That old buildings should be replaced by modern constructions is concurred by many people as recent practical issues call for this attempt, while some advocate for a maintenance because of these buildings’ historical and spiritual values. From my perspective, I totally agree with the destruction of these old buildings in terms of housing demands and safety.
On the one hand, aged buildings represent constructive ways that are unique from recent methods, which in turn promotes diversity by a coexistence of the past and the present, as well as creates historical values for the thriving of tourism . Specifically, by keeping these buildings, people can be “mentally healed” as a psychological treatment. This is because a concrete jungle will occur if the old constructions are demolished, leading to a mental sickness of uniformity. Additionally, tourism can be well-developed under the appearance of these buildings. Hoi An ancient town is the paradigm for this, when the town attracts nearly four million visitors annually, boosting the country’s economy.
On the other hand, I still reckon that these long standing structures should be replaced for more practical needs. That the population is rocketing day by day leads to increasing housing demands, thus eliminating buildings that are outdated and of no living value for the sake of constructing houses is one of the resolutions to the vacancies shortage. Moreover, the safety of these aged buildings is not assured as well. Because they were constructed for such a long time, the materials and buttresses have gradually eroded or decayed, which brings about unwanted collapse if maintenance continues. Also, there will be an emergence of viruses and bacteria hiding under these buildings, triggering diseases among people.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that old constructions are symbols of historical appearance, which can promote tourism and diversity. However, problems relating to housing needs and safety assurance need to be taken more seriously.