Personally, I found this heritage trail very meaningful. Not only did it give me the opportunity to bond with my history friends, but it also allowed me to better appreciate Singapore’s history and its progress since the colonial days. Though we had the Singapore trail guideline as a reference online, we had to rely on our navigation skills to get to the different attractions. We did not stick fully to the exact route of the trail for it was not entirely systematic and required us to constantly retrace our steps. Rather, we visited the clusters of attractions that were near each other before moving on to the next cluster. It was very rewarding when we were able to locate the different signboards that were erected to provide information on each landmark, and I also felt a sense of accomplishment after completing each cluster. The contents of the signboard contained brief descriptions of each landmark’s history, probably because it was meant for tourists to get a brief understanding of the background context of the landmark. There was hence not much elaboration on the relation of the landmark to Singapore’s dominant narrative, which was a little disappointing as I wanted to learn more in depth about the landmark through doing the trail.
Before I took this module on Singapore History, whenever I frequented the waterfront, my view of these landmarks were limited to its aesthetic purposes. I did not really think about their context in the Singapore narrative, and only admired them as pretty monuments that were well preserved. However, after understanding more about Singapore history and the different narratives that emerge from our past, I have realised that even though Singapore may be very modernised now, it is still important for us to retain elements of our history. This is done through the preservation of old buildings that were and are still significant. By preserving these buildings, they serve as visual reminders of how far we have progressed at a nation, and also reinforces Singaporeans’ shared past as a colony and a “sleepy fishing village”.
This idea of preserving Singapore’s common past to unify Singaporeans was especially reinforced when we visited the Raffles landing site. The government has always promoted the dominant narrative of Raffles being the sole founder of Singapore in 1819 and attributed Singapore’s early success to him. Inscribed in the tablet below the statue were praises of Raffles’s ‘genius and perception’. With a better understanding of the other narratives from our history class, I was able to see that Raffles was being manufactured as an unassailable hero by the government and that he was glorified at the expense of others such as Farquhar and Crawfurd. Hence this served as a self-reminder that as a historian, I should not just accept things at face value. Instead, I should always think critically and question the master narrative. I should also look beyond the standard sources that focus on big personalities like Raffles. Rather, I need to delve deeper into the narratives of others that existed back then, such as the coolies and Samsui women, in order to attain a fuller understanding of Singapore’s history.
Overall, I had fun and gained new insights from completing the Singapore River Trail. I am also thankful that with the new knowledge I have acquired from history class, I can better appreciate and apply what I have learnt.
Comments
Post a Comment