Nowadays, some people think that we should always maintain and protect historical buildings which have significant meanings in cities and villages. In this essay, I will explain why I disagree with this to some extent.
For a variety of reasons, it would be reasonable to adopt this practice. First, protecting the historical buildings contributes significantly to strengthening local people’s cultural identity. It allows residents especially teenagers to visit the old buildings in person and gain deeper insight into the historical culture instead of reading on books or internet. The main reason why is that these old buildings invariably contain various traditional stories. Second, preserving the old contractions has a positive impact on tourism, thereby encouraging economic development. This is mainly because this practice can increase unique tourist attractions which are well-maintained to attract tourists. Different from some music and restaurants that become more and more homogeneous in these years, these various characteristic old buildings and monuments which means cultural heritages are able to draw more visitors with diverse cultural backgrounds.
While I support preserve these old monuments, I believe that it could be wrong to some extent. To began with, the preservation of some ancient buildings is a challenge due to some old techniques have been lost. As a result, some buildings cannot be restored to their original state and fail to meet modern safety standards. In addition, protecting all historical buildings is costly because this requires a large number of professional people and money. The main reason for this is that ancient monuments are not only numerous but also widely distributed so that it is too impractical to preserve all of them.
In conclusion, while protecting all ancient buildings can enhance cultural identity and boost tourism, it also meets some challenges such as high costs and the lack of old special skills. Therefore, I disagree with this to some extent.