Transcript: Episode #216: The Blueprint of Resistance

Below is the complete transcript for this podcast episode. This transcript was generated using an AI transcription service and has not been reviewed by a human editor. As a result, certain words in the text may not accurately reflect the speaker's actual words. This is especially noticeable when speakers have strong accents, as AI transcription may introduce more errors in interpreting and transcribing their speech. Therefore, it is advisable not to reference this transcript in any article or document without cross-referencing the timestamp to ensure the accuracy of the guest's precise words.


Host 0:13

Thank you for taking the time to check out the Insight Myanmar podcast. If you like what you hear, we would be very grateful if you might consider rating reviewing and or sharing this podcast. Every little bit of feedback helps. Also be sure to subscribe to the Insight Myanmar podcast on Apple podcast, Spotify, Stitcher, or wherever else you get your podcasts. And if your feed is not in your podcast player please let us know and we weren't sure it can be offered there.

Brad 1:45

so welcome back. My guest today is Elena and we're going to be talking about a reasonably complicated topic we will be discussing the relationship between politics, history and identity on the one hand, and on the other hand, the physical architecture and environment in which those politics that history and that identity are actually defined. So before we actually dive into the meat of the matter, I'd like to invite Elena to introduce herself and the work that she's done so far.

Helena 2:19

Thank you, Brad for having me. Yes, I'm Helena Ching, dice Yan. And I'm the curator and author of the project being in place longing for heritage in Yangon, Myanmar. The project is based on my master thesis at the University of Stuttgart, faculty of architecture and urban planning. And currently, I am having a exhibition in the museum in Stuttgart. It's

Brad 2:44

excellent. So I want to start with pretty basic questions so that we can get our bearings for this discussion. How do physical sites physical buildings and monuments affect our understanding of our own history and our own identity?

Helena 3:00

So, history as the social, our socio historic dynamic, are in some way reflected in the spatial environment. Having said that history, to a certain extent is displayed in the built environment and architecture and an urban planning or the urbanity in architecture we talk about actually talk to Paulo, based on Ledoux. And it's basically saying the speaking architecture that tries to narrate something about a place through its aesthetic through its design, states and later individuals will start to establish their own design in order to make their physical side speaking for who they are, and the scale of the city, the people are very deeply touch with that, but rather unconsciously, for most of us, that is where identity and the path of history get entangled. Unfortunately, not always for good as the to become the to history and identity, become representative phases of heritage and for that the governing entity. And in the scale of the city, the people are very deeply but rather unconsciously, in touch with these entanglements, and that is where identity and the path of history get entangled. Unfortunately, not always for good as the to become the representative faces of the very notorious term heritage and for governing entity. The heritage has become an way arraigning tool to exceed power. And that entanglement becomes problematic once the narrative of this heritage is guided by a specific ideology that suits only a certain group of the population. even when it is quite diverse, all of a sudden the physical side in this case, the city scape, becomes the platform and incubator to demonstrate and popularized specific narratives. And one can only become aware of how much the built environment influences the way we move, we think we feel and eventually supervised our sense of belonging to a certain community, or not an exclude, even in a letter and delay to process that physical space. And the rules that are set to live in that legal framework of that city to live in, triggers us to question about how identity as a city and certainly in a later process, that physical space and the rules that are said to live in that legal framework triggers us to question about our identity as a city. And certainly as an individual. In the case of Yangon, the holistic understanding of history is mainly provided by the Madras the junta do and is exacerbated by the authoritarian rulership over the urban planning units leading to an environment that would only share the story from the Hunters Point of View. Yeah.

Brad 6:18

So I just want to immediately follow up on that. You mentioned urban planning units can can you talk more about what that is?

Helena 6:27

Like the by urban planning units, I mean, institutions that will plan and regulate the design and the infrastructure will proceed processes within the city. So I'm talking about administration's city governments, etc. And, yeah,

Brad 6:50

okay, so I'm gonna come back to that, because I do very much want to talk about the specifics of that. But before we do, I want to move on to history itself. And, and from that, I want to move on to heritage because I noticed the the way that you speak about heritage, and you, you seem to flag heritage as a sort of double edged sword. So the first thing that I want to clarify, because a lot of people don't think about it is that there is a chasm between what history is the things that happened in the past. And what we think history is, what the people who grow up think, is because it's not possible for us to know, everything that happened at every point in time, in the mind of every person, we learn a story about history, we learn a very specific image of our history, which is taught to us and there are many parts of our history that we don't know. And our identity is typically the result of that story, this this narrative that we are taught. It's not actually based on historical fact that we regularly have to go back to history and we regularly have to re examine, why do we believe things that we believe about history? Are our beliefs incorrect? Did somebody tried to lead us astray? And so, I want to ask you, specifically within the Burmese context, not necessarily in the in the urban planning contexts, but more broadly, can you think of ways in which Burmese history has been retold and reshaped in the minds of people to serve a political agenda and and to to basically change and to warp history into something that is not accurate?

Helena 8:39

Right. I think first of all, the term Burmese using it for when we speak about Myanmar is already one of the issues we have in this discourse about identity and heritage in Myanmar, because so many people outside of Myanmar think that we are all Burmese when actually we are actually a multi ethnic country. And I think this very much term also calling all of the people Burmese reflects on the representation of the cultures the dominating culture. And in that sense, a lot of the minority groups don't feel represented in this and and this is a very recent problem, but unfortunately, a very traded problem throughout the history of Myanmar. So, having said that, I would like to talk about the people of Myanmar in this referring to all peoples and Yeah, certainly history is a very complex and entangled medium For experts and for non experts, and especially for non experts to understand we are drawn to are not even just experts or non it's just human drawn to narratives and simplifications of these complex dynamics that took place in the passing events. And this processes many aspects might be omitted or even get lost. And therefore, it is important to take account and archive such contact history to provide for wholesome understanding for each individual, each generation that would help to understand that myths and narratives are a simplification of something greater. So indeed, history, historical facts need to stay facts and need to be aware that these facts are as equally important as the narratives we are drawn to. From the history arises a certain identity building narratives and myths also help to remind ourselves that the given status quo of identity is a actually a composition, a construct of a someone or a group and rulership. And that identity is very dynamic in terms of changing zeitgeist of the built environment, we human as part of the whole system change too. And it is only the rhythm of nature to adapt to the environment and rethink of who we are and what narrative we want to be represented by and at the same time honoring the past by acknowledging all shapes. And, yeah.

Brad 11:40

Okay, and so from that, I want to move forth into heritage specifically, because the way you speak about heritage, it makes it obvious that heritage heritage is not a sort of one dimensional thing, it's not a simple thing. And heritage is is both tangible, you know, physical evidence of the past itself, and overwhelmingly is intangible, its culture, its language, its practice, it's belief, it's historiography, its identity, it's all of these things wrapped into one. And correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be saying that heritage is something that governments attempt to take control of, and almost like a story that they're trying to manipulate, and they're trying to change in order to achieve their personal goals, visa vie the population, rather than the population itself taking charge of its own heritage. So I just, I just want to hear what your thoughts are on the issue of heritage and how you perceive heritage within this context.

Helena 12:42

Yeah, indeed. I think I'm, you're right, when we're talking about the context of Myanmar, about that term, and my perception of it, but I think heritage in itself is a treasure, and, and everyone knows about it. So, it is very much it is it moves people heritage, right. And whoever gets to speak about heritage, whoever gets to decide, what is heritage isn't power. So, in authoritarian governances, it is no surprise that these entities take over that that very sentimental and fundamental term of heritage and captured for their for their needs, right. So, if I think for most according to my research, heritage in Myanmar is is very heavy is a very heavy topic to talk about, because there are so many, so many layers that have not been discussed yet and represented yet. And so, for now, for the status quo heritage is instrumentalize. For the governing entity, the Damara, in this case, the junta to to educate the people about what is where they come from, who they are, and that is very much so through the lenses of their point of view of their, of their ideology. So yes, indeed, heritage is a powerful tool, and one has to be very careful using it.

Brad 14:46

Fair enough. And when we talk about the junta or the Damodara. We know about some of the more overt ways that they've tried to manipulate heritage like we are To stand the reeducation of the people to convince them that, that Dumbledore are the guarantors and the protectors of the state and of the people and that they are guiding the people to a better place and to democracy and they are at the vanguard of progress and the way that they've co opted Buddha's Buddhism, as well and forced people to learn those elements of Buddhist scripture which emphasize accepting fate, and accepting authority and piety and duty without emphasizing those elements of the scriptures that would lead people to start questioning the legitimacy of a regime that wantonly murder civilians. But in terms of your field, let's talk about the relationship the junta have historically had to the physical environment and to the to the sites that have historical inherited significance. What else have they been doing in the last 60 years?

Helena 15:59

Yeah, I guess when in a society displaying history as it is, with all the saddening and cheerful moments of that history doesn't play a major role, then certain sides that might have become iconic to these events become quite insignificant and even invisible. And this is what one can observe and Myanmar. In my research, I found that the valuation of historical sites that correspond to their ideology, that ideology of the hunter, are taken care of, and even contributed to within the process of merit making again, using Buddhism as their religion. So it is to the stakeholders of power, how historical and eventually these heritage sites are being treated. And so far in the past 60 years. In Myanmar, history is filtered through the lens of the junta and not all sides with respect to the ethnic groups are treated equally. The policy on heritage protection or these really eventful sites are still old fashioned and not applicable to the contemporary age in which Myanmar after all has got so talking about old fashion to the status quo of heritage sites, or historical sites. They're considered heritage and are protected by the city government, and also listed, but all these buildings are all the listed buildings consist of colonial buildings and religious structures, and other categories of buildings are neglected or even demolished. There are rarely signs of contextualizing what happened in the past what happened in the history. For example, the Yangon downtown prison that was demolished in 1985 is the site of the pro democracy resistance or the reconciliation with the Student Union for the Yangon University Student Union Building of 1962. And that matter, the junta choose to rebuild the historic building in 2017, without acknowledging and honoring the fallen and unarmed students that have been killed by the junta during the peaceful march again of 1962. And, and there is this, this very consistent resilience from the junta to not cope with the past, and rather to either rewrite it or abolish it, like we have seen with the prison and rebranding it in their own rhetoric in their own terms. And that's, that's currently the status quo, that after the opening in Myanmar, when I say opening, I'm referring to the year of 2011, when Myanmar started opening and going on the road of democracy a year later, so in 2012, fortunately, the Yangon Heritage Trust was found and they are one entity and this whole this whole discourse about heritage and belonging, who actually tried to research and advocate modernizing the perception of heritage. And fortunately, the Yangon Heritage Trust was found in 2012. They tried to advocate and modernize the perception of heritage research about historical sites beyond these two categories of colonial buildings and religious structures in Yangon. Therefore, adding more historical knowledge is needed. And in that understanding, even counter narratives can help. And not only help are necessary to achieve a greater perspective of that place other people live in, in this case, Yangon, and converse about the richness of their history that is woven within the urban fabric of Yangon.

Brad 20:33

And I wanted to continue on that because what's very interesting is that you you do mention that these these particular types of buildings, in particular, Buddhist religious buildings are more likely to be heritage listed. Although one example that I do want to before I before I talk about the religious buildings, one example that I do want to mention is the Secretariat, because the Secretary has been very strange, it's it's largely been under perpetual, sort of external renovation, as a lot of large older buildings are, that's not unusual. But it was kept closed for a very long time, it was opened on martyrs day, once a year, and that was about it. And now, they're in a position where they've sold a lot of real estate within the Secretariat to private enterprises, some of them, you know, Western, fast food companies, for example. And they have heavily commercialized the Secretariat, even though the secretariat is a building that it appears, even the junta have an understanding of the significance of and have a respect for. So is there is there some sort of internal clash or cognitive dissonance happening with the junta where they can view a site as being intrinsically important to the foundation of the country. And obviously, this is where General our son was murdered and much of his cabinet, while simultaneously also not being willing to support it, pay for it, upkeep it and and being willing to commercialize it and sell it off? Like what's happening there?

Helena 22:06

I think actually, it's already happening. Right? They did it years ago. Yeah, exactly. So I don't know where you're like, they do have this attitude to like, invest. But your question actually goes to like, why they can't keep it as a heritage site? And like, leave it more to like museums kind of state or Yeah, that would largely be talking about the secretary. It is very contested, due to its history. And certainly the junta that is how it is constituted today, has not taken part of that history. Right? It was on Sam, who founded them, but and who got set assassinated in this building. But when when one looks at or juxtapose these two narratives, the one talking about this building as his fundamental important building that survived all the eras or the reigning eras. And on the other side, it is the house where, yeah, the models. Current narrative just doesn't fit, right. And so it is. One, when you see it that way, one can understand its neglect from the hunter to reset building. And so for them, it is very easy to just take out all the sentimental feelings about this building that most of the people in Myanmar have about that side, and just commercialize it and make something profitable out of it in terms of commerce, and I think I can just assume, right, but that most like it is just not not part of their history, or they don't want to be related to it. And their strongest argument is to say this is the remnants of the colonial era. But yeah, forgetting about that this was the parliament right after independence, and it is very much woven and in the Myanmar history. And this is just an example of how they treat these historical sites. I mean, the junta

Brad 24:43

fair enough, and I want to circle back to the colonial heritage specifically but first I want to move to the religious heritage because this is something that that I also find very perplexing. The hunter here to be in two minds about these things. Because on the one hand, you have all of these temples that are being put up across the country, particularly when things aren't going well for the junta, they tend to invest heavily in building temples, because merit making in their mind is going to bring them success. But at the same time, when we look at began, began has incalculable heritage value. And when I visited, this would have been quite a few years back when maybe maybe four or so years back, the fee that was being paid, was being given about 90% to the Union government. And of the remaining 10%. If I remember correctly, something in the order like 8%, of that 10% was being given to the company that handles the transactions, so only some some 2% of the actual fee was being spent on rebuilding the site and due to the successive earthquakes and began the site is my understanding is it's either threatened by UNESCO as being taken off the Heritage list, or it may already have happened. I can't remember which this is simultaneously we look at, if I remember correctly, Gen. Danshui, who covered a famous white pagoda in gold, because he believed that that would bring him luck and the restoration work that was already underway. To return it to its original white facade was a very costly enterprise, but he was specifically famous for being a white pagoda we even had reports 2021 but following the coup, that gold plates were being removed from Shwedagon itself, and we definitely had images of soldiers walking out of Shwedagon carrying boxes of valuables, or or cash. So they definitely extracted significant value from Shwedagon, despite its clear significance to Buddhists. So on the one hand, it seems that they love Buddhism, and they love to patronize and invest in Buddhism, by building all of these temples, but on the other hand, they seem to also want to desecrate these temples and extract as much personal financial value from them as they can, once again, what is going on with this, like, what is the attitude of the hunter to Buddhist heritage here?

Helena 27:35

I think, I think we're just talking about a governance without moral maybe. And Buddhism was useful as long as it was useful to there raining and, and all that you've said, is just very, very evident to a governance without Morrow. And so it doesn't surprise me that they would cross borders, they would cross the red line basically, for their own benefit, so when so even when I said, colonial buildings and religious structures are under protection, it is on paper said, but de facto, it doesn't happen, right? De facto, it is what it is. And it is constantly changing, to their tone to the speed of their tone. And it is it is not very foreseeable for others to or to predict what's going to happen next. Because it's it's like the junta is ruthless. You know, I talk a lot about history and how we derive from the history to the now and look towards the future. And and there's this logic about it right. But when you're ruthless, I think you can allow yourself to, to do whatever you want, you're more or less boundless, and, and that becomes very dangerous when you are actually a government of a country. And yeah, I just think that the roots are missing here, within the ranks of the junta

Brad 29:31

furnace enough. So let's circle back then to the colonial history because this this one is is always going to be very contentious. And I'm curious to know not only how the hunter relates to colonial heritage, and certainly we see especially in downtown Yangon, we see a lot of colonial era. Buildings I can't say for certain because I don't know the history of them but the High Court the The town hall, definitely the Secretariat, a lot of these buildings have a very strong colonial appearance. I'm not sure whether they genuinely are colonial buildings or not, but they definitely look to be colonial buildings. And there hasn't really been to my mind, any attempt to remove that, that colonial edifice. So what is the relationship that the junta have to the, to the physical colonial heritage? And what is the relationship that the Myanmar people have to the colonial heritage as well? Because suddenly, it would be a very painful memory for them. But I could imagine that in the light of the junta, they might say, Well, yeah, painful memory, but better times, because at least we didn't have, you know, the hunter coming into houses and murdering people. So what's the relationship there?

Helena 30:49

Yeah, I think for the junta history doesn't, like I already said, doesn't play a major role. It's more about the economy, and what all these restorations would cost. And, obviously, they, they advertise when they want to demolish these colonial buildings. Under the statement of saying, Yeah, this is a remnant of the colonial era. But then, it's not genuinely preceded, right? So you don't see you like, it's very ambivalent the whole spectrum of protecting these buildings or not. And I find this discourse very, very dynamic. And for me, now very difficult to respond, I just can issue my observations of Yeah. So I think really, the junta care cared about that. And also, when we talk about the junta, there's not just like one leader that has been raining the whole six years right, it has been changed. So, with every governments with every period, I think, there are slight differences towards the attitude of how to deal and how to cope with these colonial buildings. And so, there is a rise and at the end, they they basically neglected Yangon as this very historical city and left and built their own city. So, that is quite a final solution for them, how to deal with it just to sort of erase it by neglecting the architecture in Yangon. And for the people in Myanmar, I, I felt like they, they like it's very much part of their history and there are voices who say no, this is a remnant of the colonial era. But at the same time, me as a as a architect and urban planner, I find these sites very important, because no matter what story they tell, they should be considered and they should be included in the history and demolishing them won't make the past look better or otherwise. So, when we talk about Myanmar, in terms of historical sites, it is very, it is very tricky for me to talk about it because again, what is represented is mainly the colonialism and the mono culture of the Burmese culture. When in reality, again, Myanmar is a multi ethnic country and most of what is preserved and of heritage side preserved are related to the Burmese culture. So having said that historical sites are more or less concerning the Burmese related culture and not the other ethnic cultures in that matter. It's no surprise that historical sites are not even known or certain traditions are not even passed on because of the lack of such knowledge and institutions who would care about these issues. Therefore, I hope I kind of like draw the picture of the It's very, this almost mosaic like remembrance of historical sites in Myanmar. So, I can only say that the relationship for most people towards these historical sites is rather interrupted. And in its best case, fragmented. It is more likely that older generations are aware of these historical sites, as they have witnessed these historic events. But for the generation that is still in school, it is rather difficult as the children are being indoctrinated by the history books of the junta. And to put it in a nutshell, historic sites are very contested, and this is differently perceived depending on which people you actually asked and Myanmar.

Brad 35:59

And so it says that makes sense or absolutely does, it absolutely does. I'm trying to mull over some of the things that you've just said, because I'm trying to get into the mindset of, of the junta with with regard to to these sites, because from my perspective, it seems almost schizophrenic. It's it doesn't seem to have internal consistency. And when you the way you express it like saying that there's a focus on commercialization and extracting value from sites, it's it just sort of makes me realize that the junta does not the correct me if there is this basically what you're saying, The junta does not actually care about any sites. But on the off chance that the people care about a site, the hunter will either try to gain the money from that site, or they will try to destroy that site. Not because they care about it, but because they know that people care about it. And this is their way of trying to entrench their power and authority. Is that Is that an accurate? Yeah, yeah,

Helena 37:13

exactly. Yeah, yeah. That's what's happening. Yeah. It's,

Brad 37:17

it's fascinating, because we have examples in history of regimes that have inherited countries with extensive historical archaeological heritage. An example that comes to mind is Iran, previously, Persia. And under one of the I think it was the Shah, they went through an era of extreme iconoclasm, and destroying everything, but it wasn't because it's significant to the people, and we must control the people. It was because of this mentality that everything that is old is bad. And we must destroy what is old, so that we can build a new nation. I know China went through a period like this after the Communist revolution, although they they stopped doing that, thankfully. Well, at least when it comes to sort of Han Chinese culture, not so much when it comes to non Han Chinese culture. But what you seem to be saying is that in the Myanmar context, it's not about this, we must rebuild the nation and therefore we must destroy the heritage that holds us in the past. They don't care. It seems to be what you're saying. They just don't care one way or the other about the buildings. All they care about is controlling how people see the junta and how people think of Myanmar identity and history. Exactly.

Helena 38:40

It's all their means are done with the objective of stay in power, whatever it takes.

Brad 38:50

I mean, that is it conforms obviously, to what we know about these people, but every single time you're confronted with the realization that people exist, who only care about the preservation of their own power, it's just a very sobering realization. Yeah. And so I think I think you're very justified in also pointing out that much of our discourse here is focused on Bama heritage. Obviously, Mandalay and Yangon are two of the most important cities in in Myanmar from a historical perspective. So as began all of these in the now, Bama dominated heartland, but of course, we have a lot of sites that fall outside of that scope. So how has there been a market difference in the way that Burma and non Burma sites have been treated under the junta?

Helena 39:57

So to my knowledge, I I just find it very, very difficult to find literature about the preservation of the Qin culture or the Christian culture under the governance of the junta, so, and contrary from the news, I have heard is that crosses that are put on the streets in the chin region are being knocked down. And that was these were incidents from 10 years ago. And instead, Buddha sculptures were placed. And so, I think that is the reason why there is our, me not finding literature much literature about most of the ethnics cultures is and their histor re with their historical sites is because of that it's just not it's just has not been cared of and the ethnic groups have been busy with surviving. So there was no one recording or archiving such cultural treasures. And and and certainly not the junta would do that for them. So it is. Yeah, it it is almost forgotten or invisible, at least.

Brad 41:28

And just for the sake of those in the audience who might not be aware, I just want to point out that Ching chi Ching Shan Korean and Korean estates are overwhelmingly Christian populations, whereas the Commodore, the hunter, and basically the the infrastructure of the state, is overwhelmingly Buddhist, and is deeply interwoven with with Buddhism, and there is there is a very long standing conflict. So it's, it is not just an inter ethnic conflict, it's an inter religious conflict, that there are many layers here. So it's it's not surprising, sadly, to hear that, that Christian crosses would be deliberately taken down and replaced with with Buddhist iconography. It's that's, that seems very, very typical for the military, and for their approach. Although, again, this is a thing coming to the issue of monetization. I don't know how you feel about the Rakhine, whether you whether you perceive them to be completely separate from the Obama as an ethnic group, or whether you see them as a sort of kindred ethnic group to the Obama. But now, who is obviously a very important historic site, but my understanding is, it's also when it's stable, a popular tourist attraction that that draws in quite a bit of revenue. So is there once again, this mentality of well, we don't like the the the ethnic minorities, but if their sites have any value, as far as tourism revenue is concerned, then whatever, we're happy to support that and we're happy to allow that to to exist. Would that would that be fair? Yeah.

Helena 43:13

Unfortunately, unfortunately. Yeah. It's, it's like you, you sell the culture, you know, and, and everything that is for sale, that's good. And in the interest of the junta, maybe partially set but what defectively is happening, happening.

Brad 43:41

Absolutely. And so, with that in mind, so now now that we have a slightly clearer understanding of the motivations of the junta? This is this is a very difficult question to answer. And I don't think anyone will be able to give a completely accurate answer to this, but I very much welcome your interpretation. To what extent has the military succeeded in changing not changing history, but changing Myanmar's collective understanding of its history?

Helena 44:24

Yeah.

I think really, rebranding and filtering the historical background of certain sites and turn them into their narrative is a classic manner by the junta observing the built environment, in this case, the city of Yangon. Well, I can easily tell what is kept in protection and what is neglected by by the decaying facades of these buildings in Yangon. And, and it is amazing to see that these buildings are the tokens or the witnesses of the history and how, how fearful they can become to that narrative that and so far that the junta would actually move big efforts to. Yeah, get rid of them. So I think going by this act of appreciation, one could easily conclude that the junta has succeeded in schools pedagogically to rewrite history and make use of their power to constitute what the roots of the people are supposed to be, especially abusing the, as we already discussed the depths of spirituality, abducting Buddhism, and instrumentalizing it for their ideology is deeply saddening. But this is only the one and official side of the time. During my research, while talking to the witnesses of the political events, I was assured that the remnants of that would connect the people and their history is kept in their memories. It is them the people who tell the narrative of the nation actually, thanks to these witnesses, the history and its complexity is captured. Even if it's not visible, or visibly seen in the cityscape the complexity is passed on orally from generation to generation. On this, the junta has not on this, the junta has no, no power on what the people have in their mind, and will pass on. And so in that term, like seeing it from this angle, the junta has not completely succeeded. To mute the people. To me, the junta has not really changed the narrative, because like I said, it is more about their official power they they use in order to manipulate the people. But in the minds of the people, many either are consciously aware of the past, or can only assume that that the the chain of history is a bit off when the junta tells the story, and that the spirit of the resilient civilians demonstrating for justice and freedom is very embedded in the Myanmar people, which can be seen again, these days in the CDM movements. For every generation, you can see that no matter what government, the people, the civic engagement is an unrest when when it comes to their freedom, in the case of Myanmar, storytelling and the shared word, are still vital. So this this aspect of that intangible heritage, right, it's still vital to the protection of their own history and identity that will hopefully never lose its virtue. And I'm sure that junta will never touch that part. Because it is a very much the mind, you know, is so much stronger than everything outside of the body. And so the junta can only go to a certain extent. And as long as we share these stories, as long as we witness things and tell them, I think this is evidence that the junta has not succeeded.

Brad 48:51

And so you talk about the many different facets and the many different dimensions and layers that there are to history and tangible history, tangible heritage, the things that we can touch, that physically connect us to the past are very important, but they only form part of the overall heritage. So I just want to get your assessment. Let's say the junta went on an absolute tear, and decided to destroy anything from the colonial era. Everything that is not from their version of Myanmar culture, which is to say, military worshipping. Very much obedient Buddhist, Burma centered if they just destroyed all of this. What would the impact be for the people of Myanmar going forward?

Helena 49:53

It's like a very final state. You describe it I don't know what I mean civil war we already have. What is the next step? We have revolutions? And I'm saying it in a way that I can't even imagine. Right. So I, I'd rather not elaborate on this, with the hope that this case will never take place.

Brad 50:33

That's fair. That's fair. Yeah. So then so they're moving to the opposite of that. So what is it in your view that that can be done? That is that is feasible? And what is it that should be done to preserve history and to preserve heritage like, or you have the view that all things that have a connection to the past have a significant connection to the past should ipso facto be protected and should be preserved? And should be heritage listed and should be maintained unchanged, as as a sort of museum or as a shrine to the past? Or do you do you take a more sort of moderated view of this? What what do you think it is that we should be doing in general to preserve this?

Helena 51:21

Yeah, so coming from the architectural ankle i I'm very much against open museums are making not not per se open museums, but making a city or village become an open museum where the inhabitants don't have privacy, because they're part of the exhibition, right? I hope this is this would be the worst case scenario for heritage or historical sites and Myanmar happening. For me, historical sites are the images you find in history books, right? That makes history more tangible. And, and this is how I see the city or, I mean, we talk about Yangon. So this is how I see these iconic buildings, that that actually without telling, they're telling a story. And I, I just think that historical sites can be preserved in various ways. There precedent case study worldwide, we as a nation, need to find our own way then, and find a content about how historical sites are usually contested, due to the complex entanglement of feelings and its various point of views. The importance is to openly speak about it and not exclude any group of the society. It demands discussion negotiation, it is a certainly a long process that eventually lead to how we would understand heritage or these preservation of the sides. And where we want to go as a nation that might eventually lead to a common narrative. That would be the ideal situation, having a common narrative that is shared by all founded on the facts of history. And therefore, I think what is much needed in Yangon is a reclamation of the legal framework with respect to identifying and protecting historical site sites.

Brad 53:32

And so that sort of moves me quite neatly into into the final sort of question that I that I want to pose on this. And that is, what can be done by the people themselves. I mean, you say that the people have to find their way every nation has to find its own way and a solution that is appropriate for that culture and that context. But what is it you think that that the Myanmar people can be doing? Or is it is it something that would be different in every part of your mind every culture of Myanmar in order to reclaim their identity and their heritage and their understanding of their history from the Commodore from the hunter? And if and when this this war ends and the military once and for all removed from power? What would you also like to see legislated by a new civilian government to help ensure that the people can reconnect with their heritage and their identity?

Helena 54:41

Yeah, what like immediately comes into my mind is that Myanmar has been physically assaulted by the British, Japanese and later and also today, the junta and what is noticeable is the resilience of the people. And, and right after the independence, I would like to mention that the no agreement of 1947 that has been this paper and also law binding paper that would declare serenity to the ethnic minorities to the territories, their territories. And there was a moment in Myanmar's history that that might be forgotten, but mostly neglected. And I hope that this paper finds its revival in the future with the new government and, and acknowledging that all the people living on the soil of Myanmar a wholesome and calling for equality, and respecting their cultural treasures, and the people of Myanmar need to recognize their sovereign existence. This includes that in the built environment, including the traditions that might not be in tangible are cared for these, I've been talking a lot about narratives, but I think this is because so much was in the past transmitted through narratives and and still is today, that this orally transmitted knowledge basically has made Myanmar people become these knowledge co producers right about their history, and that has to be very much carefully treated, and also like passed on. Because this is the main resource of the people in Myanmar, to make place for themselves and at the end being in place and have the sense of belonging, despite the ignorance, neglect and assault on their physical sites or in their context, maybe in the case of Myanmar, many other countries which had to endure such governance. The last thing remaining are the narratives, right? The people as the vassal of of of history. And that manner, I like to see the people stop here. Yeah. Yeah, the establishment of an archive, for me gains might not stop here, I think for everyone it is. The establishment of an archive gains a major significance if the people respect and acknowledge the past and, and guard their treasures of their memories and share them with each other the way to in order to get to a public memory and a common narrative. This is how, in my perspective, the people of Myanmar reclaim their space. So my encouragement goes to all the brave witnesses within the country and out to the Myanmar diaspora internationally, to not stop sharing their testimonies and collecting the brief narratives of what's happening in Myanmar, that would lead me on my one day to freedom and most importantly, gift to all Myanmar people a sense of belonging.

Brad 58:46

And I think that's, that's quite comprehensive. And so, as is our custom here, just before we finish up, I want to invite you just to share any thoughts that you might have any lasting impression that you want to leave the audience with, with regard to this topic and the work that you do. We don't often discuss this sort of content. I don't think the role of architecture in politics is something that many people really think about or focus on, despite the fact that it has such an important role to play. And despite the fact that it has such a long and storied history in every continent. So whatever thoughts you think the audience should walk away considering and mulling over and trying to apply to their lives going forward. I'd appreciate if you could share with us.

Helena 59:37

Yeah. First of all, thank you, Brad, for this interview. I just hope that the entanglement between the daily happenings and in this world in our lives and in the spaces where we live, that we share are built with a certain intention and I encourage us to be part of that built environment. And to have an eye on how certain spaces are developed or not developed and how certain places are treated. Because all this will go into our history, and it is to us to become an active or a passive citizen, and to watch out for what's happening in our environment.

Host 1:00:41

One of the most tragic aspects of the current crisis in Myanmar is how isolated Burmese protesters feel. And in fact our thankfully, through our nonprofit organization better Burma, we are able to ensure that all donations successfully reach their intended target. So if you found yourself moved by today's discussion and want to do what you can to help, please consider giving to our fund, which is 100% directed towards supporting the movement. If you would like to join in our mission to support those in Myanmar who are being impacted by the military coup, we welcome your contribution in a form currency or transfer method. Your donation will go on to support a wide range of humanitarian and media missions, aiding those local communities who need it most. Donations are directed to such causes as the Civil Disobedience movement CDM families of deceased victims, internally displaced person IDP camps, food for impoverished communities, military defection campaigns, undercover journalists, refugee camps, monasteries and nunneries education initiatives, the purchasing of protective equipment and medical supplies COVID relief and more. We also make sure that our donation Fund supports a diverse range of religious and ethnic groups across the country. We invite you to visit our website to learn more about past projects as well as upcoming needs. You can give a general donation or earmark your contribution to a specific activity or project you would like to support, perhaps even something you heard about in this very episode. All of this humanitarian work is carried out by our nonprofit mission better Burma. And the donation you give on our insight Myanmar website is directed towards this fund. Alternatively, you can also visit the better Burma website better burma.org and donate directly there. In either case, your donation goes to the same cause in both websites except credit card. You can also give via PayPal by going to paypal.me/better Burma. Additionally, we can take donations through Patreon Venmo GoFundMe and Cash App. Simply search better Burma on each platform and you'll find our account. You can also visit either website for specific links to these respective accounts or email us at info@betterburma.org. That's betterburma. One word, spelled b e t t e r b u r m a.org. If you'd like to give it another way, please contact us. We also invite you to check out our range of handicrafts that are sourced from vulnerable artists and communities across Myanmar. Available at alokacrafts.com. Any purchase will not only support these artists and communities, but also our nonprofits wider mission. That's aloka crafts, spelled A L O K A C R A F T S one word alokacrafts.com Thank you so much for your kind consideration and support.

Shwe Lan Ga LayComment