Painting the town dead

The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) asked residents in old-town areas earlier this month to keep their houses in good condition to entice more tourists. Bangkok governor Aswin Kwanmuang said he wanted them to paint or repaint their houses as part of the so-called taemsi (paint) campaign.

In the initial stage, Pol Gen Aswin has shortlisted 15 neighbourhoods. Most of them are in Rattanakosin Island in Bangkok, in old-town quarters like Sam Praeng in Phra Nakhon or Nang Loeng in Pomprap Sattruphai.

He also instructed all 50 district offices to explore areas worth preserving and sought cooperation from locals to colour the exteriors of their homes in what he termed “old colour” shades to catch visitors’ eyes.

There is no question this was all well-intended. Tourism is vital to the city’s economy and a key contributor to Thailand’s GDP. Domestic tourism is also becoming more popular, with Thais showing increased interest in checking out local neighbourhoods.

But the idea of painting and repainting in the interests of conservation smacks of something superficial and shallow.

Not to mention ironic, as the campaign coincides with the BMA’s harsh policy on ancient communities such as the Mahakan Fort’s, a rare part of the city’s heritage.

With its latest move to evict residents and tear down one of the last wooden houses in the area this week, Bangkok has just lost a rare property in the heart of a community that was built during the reign of King Rama III.

And more such properties are due to be knocked down under the BMA’s eviction plan regardless of pleas by historians, conservationists and civic groups that the community is an asset which should be preserved as a living museum.

With its unique characteristics, Mahakan has welcomed hordes of tourists in recent years. The governor should know that the approach the government has adopted to “dealing with” Mahakan is erasing a key part of the city’s history. This reflects an outdated vision.

In truth, the BMA doesn’t have a good reputation when it comes to conserving old-town areas.

Long before the Mahakan affair, the Kalaya community found itself kicked out by the temple with which it shared a common name.

Apart from all of the evictions, the temple destroyed a number of heritage buildings located in its compound, including a stupa containing the ashes of one of the wives of King Rama V.

As these shameful acts transpired, the BMA wisely kept its distance.

Another example would be the BMA’s handling of the Pak Klong Talad flower market, which charms visitors by transporting them back to a bygone era.

Instead of regulating trade, the BMA swept all of the vendors from the pavements and replaced them with ugly tents and a stern-looking group of inspectors – in other words, just the kind of visual pollution tourists hope to avoid.

The clean-up campaign at Klong Ong-Ang market, a stone’s throw from the flower market, has earned just as much notoriety, and deservedly so.

In sum, all that Pol Gen Aswin, the city’s unelected governor who was handpicked by the regime, has managed is to turn Bangkok into a kind of police state city. It has become a place where authorities seem unable to differentiate between a beautiful spot and an eyesore.

As the governor possesses zero background in conservation, expectations of him are equally low in this regard. But he should open up and reach out to the community, and experts. He must listen rather than just give orders.

To start with, Pol Gen Aswin should know that the physical condition and appearance of buildings is just one factor that makes a place attractive. What is more important is the story or stories behind the community. As such, he should find ways to keep these communities alive.

For old-town areas, a good narrative would be far more compelling and far more important than a fresh coat of paint.