救治或加害？古蹟活化的社會美學議題

Curing or Injuring? The Social Aesthetic Issues in the Revitalization of Historic Sites

蔡明哲(Ming-Che Tsai)

《美學藝術學》 3期 (2009/01) Pp. 37-54

摘要

古蹟活化，係指古蹟經由重建和再生，以作為空間適性再利用(adaptive reuse)的過程。如何將古蹟活化的問題，就和某一特定社會的社會美學價值判斷有著密切的關係。換言之，古蹟活化問題反映出此一社會的社會美學價值判斷的水準和品質，其中總是多多少少存在著社會美學觀點的爭議。有形文化資產的適性再利用，意味著要讓老舊的事物重獲新生命。因而，活化了的古蹟，一方面承載著文化歷史的古老象徵意義，同時一方面也承載著新的大眾遊憩和消費的象徵意義。
在資本主義的全球網絡，以及經濟開發的全國脈絡下，今日台灣社會的古蹟活化運動，變成不用置疑、普遍流行的滿足文化旅遊需求的全民運動。此一文化潮流，呼應著戰後以來台灣的文化政治口號的變遷，亦即「從民族文化復興到民主文化公民」的蛻變，也可以說「從國家威權到社區賦權」的轉變。這樣，使得台灣導向文化民主化和文化旅遊的趨勢。對台灣的人來說，活化古蹟到底實際上是救治了古蹟？還是加害了古蹟？這正是本論文所論述的關鍵問題。本文藉由社會符號學的四個方面，來分析這個社會美學議題。
反省西方主義意識形態，檢視台灣古蹟活化行動中，設計構思的開發主義、產製流程的產業主義和旅遊行銷的消費主義等，提出設計、製造和行銷模型(DPM Model, Designing, Producing and Marketing Model)，來診治古蹟活化過程，用以增 進救治而防止加害。讓古蹟經由活化，而能永續生存於休閒旅遊的消費時代，不斷反省並體認：古蹟活化本質上是一種社會價值判斷的美學議題。

關鍵字

古蹟活化 ； 社會美學 ； 全球在地化 ； 西方主義 ； 文化旅遊

並列摘要

The revitalization of historic sites indicates that the historic sites was reconstructed and regenerated for adaptive reuse. It relates to the issues of social value judgment or social aesthetic judgment in a given society. The revitalization of historic sites implies that the adaptive reuse for the tangible cultural assets. It seems that it will rejuvenate any old things to new one. Hence, the historic site not only bears old symbolic meaning of cultural history, but also bears new symbolic meaning of mass recreation and consumption.
Under the global and national contexts, revitalizing historic sites have become a prevailing cultural tourist movement in Taiwan society today. Being consistent with Agenda 21 (UN), The Cultural Diversity (UNESCO), Charter For Leisure (World Leisure and Recreation Association) and so on, all cultures and societies recognize the right and free choice of leisure life for all people. During the postwar years, the cultural political slogan in Taiwan has changed from ”nationalist cultural renaissance” to ”democratic cultural citizenship”. Or we can say that it has changed from ”state authority” to ”community empowerment”, and has led Taiwanese society to the trends of cultural democratization and cultural tourism. To the people in Taiwan, the practice of revitalizing historic sites is curing or injuring after all? This is the key question for this paper. And we will answer it by exploring the question through four aspects of social semiotic analysis.
In the first instance, we have to reflex the Occidentalism in our mind when we contemplate the problem before making a decision of revitalizing historic site. The Occidentalism means the stereotypes of Western world (Western culture and people) in the mind of Eastern people. The Occidental ideas dominate the whole process of designing, producing and marketing in the revitalizing historic sites. These ideas like the ideologies of developmentalism, industrialism and consumerism, restrain the mentality of many Taiwanese cultural workers and innovators including cultural industrial managers, government officers, NPOs, artists, artisans, experts and scholars.
As long as they adopt these ”progressive ideologies”, they may always scrape and scrub the old sign of cultural history when they renovate and better the historic site as a new consumptive sign of cultural commodity. Then, a question becomes unavoidable-Does the revitalization bring back to rebirth or ruin the life of historic site? Is it curing or injuring? Secondly, we will discuss how the cultural tourism takes a flexible coping strategy for response to the glocalization. The revitalizing historic sites are cleverly tied to the rise of cultural tourism. In the third aspect, a fierce debate on the new trend of cultural tourism is going on. We explore how Taiwanese cultural policies get into a new stage of the cultural citizenship. Passing through the ”cultural renaissance”, the cultural citizenship will be promoted to a next higher stage. In fact, community empowerment and cultural citizenship match well. In the fourth aspect, the revitalizing historic sites remind us an experience we once had. In a universal market, the use value of consumptive commodity always exceeds the sign value of cultural history. This has brought about many new, vicarious, pseudo, imitate and faked historic sites. In fact, sometimes revitalizing is an act of faking the ”fine” landscape, buildings and furniture of centuries ago. What we consider as the original prototype may actually be a forgery.
Only an excellent artisan with ingenuity can succeed while others fail. Furthermore, the more the cultural tourism of historic sites develops, the more their community consciousness declines. It seems to be a contradiction between local cultural history and mass consumptive tourism. So, revitalizing historic sites can be regard as a dialectic relation of cultural history and recreational commodity.
According to our discourses above, we draw a proposal of DPM model (Designing, Producing and Marketing process) to examine the reproducing consumptive signs of historic sites. The DPM model can obtain a lot of messages from the process which revitalizing historic sites. It will succeed to get the messages which include curing and injuring, benefits and costs, or strength and weakness. On the other hand, the DPM model will be able to diagnose the problems of sustainable development which takes place in the renovating and reusing of historic sites. In addition, because of the principalagent problems, the historic sites which depute their renovated engineering and reused managing may bring about destructiveness. There is a dilemma, a small regeneration means a small destruction, while a big regeneration means a big destruction.
In conclusion, since 1990s government and industries have been turning historic sites into tourist spots and recreational commodities. A full-scale and large number of imitate, faked and similar recreational commodities of historic sites provide to serve the needs of mass consumption. Henceforward, there are widespread tourist commodities of historic sites characterize by Disneyization and McDonaldization. The historic sites have become an alternative concession of recreation. The mainstream of government strategies for revitalizing historic sites are the blueprints of ”sharing for all people” and ”deputing management by private sector”. The public and private sectors wish to promote the performance of space usage and thereby appropriate the uniqueness of historic sites for the brand of marketing and replace the cultural meaning of historic sites to the space usage efficiency.
In any case, revitalizing the historic sites may help to cure the new life of cultural heritage, and possibly injure the old life on the other hand. Finally, the question of social aesthetics proves worthwhile to make a continual depth exploration.

並列關鍵字

The Revitalization of Historic Sites ； Social Aesthetics ； Occidentalism ； Glocalization ； Cultural Tourist