Looking through the plan I am struck by the fact that nowhere in their brief was the protection of Sheffield’s Heritage and preservation of Sheffield’s history as an important part of the plan. They have only this and your guess is as good as mine as to what they actually mean by this statement.
“A city that expresses the many layers of its history and evolution in its urban fabric. While preserving the diverse wealth of Sheffield’s historic buildings, the potential of sites which are ripe for redevelopment is simultaneously embraced to create the heritage of the future. “
That doesn’t read like historical restoration or the preservation of Sheffield’s heritage to me at all. It reads as justification for doing something new instead. It uses a future view point to critique the plans (by definition, what we have today or build tomorrow will become the heritage of the people of tomorrow’s tomorrow) and ignores what came before it. I suppose somebody may have thought they were clever in coming up with that justification but it does not help us today and it does not ultimately help our heritage.
People who wish to replace the old with the new, for whatever reason, clearly sometimes use a future view point to justify their actions today. However in doing so they are ignoring what is real (i.e. the concrete past, which exists, and the desires of the present, which also exist) by utilising an imaginary position (i.e. from the future, which does not exist and is therefore imaginary). It could be argued that such a view point may actually be delusional.
I was wondering why I could not find a reference to Sheffield Castle in the plans and its restoration. The quote you’ve pulled out really helps to highlight why.
Looking through the plan I am struck by the fact that nowhere in their brief was the protection of Sheffield’s Heritage and preservation of Sheffield’s history as an important part of the plan. They have only this and your guess is as good as mine as to what they actually mean by this statement.
“A city that expresses the many layers of its history and evolution in its urban fabric. While preserving the diverse wealth of Sheffield’s historic buildings, the potential of sites which are ripe for redevelopment is simultaneously embraced to create the heritage of the future. “
That doesn’t read like historical restoration or the preservation of Sheffield’s heritage to me at all. It reads as justification for doing something new instead. It uses a future view point to critique the plans (by definition, what we have today or build tomorrow will become the heritage of the people of tomorrow’s tomorrow) and ignores what came before it. I suppose somebody may have thought they were clever in coming up with that justification but it does not help us today and it does not ultimately help our heritage.
People who wish to replace the old with the new, for whatever reason, clearly sometimes use a future view point to justify their actions today. However in doing so they are ignoring what is real (i.e. the concrete past, which exists, and the desires of the present, which also exist) by utilising an imaginary position (i.e. from the future, which does not exist and is therefore imaginary). It could be argued that such a view point may actually be delusional.
I was wondering why I could not find a reference to Sheffield Castle in the plans and its restoration. The quote you’ve pulled out really helps to highlight why.