Especially in the aftermath of disaster and war, we come to realise that what truly needs mending is not just buildings, but memory and hope. I believe that how we regard the old, the obsolete and the historical is fundamentally a question of values, but also one of dynamic relationships. One might even say that the past itself is never the real point; what matters is our relationship with the past.
This is exactly the difference between archaeology and anthropology: archaeology values the original material substance, those works of art and architecture, carefully preserved and restored like exhibits in a museum, untouchable, yet in a sense, “dead”. From an anthropological perspective, however, people are placed at the centre. The criterion for judging architecture is whether it serves people and can generate new meanings. Just like language, which cannot exist apart from human life, architecture only has vitality when it is used by people.