangkat nama Belanda di mata internasional, akhirnya Commisie in
Nederlandsche-Indie voor Oudheidkundige Orderzoek op Java en Madura dibentuk tahun 1901,
untuk mengelola warisan budaya Indonesia.
Komisi ini akhirnya menjadi Dinas Purbakala Hindia-Belanda (Oudheidkundige Dienst in
Nederlandsche-Indie) di tahun 1913. Secara undang-undang, Monumenten Ordonnantie no.
238 tahun 1931 juga ditetapkan untuk melindungi dan mengelola cagar budaya, yang menjadi
dasar pembentukan UU Cagar Budaya no 5 tahun 1992.
Dari sini muncul beberapa tindakan arkeologis yang sangat fundamental. Pada tahun 1907
hingga 1911, tim pimpinan Theodoor van Erp melakukan restorasi pertama Borobudur.
Kemudian tahun 1902, van Erp juga mengawali pemugaran candi Prambanan, yang akhirnya
terselesaikan tahun 1953 di bawah pemerintah Indonesia4
.
Borobudur sebelum proses
restorasi Theodoor van Erp.
(Sumber: Borobudur, Periplus
Editions HK Ltd. 1990)
2. Surat terbuka dapat dilihat di:
http://resources.bertrandgoldberg.
or g/Open-Letter-to-Mayor-
Emanuel_Prentice_08.29.12.pdf
3. Surat terbuka untuk preservasi
rumah Konstantin Melnikov
dapat dilihat di: http://www.
arquitecturaviva.com/media/
Documentos/melnikov_heritage.pdf
4. Lihat “Momen penting dalam
pergerakan konservasi arsitektur
Indonesia” di akhir halaman

50
Mayoritas arsitek sendiri pada saat itu lebih terfokus untuk mengenalkan modernisme, atau
berusaha melakukan sintensis dengan kearifan lokal. Di era pemerintahan Soekarno, mereka
semakin sibuk dengan arsitektur modern sebagai usaha penciptaan identitas baru bangsa
Indonesia. Hingga akhirnya di tahun 1970an, konservasi semakin terangkat di kalangan arsitek
ketika Ali Sadikin mempelopori revitalisasi kota tua Jakarta.
Namun pendidikan arsitektur di perguruan tinggi pada saat itu masih belum memberikan
pendidikan konservasi. Alhasil, arsitek Indonesia yang mendapatkan proyek konservasi
cenderung belajar secara otodidak seperti Han Awal.
Dewasa ini, beberapa universitas sudah mengenalkan ilmu konservasi bangunan, meski masih
dalam ranah mata kuliah pilihan. Konservasi seakan masih belum menjadi hal krusial dalam
dunia pendidikan arsitektur Indonesia. Nadia berpendapat, “Karena pemugaran itu engga
popular. Mereka lebih suka desain kan? Bangunan tingkat tinggi, atau yang kompleks. Daripada
bangunan tua itu.”
“Mata kuliah sejarah arsitektur juga cenderung di anak tirikan oleh mahasiswa karena buat
mereka engga keren.”
“Tapi menurut saya ya engga salah kalau mahasiswanya kaya gitu, lah dosen-dosennya juga
banyak yang engga paham.”
Alhasil mayoritas arsitek muda kurang memiliki kesadaran dan wawasan konservasi yang
diperlukan dalam dunia arsitektur. Jika hal ini terus berlanjut, praktik konservasi terancam
akan selalu didominasi oleh arkeolog. Arya mengatakan dominasi ini juga berdampak besar
pada kinerja dokumentasi depdikbud, dimana data gambar yang sudah ada cenderung masih
prematur untuk kebutuhan kerja arsitek.
Ini menjadi salah satu alasan untuk
mendirikan PDA sebagai institusi
independen pada tahun 2002. Sebagai
salah satu pendiri, Arya menyatakan PDA
berusaha menjembatani perdebatan
antara arsitek dan arkeolog. PDA juga
melakukan pekerjaan esensial melalui
kegiatan penelitian dan dokumentasi isu-
isu arsitektur dan cagar budaya Indonesia.
“Kalau bikin ‘Pedoman’ terlalu formal, itu urusan negara
dan pemerintah, akhirnya dinamakan ‘Panduan’. Panduan
itu pun pada saat mau dicetak kita pikir harusnya dibuat
oleh instansi yang berwenang. Makanya saya rubah
judulnya jadi ‘Pengantar Panduan’. Dan istilahnya sangat
di-appreciate oleh pihak pemerintah.”, ujar Han Awal.
©YusniAziz

51
Sebagai arsitek konservatoris, Han Awal merasa mendapatkan dukungan luar biasa dengan
adanya PDA. Dia juga merasa PDA telah melakukan sebuah gerakan signifikan dengan
penerbitan “Pengantar Panduan Konservasi Bangunan Bersejarah Masa Kolonial” di tahun
2011. Buku ini mencoba memberikan pemahaman dasar konservasi dari sudut pandang
arsitek. Sesuatu yang belum pernah ada sebelumnya. Dengan adanya buku ini untuk publik,
Han berpesan,“Saya yakin setiap arsitek bisa melakukan konservasi, asal ada sikap ingin tahu
dan hati-hati.”
*
Selain pendidikan, kebijakan pemerintah juga berdampak besar pada praktik arsitek
konservatoris. UU Cagar Budaya no. 11 tahun 2010 mengamanatkan bahwa setiap
pemerintah kota harus memiliki tim Ahli Cagar Budaya untuk mengusulkan penetapan atau
penghapusan BCB. Arya memandang ini sebagai sebuah langkah yang positif. Dia kemudian
menegaskan bahwaTSP DKI Jakarta telah berdiri jauh sebelum terbitnya kebijakan tersebut,
dan bahkan fungsinya telah merambah ke ranah perijinan.
Dengan ini, setiap arsitek yang menangani proyek tentang BCB atau KCB di Jakarta harus
berdiskusi dengan TSP, yang anggotanya mencakup arsitek, arkeolog, planolog hingga
budayawan. Arya berpendapat bahwa diskusi ini dapat membantu mencari solusi terbaik
untuk proyek konservasi yang cenderung memiliki grey area yang sangat tebal. Apa yang
sebaiknya tidak dilakukan di bangunan satu mungkin dapat menjadi sebuah rekomendasi ke
bangunan yang lain, tergantung dari berbagai pertimbangan arsitektural dan konteks pada
saat itu.
Meski demikian, dukungan pemerintah dirasa masih belum optimal. Masih banyak juga
kebijakan yang cenderung menjerat praktik arsitek konservatoris.
“Serba sulit kalau kita kaitkan dengan aturan proyek pemerintah. Proyek itu ditenderkan,
komponen penilaian tender lebih banyak biaya daripada teknis. Sementara kalau bicara
konservasi, justru masalah teknis didahulukan”, komentar Arya.
Insentif untuk konservasi juga masih belum ada sehingga arsitek dan pemilik bangunan tidak
terlalu tertarik untuk mengusulkan konservasi. Arya menambahkan,“Pada waktu bekerja di
konservasi, sebetulnya kita kerja double. Sebagai arsitek dan peneliti. Namun jika itu proyek
pemerintah, kita dibayar seperti proyek pemerintah yang lain. Dan sialnya juga terkadang
pekerjaan itu disebut sebagai pekerjaan rehabilitasi!”
Standar gaji untuk pekerjaan rehabilitasi memang cukup minim, ujar Han Awal. Membuat
konservasi cenderung menjadi pekerjaan sampingan seorang praktisi,demi hobi atau idealisme
dalam berprofesi. Hal ini tentu membuat banyak orang berpikir dua kali jika ingin mendalami
konservasi. Membuat kita terancam untuk selalu kekurangan arsitek konservatoris.

52
Namun akhirnya tantangan yang luar biasa besar, tidak membuat para penggiat konservasi
menyerah. Perlahan tapi pasti, dengan optimis, perjuangan Han Awal, Arya Abieta, Nadia
Purwestri bersama rekan lain untuk mengangkat praktik konservasi semakin menunjukkan
masa depan yang cerah.
Kesadaran pemerintah kota dan masyarakat akan pentingnya bangunan bersejarah semakin
meningkat. TimAhli Cagar Budaya sudah dibentuk di Surabaya,Solo,Yogyakarta,dan beberapa
kota lainnya. Mimpi Ali Sadikin pun dilanjutkan kembali lewat sebuah langkah yang patut
dicontoh melalui kerjasama pembentukan Jakarta OldTown Revitalization Corporation (JOTRC).
Konsorsium ini berinisiatif untuk menghidupkan kembali kawasan Kota Tua dengan membeli
85 bangunan dan merenovasinya kembali. Ini berarti juga membuka jalan lapang untuk
pekerjaan konservasi bersama dengan pihak privat hingga setidaknya 20 tahun kedepan,
sesuai target operasi mereka.
Proyek konservasi kita juga sering mengangkat dunia arsitektur Indonesia di mata internasional.
“Award of Excellence” dari UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Award pernah diberikan kepada
proyek Arsip Nasional pada tahun 2001, atau Wae Rebo dari Rumah Asuh pada tahun 2012.
Wae Rebo juga pernah terdaftar dalam shortlist untuk Aga Khan Award 2012.
Semakin banyak juga kerjasama dengan pihak internasional terkait dengan pergerakan cagar
budaya mulai dari International Committee of the Blue Shield, UN-Habitat, UNESCO, dan
dengan Pemerintah Belanda, seperti program Jakarta Old Town Reborn dan Inventarisasi
benteng di Indonesia.
Namun perjalanan masihlah panjang. Masih banyak mimpi yang ingin dicapai. Nadia berharap,
“Saya inginnya makin banyak arsitek yang melek konservasi. Supaya bangunan-bangunan kita
bisa lebih lestari.”
Arya juga merasa bahwa hal itu sangat penting, sehingga dunia arsitektur bisa menjadi lebih
ideal. Arsitek konservatoris bisa bergerak secara independen atau mendukung arsitek lain
dalam proyek konservasi. Kerjasama ini sangat penting sehingga usulan akan menjadi kreatif
dan tetap dapat dipertanggungjawabkan dalam kaidah konservasi. Untuk dunia konservasi
yang lebih progresif, tidak selalu didominasi oleh pendekatan arkeologis.
Gedung Arsip Nasional dan Wae Rebo, pemenang penghargaan tertinggi,“Award of Excellence” dari UNESCO Asia-
Pacific Heritage Award. (Sumber: kiri: ©Henrivandeputte; kanan: ©florestourism.com)

53
Tanpa terasa, kopi susu saya sudah hampir habis. Langit juga sudah mulai gelap.Ternyata sudah
satu jam lebih saya bercengkrama dengan Han Awal. Menjelang akhir, Han Awal menekankan
dia tidak pernah berekspektasi macam-macam dalam berprofesi sebagai arsitek konservatoris,
meski pengakuan semakin sering datang dari berbagai pihak. Seperti ProfessorTeeuw Award
dalam bidang pemugaran yang diberikan kepadanya di tahun 2007; dan Satya Lencana dari
Presiden SBY yang dianugerahkan atas perjuangannya dalam konservasi di tahun 2013.
Ketika saya tanyakan apakah ada keinginan untuk mendapatkan penghargaan UNESCO
untuk proyek Jakarta Kota Tua, dia menjawab, “Saya lebih mementingkan, bagaimana saya
bertanggung jawab kepada isu sejarah. Kalau saya dapat memperkaya tanpa mengganggu
jejak sejarah, its okay. Bahwa itu nanti dihargai macam-macam, itu bonus.”
“Yang penting, saya bertanggung jawab. Dan itu satu poin yang juga harus dipegang arsitek
terutama yang muda, beranilah bertanggung jawab!”
Begitu banyak ilmu yang dia dapat dari bekerja sebagai arsitek konservatoris. Mulai dari
kearifan masa lampau, hingga cara pandang baru yang lebih menghargai setiap peran dalam
proses pembangunan sebagai mitra sejajar, baik klien, kontraktor ataupun para pengrajin.
Untuk semua ini, Han Awal berkata, “Saya sangat berterima kasih. Luar biasa kayanya. Dan
saya ingin kerja terus sampai akhirnya engga bisa.”
Dalam dunia pendidikan, Nadia
berharap dalam waktu dekat sebaiknya
semua universitas bisa mewajibkan
mahasiswa arsitektur untuk mengambil
mata kuliah konservasi, minimal satu
semester. Arya juga mengusulkan
sebaiknya mulai dipikirkan mendirikan
S2 khusus konservasi, mengingat
beberapa universitas sudah memiliki
sumber daya yang memadai.
Han Awal menambahkan, “Undang-
undang dan peraturan yang ada perlu
dielaborasi. Dan janganlah konservasi
itu dianggap sebagai kerjaan rehab.
Skala fee-nya itu tidak banyak.Kalau ada
peraturan yang lebih baik, dan insentif
mungkin orang akan lebih tertarik.”
*
Pemugaran gedung Jasindo oleh Arya Abieta dalam proses
konstruksi. JOTRC akan melanjutkan dengan 85 bangunan
lainnya ©YusniAziz

54
Monumenten Ordonantie
no. 238 tahun 1931
Monumenten Ordonantie
no. 21 tahun 1934
1901: Commisie in Nederlandsche-Indie voor
Oudheidkundige Orderzoek op Java en Madura
(Komisi Penelitian Arkeologi di Hindia-Belanda)
1913: Oudheidkundige Dienst
in Nederlandsche-Indie (Dinas
Purbakala Hindia-Belanda)
1907 - 1911: Restorasi pertama
Borobudur olehTheodoor van Erp
1902 - 1903: Restorasi bagian dasar Candi
Prambanan olehTheodoor van Erp
1918 - 1926: P. J. Perquin (Oundheidkundige
Dienst) melanjutkan restorasi Prambanan
1926 - 1930: De Haan melanjutkan
restorasi Prambanan
1931 - 1942: V.R. van Romont
merestorasi Prambanan
PENGHARGAAN
MOMEN PENTING DALAM PERGERAKAN KONSERVASI ARSITEKTUR INDONESIA
PROYEK
KONSERVASI
PROGRAM &
ORGANISASI
UNDANG
UNDANG
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950
1951
Diens
Purba
19
19
Siw
te
Pe

55
TAHUN PUSAKA INDONESIA 2013
TAHUN PUSAKA INDONESIA 2003
1: Oudheidkundige
st menjadi Dinas
akala
953 - 1957:ATAP
953: Restorasi Candi
wa, Prambanan
erselesaikan di bawah
emerintah Indonesia
1971 - 1984: Restorasi kedua
Borobudur oleh Pemerintah Indonesia
1977 – 1987: Restorasi
Candi Brahma, Prambanan
1982 – 1991:
Restorasi Candi Wisnu,
Prambanan
1997 - 1998: Restorasi
Arsip Nasional, Jakarta
2011: IAI Award untuk Wae Rebo
2012: UNESCO Asia
Pacific Heritage Award:
“Award of Excellence”
untuk Wae Rebo;
IAI Jakarta Award
kepada Swiss Ambassador
Residence
2000: UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awards:
“Honorable Mention” untuk Restorasi rumah
Charles Prosper Wolff Schoemaker, Bandung
2001: UNESCO Asia Pacific Heritage Award:“Award
of Excellence” untuk Arsip Nasional, Jakarta
2003: UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awards:“Award
of Merit” untuk Jembatan Chen-Tek, Medan.
2006 - 2008: Konservasi gedung
bank Indonesia, Jakarta
2010: Konservasi gereja St
Leo, Padang & Rehabilitasi
Jam Gadang, Bukittinggi
2014: Renovasi
gedung Jasindo &
Kantor Pos, Jakarta
2004 - 2010: Konservasi
gedung eks Imigrasi, Jakarta
2009: Pelestarian Wae Rebo
2008: Berdirinya JKPI; Rumah
Asuh; dan Indonesian Committee
for Blue Shield
2012: P3KP / Kota
Pusaka Heritage Planning
2013: Lahirnya JOTRC
& JEFORAH
2007: OMAH UGM, Inventarisasi
benteng seluruh Indonesia
(hingga 2010); Berdirinya Jakarta
OldTown Kotaku
2006: IAI Jakarta Award kepada Konservasi
Gedung Eks Imigrasi Bataviasche Kunstkring
2004: Lahirnya BPPI
2007: Soedarmadji Damais,Wastu Pragantha Zhong & Han Awal
mendapat penghargaanTeeuw Award untuk pemugaran.
1987: Pemugaran gereja
Katedral, Jakarta
1959: Lahirnya Ikatan Arsitek Indonesia (IAI)
Sumber: Pusat Dokumentasi Arsitektur, BPPI & Berbagai Sumber
1970an: Revitalisasi Jakarta Kota
oleh Ali Sadikin
1991: Balai Studi dan Konservasi
Borobudur. Pada tahun 2006,
berubah menjadi Balai Konservasi
Peninggalan Borobudur
UU Cagar Budaya
no. 5 tahun 1992
2000: Lahirnya JPPI
2002: Berdirinya Pusat
Dokumentasi Arsitektur
2003: Lahirnya Piagam
Pelestarian Pusaka Indonesia.
UU Cagar Budaya
no. 11 tahun 2010
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Akhir 1980an: Lahirnya Arsitek Muda Indonesia (AMI)

56
YORI ANTAR :
PERJUANGAN UNTUK
NUSANTARA
oleh Yusni Aziz

57
Siapapun yang pernah mengunjungi kantor Han Awal &
Partners pasti terhenyak saat datang pertama kali. Selamat
tinggal suasana kantor yang tipikal, karena apa yang ada lebih
mirip sebuah rumah peristirahatan dengan kolam renang
dan area untuk bersantai. Bahkan saat datang kesini, David
Gianotten dari OMA pun berujar,“We should have an office
like this!”.
Bangunan yang sama juga menjadi markas Rumah Asuh,
yayasan pertama di Indonesia yang bergerak dalam preservasi
arsitektur nusantara. Sore itu, saya, mewakili RUANG, datang
untuk berdiskusi dengan Yori Antar mengenai pergerakan
tersebut. Sebuah langkah baru dan berani untuk dunia
arsitektur Indonesia.
Bagaimana sebetulnya Rumah Asuh (RA) didirikan?
Saya sering melakukan perjalanan, baik di dalam maupun
di luar negeri, untuk melihat obyek-obyek arsitektur. Dari
arsitektur modern, seperti Le Corbusier atau Mies van de
Rohe,hingga arsitektur tradisional yang dibangun masyarakat
setempat. Setelahnya, saya refleksikan terhadap keadaan
Indonesia. Seringkali saya menemukan fakta-fakta baru.
Salah satu perjalanan yang terpenting adalah ketika ke negeri
Tibet. Kami mengunjungi 3 wilayah Tibet: Tibet Cina, Tibet
Nepal, dan Tibet India. Pada tahun 2003, perjalanan kami
menghasilkan buku berjudul Tibet di Otak. Iseng-iseng kami
meminta kata sambutan dari Dalai Lama, mengejutkannya
ia membalas kurang dari 2 minggu.Tulisannya menggerakan
saya untuk lebih mengetahui negeri sendiri.
Apa yang sangat berkesan dari kata sambutannya ?
Saat kami diTibet Cina,Dalai Lama sudah terusir ke India.Kami katakan bahwa kami mendapat
banyak pengalaman yang luar biasa di negeri Tibet. Tidak banyak orang Indonesia yang
mengenal negeri anda, karenanya kami ingin menuliskannya dari kacamata orang Indonesia.
Dia membalas, walaupun bangsa Indonesia tidak mengenal negeri Tibet. Sebaliknya, sejak
berdirinya negeri Tibet sampai sekarang kami selalu mengenal Indonesia. Guru besar kami
seorang India bernama Atisa Dipamkara. Ia berguru selama 11 tahun kepada seorang Lama
– pemimpin tinggi Budha – bernama Serlingpa. Lama itu berasal dari Golden Islands, atau
tepatnya tepatnya Sumatra. Di sana dia dikenal sebagai Dharmakirti.
Semua foto ©RumahAsuh

58
Hal itu menjadi pelajaran wajib murid-murid BudhaTibet.Sedangkan,
orang Indonesia sendiri engga tahu Dharmakirti dan peninggalannya.
Perjalanan penting lainnya ketika kami ke Kamboja untuk melihat
Angkor Wat, yang ternyata sangat mirip dengan Prambanan dan
Borobudur. Ternyata dinasti Jayawarman I, yang memimpin pada
masa itu, berasal dari dinasti Syailendra yang juga membangun
Borobudur. Angkot Wat adalah kerajaan yang didirikan oleh dinasti
Syailendra dalam pelariannya ke Kamboja.
Indonesia telah menginspirasi sekelilingnya di masa itu, namun
orang Indonesia kurang mengenal negeri sendiri. Buku-buku yang
menceritakan sejarah Indonesia malah ditulis oleh orang asing.
Bahkan, masak candi Borobudur yang menemukan Raffles? Kan
Aneh? Udah ada dari dulu, kenapa dia yang nemuin!
Pengetahuan sejarah yang blank, membuat kita amnesia sejarah.
Dari sana, saya ingin lebih mengenal Indonesia, karenanya kami
melakukan perjalanan rutin keliling Nusantara. Sejak 2003, kami
sudah mengunjungi Nias, Toraja, serta desa-desa adat yang sulit
dijangkau. Pada tahun 2008, kami bertandang ke NTT, tepatnya
wilayah Flores dan Sumba. Dua perjalanan itu sangat penting untuk
kelahiran RA.
Di Sumba,kami bertemu seorang rohaniwan,fotografer,dan pecinta
budaya Sumba bernama Pastor Robert Ramone. Kelak dia akan
menjadi motor pembangunan program-program RA di Sumba, di
Katenggaro,Waenyabo, dan Baetabula.
Apa bapak Robert adalah orang asli Sumba?
Iya. Hidupnya juga diserahkan untuk melestarikan budaya Sumba.
Bersama pak Robert, RA melakukan pembangunan rumah-rumah
dan desa adat yang terus berjalan hingga sekarang.
Lain halnya dengan Flores, kami menemukan Wae Rebo. Awalnya,
kami tidak mengetahui lokasi Wae Rebo. Satu-satunya informasi
yang kami miliki adalah bangunannya, yang bisa memuat 100 orang,
terancam punah.Tanpa arah yang jelas, kami mencari ke Manggarai.
Setelah dua hari tanpa hasil, kami memutuskan untuk menghentikan
pencarian.

59
Dalam perjalanan pulang, kami mampir di sebuah rumah makan yang ramai dengan orang
asing. Kami terkejut oleh foto Wae Rebo di dindingnya. Namun, pemiliknya tidak tahu, hanya
menunjuk rombongan turis yang akan menuju Wae Rebo dan menyarankan seorang supir
yang bisa mengantar. Kamipun membuat janji dengannya untuk berangkat ke Wae Rebo jam
10 malam. Namun, ia tidak datang, dan digantikan oleh temannya. Sayangnya ia juga hanya
mengerti bahasa Manggarai. Kami pasrah, dan tetap berangkat.
Dari Ruteng, kami bermobil dari jam 12 malam hingga 5 pagi, namun belum terlihat tanda-
tanda Wae Rebo. Setengah 6 pagi kami sampai di sebuah desa bernama Denge, yang
merupakan perhentian terakhir ke Wae Rebo.
Kami bertemu dengan seorang guru bernama Blasius Monta. Ia kaget dengan kehadiran kami.
“Mau ke Wae Rebo? Deket, tinggal jalan kaki.Tapi makan dulu, jalannya agak berat.” Kami ber-
15 dikasih makan mi instan dan nasi. Setelahnya, pak Blas memanggil dua orang guide untuk
membimbing kami.
Kami berjalan tanpa jalan setapak dan menyeberangi sungai setinggi pinggang. Setelah 3 jam
masih belum sampai, saya semakin deg-degan. Dua kali saya ingin kembali karena tidak ada
kejelasan. Perjalanan semakin berat. Kami tidak lagi berjalan dengan kaki; merayap bahkan
pakai pantat, bermodal nekat.
Setelah berjalan lima jam, pada jam 3 sore, kabut tiba-tiba terbuka.Terlihatlah siluet empat
rumah bundar. Kami berteriak senang, bertepuk tangan. Sementara Wae Rebo membalas
dengan gonggongan anjing.
2008
2008

60
Rupanya masyarakat sadar dengan kedatangan kami dan keluar rumah. Dua pihak yang sama-
sama asing bertemu.Buat saya,itu adalah pertemuan bersejarah.Kami adalah orang Indonesia
pertama yang masuk ke Wae Rebo! Kami menemukan desa yang nyaris punah.
Berdasarkan data pak Blasius, ada ratusan turis tapi tidak satupun orang Indonesia. Saat itu,
ada 8 mahasiswa dariTaiwan yang sudah seminggu menginap, dan 2 antropolog dari Amerika
yang perempuannya sudah menetap selama 1,5 tahun. Desa ini seperti jendela dunia. Di
tempat itu kami menemukan berbagai bangsa.
Orang Wae Rebo menganggap orang dari Jakarta adalah orang tua mereka. Saya katakan
bahwa saya datang dari Jakarta yang justru tidak punya akar. Saya datang untuk belajar dari
akar arsitektur Indonesia.
Kemudian sampai kapan kita hanya jadi penonton, padahal banyak potensi dari arsitektur
nusantara.Anggaplah kita seorang dokter. ada pasien yang sakit, kita hanya melihat, merekam,
dan memfoto penyakitnya, tapi jika tidak berusaha menyembuhkan, sama saja kita melakukan
dosa profesi. Jadi, jangan menunggu siapa-siapa lagi, ini tugas kita!
Kami mengenal seseorang dariWae Rebo bernama pak Martin.Ia pernah bercita-cita menjadi
pastur di Filipina, tetapi tidak jadi. Namun, positifnya dia belajar bahasa Inggris. Pak Martin
menjadi juru bicara Wae Rebo yang membawa keluar-masuk turis asing. Seperti duta besar.
Dan yang paling penting, kami bertemu pak Frans, kepala tukang yang pernah memperbaiki
Wae Rebo. Saya undang pak Blasius, pak Martin, dan pak Frans ke Jakarta.
Dahulu ada tujuh rumah, sekarang tinggal empat, kata mereka. Saya bertanya,“Kalau misalnya
dicarikan dana, mau engga kalian bangun lagi?” Mereka bilang, “Oh, itu engga pernah kita
pikirkan pak. Buat kami, memperbaiki saja udah lebih dari cukup. Kami miskin, engga bisa
mengambil kayu dari hutan karena hutan itu sudah termasuk kawasan hutan lindung.”
Jadi, karena desa tersebut termasuk kawasan hutan lindung yang tidak boleh ada manusia di
dalamnya. Pernah desa itu disuruh pindah. Mereka bingung, lah mereka sudah ada sebelum
Indonesia merdeka kenapa disuruh pindah? Akhirnya mereka harus beli kayu-kayu di pasar,
dan harganya mahal sekali. Padahal kayunya juga dari hutan mereka.
Itu ternyata juga permasalahan utama rumah adat dimana-mana!
Dari situ saya pertemukan mereka dengan ibuTirto,dariAqua,yang saya ajak menjadi donatur.
Awalnya,ibuTirto masih belum tertarik,namun,ketika bertemu dan melihat kejujuran mereka.
Ia pun terketuk dan berjanji membantu. Kami membuat program pembangunan satu rumah
di Denge. Semacam perpustakaan dan museum kecil, tempat dokumentasi pembangunan itu.
Kemudian di Wae Rebo, pembangunan dimulai. Menariknya, saat membangun, satu rumah
yang sudah agak rusak dipretelin untuk dipelajari dan diperbaiki. Setelah paham, mereka
dapat membangun kembali dengan cara mereka sendiri. Dari situ saya mendapatkan formula!

61
Pertama, cara mempelajarinya adalah
dengan membiarkan mereka membangun
dengan cara mereka seasli-aslinya, karena
itu rumah adat bukan rumah modern. Saya
juga melihat luar biasanya upacara, budaya,
kehidupan sosialnya sebagai sebuah kegiatan
yang sangat berharga, sebagai living culture.
Bahkan yang sudah mulai punah, hidup lagi.
Jadi sebetulnya bapak tidak
mempertahankan monument tapi
living culture-nya?
Iya. Buat saya, itu adalah living museum.
Setelah rumah itu selesai, bu Tirto tambah
lagi satu. Namun, rumah mereka masih
empat karena yang lama dibongkar lagi dan
membangun lebih cepat. Saat pembangunan
rumah kedua, saya mengirim dua mahasiswa
dari UI dan UNS untuk merekam prosesnya
dari awal sampai selesai. Selama satu bulan
lamanya. Tanpa pernah pulang. Data itu
menjadi buku Pesan dari Wae Rebo yang
menghasilkan tiga rumah lainnya. Lengkaplah
rumah Wae Rebo menjadi tujuh.
Selanjutnya, kami kirim lebih banyak
mahasiswa. Mereka mendokumentasikan
melalui tulisan,gambar digital,foto,dan video.
Data-data ini akan merubah pendidikan
arsitektur di Indonesia, karena untuk
pertama kalinya kita punya bahan arsitektur
nusantara. Prof Josef Prijotomo bahkan
berani menulis, “Kebangkitan Kembali
Arsitektur Nusantara”.
Wae Rebo menjadi bahan kampanye
saya ke perguruan tinggi dan pemerintah.
Depdikbud tersadar bahwa saya mengurusi
living culture, sementara mereka mengurusi
dead monument. Seharusnya kita
menyelamatkan living culture, bukan dead
monument. Dengan membuat museum,

62
jangan-jangan budaya malah kita matikan supaya bisa masuk museum.Mending kita selamatkan
desa-desa adat yang terancam punah. Ide ini didengar wamen, Ibu Wiendu Nuryanti, dan
kami ditawarkan program rumah budaya, yang diadopsi dari RA.
Program itu saya tolak, karena mindset berpikirnya proyek. Masa saya suruh jadi kontraktor.
Jangan pakai metode proyek, jangan pakai tender. Ini masyarakat, kita harus bekerja bersama-
sama masyarakat. Kalau dijadikan proyek, mereka akan melakukan penolakan, dan akhirnya
bukan milik mereka lagi.
Hal ini menyadarkan Kemen PU, program mereka dalam penyelamatan rumah adat
menghadapi banyak kegagalan. Rumah adatnya diganti semen, dicor, dan sebagainya.Ada satu
rumah yang berhasil dibangun oleh kontraktor, tapi masyarakat engga mau pakai.Tujuannya
sudah benar tapi resepnya salah.
Uang segitu banyak akhirnya engga kepakai, seperti program bagi-bagi kulkas untuk rumah
adat Sasak, Lombok, yang dilakukan Depdikbud . Masak rumah adat ada kulkasnya? Itu kan
konyol! Itu uang hangus, karena engga ada yang jalan.
Itu kan sebetulnya juga bisa memusnahkan budaya yang ada?
Iya, itu kan penghancuran sistematis. Saya katakan, sebaiknya sistemnya berupa bansos,
nilainya terbatas 500 juta. Itu sudah cukup! Dan untuk menerima dana bansos, masyarakat
harus membuat sebuah lembaga. Memang agak rumit, tapi programnya jalan. Pemerintah
membangun 2 rumah lainnya yang masih bagus,rumah yang utama dan terakhir,jadi semuanya
benar-benar baru. Mereka juga membangun di Sumba. Kemdikbud sekarang bangga dan
mereka mengadopsi resep RA.
Yang paling penting buat saya dengan program RA ini, kita berhasil merubah mindset dunia
pendidikan. Kalau merubah jalur birokrasi, sampai kapanpun tidak bisa. Mindset bahwa
arsitektur Indonesia ini harus mengacu kepada arsitektur nusantara. Seluruh dunia sedang
mencari green building, arsitek nusantara jelas memenuhi green building. Ada gempa dimana-
mana,arsitektur nusantara tetap survive. Makanya kita harus mengkinikan arsitektur nusantara.
Apa proses pengkinian arsitektur nusantara itu saat ini sudah berjalan?
Sudah, justru melalui perguruan tinggi. Permasalahannya adalah, selama masa kuliah hingga
kini, kita tidak pernah mendapatkan pendidikan arsitektur nusantara. Buku-buku tentang
arsitektur dan tokoh luar negeri hafal, tapi buku tentang arsitektur nusantara engga ada.
Dari sini, mahasiswa belajar banyak dan makin banyak yang ingin ikut. Program kami di
Sumpur, Sumatera Barat, malah yang bergerak satu universitas, yaitu Universitas Bung Hatta.
Inilah dunia akademis kita yang baru, dan ini menjadi tugas teman-teman IAI daerah. Jadi tidak
usah repot-repot, selamatkanlah semua aset budaya daerah itu.

63
Kita akan bikin buku yang akan menjadi pembelajaran. Buku itu akhirnya menjadi hak cipta
kita semua. Jadi kalau ada yang minta data ke saya, saya kasih. Mari kita menuju arsitektur
Indonesia dengan mindset baru.
Jadi kesimpulan dari saya adalah arsitektur nusantara penting buat Indonesia, dan penting juga
buat dunia. Sudah saatnya arsitektur nusantara menginspirasi dunia. Permasalahannya, siapa
duluan yang mendapat ilmu itu? Kalau kita engga duluan, arsitek luar negeri yang bisa duluan
menemukan formulanya.
Apakah pengkiniannya juga sudah terformalisasi ke dalam institusi pendidikan?
Pasti. Sekarang ini ada sayembara arsitektur nusantara yang disponsori oleh Propan, dan
sebagian dari perguruan tinggi sudah menjadikan sebagai bagian dari studio atau ujian akhir.
Jurinya pak Endy Subijono, Popo Danes, Prof. Josef Prijotomo.
UNESCO juga pertama kalinya memberi penghargaan kepada bangunan seperti Wae
Rebo. Selama ini mereka condong memberikan penghargaan kepada bangunan-bangunan
yang lebih tektonik, dari batu atau bata. Mereka bilang ada dua poin yang membuatnya
menang. Pertama yang melakukan adalah masyarakatnya sendiri dan kedua, terjadi proses
pembelajaran kepada masyarakat adat sekaligus kepada dunia akademis.
Dari sini kita mulai menerima banyak panggilan. Saya dipanggil ke Australia, Kroasia untuk
bicara mengenai Wae Rebo.Wae Rebo akhirnya juga masuk shortlist Aga Khan. Itu publikasi
yang luar biasa, alhasil tahun lalu jumlah turis meningkat ke Waerebo hingga 4 kali lipat, baik
turis asing maupun lokal.
Jadi, walau ada DNA yang hilang, yang baru yang bisa kita tambahkan ke dalam masyarakat.
DNA yang baru itu kita berikan pembelajaran seperti pariwisata dan bahasa Inggris. Saya
sampaikan agar mereka membuka diri untuk eco-tourism. Seperti program homestay untuk
mendapatkan income.
Namun, kita juga harus waspada, apakah dengan banyaknya turis ini nantinya akan merubah.
Mereka punya cara sendiri untuk menyortir, saya usulkan kalau perlu dimahalin! Jadi turis yang
masuk juga bukan sembarangan, seperti di Nepal dan Bhutan.Turis yang kasar dan kelakuan
yang engga terpuji tidak diterima.
Tapi akhirnya menurut bapak apakah punahnya itu juga karena pendidikan
arsitektur modern?
Secara tidak langsung, kitalah pembunuhnya, melalui pendidikan arsitektur modern. Kita
diajarkan yang modern lah masa depan, arsitektur tradisional adalah masa lampau. Kita
dibingungkan dengan masa depan yang bukan dari akar kita, tapi dari revolusi industri Eropa.
Kita disuruh menganggap tradisi adalah bagian dari masa lampau.

64
Kemudian apa langkah kedepan dan mimpi besar dari RA?
RA bekerjasama dengan Propan mengadakan sayembara untuk perguruan tinggi, berkala
setahun sekali. Sayembara arsitektur belum pernah dilakukan secara masif dalam bentuk
roadshow ke perguruan tinggi. Ada 15 lebih perguruan tinggi yang kami datangi. Brief-nya
adalah merancang rumah budaya dengan mengkinikan arsitektur nusantara di daerah masing-
masing.Terbuka untuk mahasiswa dan fresh graduate yang maksimal 2 tahun lulus.
Sayembara berikutnya adalah mendata rumah tradisional. Jadi yang dipilih adalah siapa yang
bisa mendata selengkap mungkin dari Rumah Adat di daerah masing-masing. Misalnya sudah
kejadian,kita akan punya data untuk dibagi.Perguruan tinggi akhirnya punya PR yang luar biasa
untuk menggali budaya kita sendiri.
Bahkan, saya terobsesi untuk menemukan DNA bangunan yang sudah punah.
Misi saya, saya berharap tahun ini bisa membuat pameran bersamaTropeninstituut (Koninklijk
Instituut voor deTropen). Saya akan kasih semua bahan-bahan saya dari RA dengan kompensasi
bahan-bahan sejarah dari mereka. Data-data antropologis kita itu sangat lengkap di Tropen
Instituut dan KILTV.
Kami tidak hanya mengurus data di tingkat nasional,tetapi juga internasional.Bahkan kerjasama
ini juga akan sampai ke Malaysia.Saya pernah presentasi di Australia,bersama arsitek restorasi
Foto ©RumahAsuh

65
Asia. Pada saat arsitek Malaysia melihat waerebo, mereka kaget, “Kami baru sadar.Ternyata
selama ini kami merestorasi bangunan peninggalan Inggris! Kami ingin diajarin!”
Ada rumah Dayak di desa adat Dayak Bidayuh,Kalimantan,yang bentuknya bulat yang biasanya
mendampingi rumah tengkoraknya. Suku dayak ini ada di Indonesia dan juga Malaysia. Kami
pelajari dari Rumah Dayak yang ada di Malaysia kemudian diaplikasikan lagi ke Dayak yang di
Indonesia. Donaturnya saya yang carikan, tapi datanya dari mereka. Mereka setuju, dan lokasi
akhirnya di Indonesia. Datanya nanti buat Indonesia dan Malaysia.
Apa juga ada mimpi untuk membawa arsitektur tradisional Indonesia ke ranah
internasional ?
Jelas,mungkin itu bukan tugas saya lagi,tetapi arsitek-arsitek yang akan datang.Kami membuka
jalan, dan itu sudah cukup.Tidak usah mengurusi birokrasi yang begitu rumit, cukup dengan
mengubah mindset. Jadi kalau kita mau bikin perubahan secara cepat dan masif, itu harus dari
mindset. Percuma berbelit birokrasi, kita kecapekan sendiri.
Akhirnya, bagaimana kesan mahasiswa yang menginap 2-3 bulan di lapangan itu?
Kamu bisa tanya ke mahasiswa tersebut. Mereka pernah menjawab, kami dapat harta karun,
Pak! . Beberapa bilang,“ini seperti sekolah kami.”
Program itu berhasil buat saya,karena saya berhasil mengubah mindset dan kecintaan mereka,
dan menjadi militan. Mereka selalu menceritakan ini ke teman, dosennya, mereka jadi dikenal
dan ketua jurusannya minta lagi dikirimkan.
Kajur ITS sampai bilang,“saya senang sekali bapak mengirimkan mahasiswa kami ke Sumba.
Setelah pulang dia berubah”
“Dia lebih percaya diri”
Jadi pada waktu mahasiswa dia masih bingung, sekarang dia sudah mengerti kenapa dia
menjadi arsitek.
Setiap kali saya ke kampus, mereka selalu tanya, “Kapan kita dikirim?” Seperti perang, “kita
rebut merah putih!” Hahaha. Darah muda dan kebangsaan mereka hidup lagi.
Ini hal yang patut kami syukuri, karena engga mengira dampaknya sampai kemana-mana. Dan
ini bergulir terus, dan tetap menginspirasi. Bahkan Eko Alvares, yang juga dosen di Univ Bung
Hatta bilang,“Yor, aku akan melakukan apa yang kamu lakukan diWaerebo, membantu rumah
gadang dibangun.” Dia sudah ada pasukan mahasiswanya sendiri.
Sekarang, penghuni desa adat juga merasa bangga, karena desa-desa adatnya mendapat
perhatian dan mereka dalam posisi memberi. Sebuah kebanggaan untuk mereka.

66
PROFIL KONTRIBUTOR
narasumber
cor passchier
Cor Passchier is a Dutch architect-researcher (1945), who is a honorary
member of IAI (Indonesian Institute of Architects), also director of ”PAC
architects and consultants”. He is actively improving cultural ties between
Indonesia and the Netherlands, especially in the field of architecture. He
was previously awarded with the UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Award for
the conservation of the National Archives Building in Jakarta, along with the
architects Han Awal and Budi Lim. He was recently involved and responsible
for the bilateral project ”identification and inventory of Forts in Indonesia”
YORI ANTAR
Generasi kedua dari Han
Awal & Partners yang
telah aktif sejak 1970. Salah
satu pendiri AMI (Arsitek
Muda Infonesia) di tahun
1991 dan juga menjadi
fotografer freelance untuk
Aga Khan Awards for
Architecture. Pada tahun
2008, Ia mendirikan Rumah
Asuh yang terfokus pada
preservasi arsitektur
tradisional dan kolonial di
Indonesia.
Yusni Aziz
Alumnus dari double-degree bachelor program
kerjasama antara ITS dan Saxion Hogeschool of
Applied Sciences. Kemudian menyelesaikan riset di
Berlage Institute pada tahun 2013. Saat ini sedang
sibuk dengan riset independen.
johannes widodo
Associate Professor and the Deputy Head for Administration and Finance,
the co-Director of theTunTan Cheng Lock Centre for Asian Architectural
and Urban Heritage in Melaka (Malaysia), and Executive Editor of JSEAA
(Journal of Southeast Asian Architecture) at the National University of
Singapore. He is the founder of mAAN (modern Asian Architecture
Network) and iNTA (International Network ofTropical Architecture).
He received his degree in Architecture from Parahyangan Catholic
University (Bandung, Indonesia, 1984), Master of Architectural Engineering
degree from Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium, 1988), and PhD in
Architecture from the University ofTokyo (Japan, 1996).
Moch. Ichsan Harja Nugraha
He is an artist currently lives in Bandung, Indonesia __a city well-known for
its heritage of beautiful old buildings. Being its lifetime resident, He develop a
strong interest in urban/building conservation and since 2005 has already publish
several illustrated books, contain 150-300 building sketches exclusively done in
watercolor, aimed at promoting general public awareness on this issue. In 2009,
He got the Asian Public Intellectual (API) Fellowship to create a similar book on
Kyoto, a world-heritage city famous for its plethora of old and beautiful buildings.
kenta kishi
Direktur dari LWL (Lab for the wonderlanscape) sejak 2003 dan CDN
(Crisis Design Network) sejak 2007. Pada tahun 2010, melakukan sebuah
proyek studi urban di Surabaya sebagai API (Asian Public Intellectuals) dari
Nippon Foundation. Mendapatkan gelar BA di arsitektur dariTokyo University
of Arts dan M.Arch dari Cranbrook Academy of Art di Michigan, USA. Ia juga
mengajar sebuah studio desain diTokyo Zokei University.
diana ang
Diana Ang is a junior architect at Office for
Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) in Hong
Kong. She holds a Bachelor of Architecture
from Rice University. Previously, she
has worked atTod Williams BillieTsien
Architects in NewYork City.
daliana suryawinata
She is the founder of SHAU Rotterdam, curator of Open City Jakarta,
lecturer, researcher and PhD-by-Design nestor at the Why Factory,TU Delft.
She is chief officer of the Indonesian Institute of Architects, European Union
chapter. Daliana is a graduate of the Berlage Institute Rotterdam (MArch)
andTarumanagara University in Jakarta (BSc). She worked at OMA,West 8,
MVRDV, andramatin and Han Awal and Partners. Since 2006 she has been
teaching at the Berlage Institute, the Rotterdam Academy of Architecture,
and Delft University ofTechnology. Recently she received the ”ARCHINESIA
Certificate of Appreciation 2012” and ”Indonesian Diaspora Award for
Innovation 2012”. She is also an advisor to the architecture and urban design
programs at the Erasmus Huis Jakarta for the period 2012-2016.

67
#1: Ruang #2:Arsitektur Hijau #3: Jakarta #4: Karya Arsitek
Indonesia di luar
negeri
#5:Arsitektur
#6: Ruang Publik #7: Rumah
Edisi sebelumnya:
#8: Preservasi
Vol I:Abstraksi
RUANG merupakan sebuah wadah menyuarakan hati dan pikiran insan kreatif yang memiliki ketertarikan pada arsitektur,
kota serta permasalahan sosial disekitarnya. RUANG hadir untuk memasyarakatkan arsitektur melalui majalah elektronik
arsitektur.
Ingin berkontribusi? Kunjungi http://www.membacaruang.com
KOLEKSI RUANG

RUANGkreativitas tanpa batas
membacaruang.com
ruangarsitektur.tumblr.com
facebook.com/ruangarsitektur
@ruangarsitektur

e-magazine arsitektur. ruang 08|2014 Vol.2: Preservasi (Aksi)

More Related Content

Viewers also liked (19)

Similar to e-magazine arsitektur. ruang 08|2014 Vol.2: Preservasi (Aksi) (20)

More from akudanruang (8)

Recently uploaded (20)

e-magazine arsitektur. ruang 08|2014 Vol.2: Preservasi (Aksi)