Preface: Historical preservation has been mostly understood by the means of preserving the physical artifact. However, in an urban context, what makes artifacts’ character “distinctive” and “definitive” is not only their physicality but also their memory. To this end, Also Rossi’s argues for “the soul of the city” as the city’s history, its memory. Although we all travel backward in time through memory, history and memory should be distinguished totally from each other, the former belongs to a specific point which got already expired in the time-line of universe- only if such time line could be imaginable, but the latter is a dynamic expression, a constant migration from time to time, a “transit device between dualities: past and present, here and there, real and imaginary.”
The realization of this difference is important since in the art of preservation, the tendency is more toward history rather than memory. Still arguable, but it is somehow true that by preserving the physical object, the memory would also retain. Buildings and urban centers with significant …show more content…
The attempt of paper can be seen more as a critique of a specific practice of semiotics taking place with the aim of preserving identity and memory by naive use of signs and symbolism. In the case of some renewal projects in Iran, this phenomenon can be formulated as inserting traditional symbols into contemporary urban context. The problem rising here is that, these fragments from the past are producing more disturbing experiences for audience rather than pleasurable. While planners argue for retaining memory, city collective memory seems more damaged, undermined by ambiguity and confusion of
The realization of this difference is important since in the art of preservation, the tendency is more toward history rather than memory. Still arguable, but it is somehow true that by preserving the physical object, the memory would also retain. Buildings and urban centers with significant …show more content…
The attempt of paper can be seen more as a critique of a specific practice of semiotics taking place with the aim of preserving identity and memory by naive use of signs and symbolism. In the case of some renewal projects in Iran, this phenomenon can be formulated as inserting traditional symbols into contemporary urban context. The problem rising here is that, these fragments from the past are producing more disturbing experiences for audience rather than pleasurable. While planners argue for retaining memory, city collective memory seems more damaged, undermined by ambiguity and confusion of