Japan to push architectural craft for UNESCO heritage list

This one may deserve recognition as it is directly connected to Kongo Gumi which was the world's oldest continuously ongoing independent company, operating for over 1,400 years until it was taken over in 2006.

Interesting read!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kong%C5%8D_Gumi

I might be reading into this but I only ever occasionally hear about other countries applying for UNESCO world heritage status. I'm sure plenty of countries have more than Japan (I mean, most countries around the Mediterranean have much older continuous habitation so it makes sense) but Japan seems to be in a rush to secure their status on just about everything. I mean there are some benefits, protection of the site during military conflict (something Japan doesn't really need lets be honest) but also UNESCO funds to preserve the site. Maybe that's it. I read anthropology at university so I'm biased about site preservation but... with all due respect some of the sites Japan nominates for itself are overtly political (i.e. WWII era ship yards that employed Korean Slave Labor). UNESCO isn't exactly a non-biased organization but some of these applications seem like Japan doesn't want to fork out the money for the preservation of its own historical sites.

Just a theory, don't hate me.

marcelito

It would be Japan's 22nd inscription on the list, if successful.

The sheer and ever increasing number of UNESCO heritage list entries has gotten out of hand.

It just all about the ¥$ now. Not just in Japan

exactly!

Wood is not fragile.

We live in a renovated Japanese farmhouse, so I have a lot of time for Japanese architecture. I also understand that some of these techniques are dying out, so some of this will be an attempt to sustain them. My suspicion here though is that they want UNESCO protection to strengthen their hand in getting more money out of the Japanese government for future projects. The techniques themselves are wonderful, but that does not mean there are many people out there prepared to pay for them with their own money.

Good decision, the craftsmanship of wood in shrines and temples in Japan must be seen to be believed. If this boosts foreign tourism further, to sites in Nara and Kyoto for example, it will be fabulous.

@savethegaijin

It seems to me that Japan is just taking advantage of the opportunities available to it. Just because other countries aren't making their own claims, it doesn't mean Japan shouldn't do as much as it can to preserve its heritage. If assistance is available, why not take it?

Just register the whole country - save on multiple applications!

@extanker

I don't have a problem of it in theory, it's just that there's so many incredibly significant cultural and archeological sites that exist elsewhere in countries that have no chance of being able to preserve them (lack of money, anthropologists and many of them being in conflict regions) and I just feel like sites in those areas should be given precedence. Japanese sites are very important but they're not really in any danger of being lost. Japan is a wealthy first world country with a lot of highly educated anthropologists/archaeologists to study and care for them, as well as a population who holds its culture and history in high regard... and the odds of them being at risk because of geopolitical conflict is next to nil. I'm not trying to speak ill of Japan (I actually take the same stance when it comes to the richer western countries) I just think that preservation grants would be put to better use if they were allocated where they are needed the most. That's all.

One of these days, the sequence of nucleotides that make up Yamato DNA will be nominated and then we'll finally be done with this charade.

Is this a tourism promotion program for Japan?

UNESCO, please just give the whole of Japan a heritage stamp as they are so unique after all.

I would recommend that readers distinguish between UNESCO World Heritage sites, which this is not, and the UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage List, which is what this is.

The former is about specific sites / locations. This is not about that.

There is no question that Japan is aggressive in applying to UNESCO for recognition of sites / items under both groups.

However, in the case of the Intangible Cultural Heritage List, it is not something that can be directly translated into tourism or dollars. I would recommend everyone go visit the list of entries for Japan. You will see what I mean.

One may wonder why Japan is so aggressive when it comes to this particular designation. The truth is that the Japanese government has put a framework and an organization in place to address the preservation of all things cultural, and with that in place, it allows for a focused effort, year after year.

When the Japanese build modern buildings today, they used modern techniques which evolved directly from Western, not Asian, techniques.

One just one example, traditional Japanese and other Asian buildings had strong, heavy roofs with weak foundations. Traditional Western buildings were the other way round: strong foundations with light roofs. The Western approach won out, because it was superior. The Asians didnt even have glass for windows: just paper.

If any country deserves an award for "architectural craftmanship" it should be a Western one -- for giving the world buildings that are safe, comfortable and efficient.

Seems your saying that because Japanese architecture didn't win out, it's of no value and not worth remembering.

Seems pretty strange to me. By that logic, everything created will eventually have no value and not be worth remembering.

I think that is a pity that Japan did not take heritage regarding architecture more seriously in the 1980's, 1990's.

Tokyo, especially Chuo-ku has lost some real treasures.

When the Japanese build modern buildings today, they used modern techniques which evolved directly from Western, not Asian, techniques.

Just how many 1000 year old wood structures remain in the west? Right, they used rocks.

Japanese carpenters/craftsmen, are noted throughout the world, reread the article and see what this one is about,.

@savethegaijin

I'm not arguing that there aren't significant sites all over the world.

My point is, it is not Japan's responsibility to take care of those sites. If the countries or organizations responsible for those sites are not doing anything to secure funding for them, why shouldn't someone else use that funding?

Just change the name of Japan to UNESCO and get it over with