Here's another story
The Gloomy Past of Haw Par Villa
Save Haw Par Villa from being torn down
Haw Par Villa was a big attraction in the 1960s and 1970s. But in
the fad-happy Singapore of today, it may have outlived its
usefulness. Should it go? The king of Tiger Balm left a gaudy mark
on Singapore's landscape 67 years ago - and the Lion City has been
left holding his cub ever since. Managed since 1990 by
International Theme Parks, a joint venture between beverage group
Fraser & Neave and Times Publishing in shares of 75:25, the
operator of Haw Par Villa announced last month that it would return
the loss-making park's keys to the Singapore Tourism Board by March
31 next year. Life! conducted a straw poll on whether the park
should be spruced up or shut down for good, among 80 men in the
street this week. These were the top-of-mind impressions of 49 of
them: "Close it down." "It is incurring massive losses." "It is
boring." Still, many of those in the minority, who were older
singaporeans, said that the park should be preserved for
sentimental reasons. But does that fact alone warrant its
conservation in land-scarce Singapore, in this day and age? Says
architect Tay Kheng Soon, without hesitation: "Tear it down. It's
so old and out-of-date. Singaporeans don't have any sentiments left
for it. I went there once as a child and I have no intention of
ever going back there again." Mr Tay made a case recently for
preserving the National Library building, which is slated to make
way for the Singapore Management University.
A Burmese by birth, Mr Aw Boon Haw, a Hakka, built Haw Par Villa in
1937, at the cost of $1 million. It was the magnate's way of
rewarding his younger brother, Boon Par, for helping him hit the
jackpot by their medicated balm, Tiger Balm. The villa and its
grounds were destroyed in World War II but he rebuilt it from 1950
to 1959. Then, in a twist of fate, Mr Aw died in Hawaii in 1954, so
he never did get to see what the restored compound looked like
finally. Today, tourists and trek-happy locals see it as a uniquely
quirky attraction, while others would go so far as to call it a
national monument. With its hundreds of garishly-hued statues and
figurines depicting famous characters from Chinese myths and
legends, no one would dispute that, as a park, it is in a class of
its own. Recalls Mr Chin Kean Kok, 28, an architectural associate,
who first visited the villa as a boy: "Even the floors of his
swimming pools were crammed with gaudy figurines. I remember
wondering how anyone could swim in such pools. It was so weird."
Caught in a sudden afternoon shower on Wednesday, first-time
visitor to Singapore Nirmal Agarwal, 40, huddled under the Laughing
Buddha pavilion together with his wife, two daughters and son. The
chartered accountant, who had flown in from New Delhi that day,
says: "My brother, Raj, recommended this place as a must-see for my
kids. But when I asked staff at the hotel where I'm staying if tour
guides would cover Haw Par Villa in their itineraries, they said
'No'. So, after lunch, I decided to take my family here first,
before we join our tour group for all the other attractions." Says
Ms Amanda Yeo, a sales executive with International Theme Parks:
"Apart from placing Haw Par Villa brochures in hotels island-wide,
we've done zero aand promotions since we closed down the flume ride
and amphitheatre in 1997." Ms Jenny Meng, a stall hand at the
park's Pavilion cafe, says: "Four to five years back, tour guides
would bring groups of tourists -- mostly Indonesians -- here. But,
once they were in the park's grounds, they'd leave the visitors to
wander around on their own, while they sipped their drinks. "When I
asked them why they wouldn't explain the myths and legends of the
park to visitors, they replied, 'Why should we take them around if
we're not paid any commissions?' "
For Singaporeans in earlier days, much of the thrill of visiting
the park lay in the fact that they were being allowed to tour the
private grounds of a larger-than-life millionaire. Now, 67 years on
and one failed multi-million dollar theme park later, the Singapore
Tourism Board wants to revive its grounds. Architect William Lim,
67, supports the move. Says the former president of the Singapore
Heritage Society: "Tourists will be more interested in visiting if
they can get to know more about folk mythology and legends from the
park." He adds: "They should go back to the original concept of a
public access park like the Botanic Gardens. Just look at how many
people visit the Botanic Gardens."
The issue, then, is: Does Singapore need two Botanic Gardens? Plus,
while the Botanic Garden is just a stone's throw away from Orchard
Road, the Villa sits along a slip road in out-of-the-way Pasir
Panjang.
Of course, in recent years, it did not help its image that
International Theme Parks used to charge $15 (and, later, $16.50)
for admission. Before Haw Par Villa turned into a theme park,
admission was free.
The entry fee per person has since been slashed to $5 for
adults and $2.50 for children (NOW IT IS ABSOLUTELY FREE OF
CHARGE), but checks with the handful of shopkeepers
scattered about the park confirmed that visitors are
fast-dwindling.
Looking at the park, then, strictly as a recreational feature, what
it suffers most from, perhaps, is its "once is enough" shock value.
It is, for instance, hard to shake off the profusion of True to
Singapore's pragmatic spirit, it may well be better to close the
park as it is, and put the hilly land to better (inevitably
commercially-viable) use The issue it all really boils down to,
then, is: Haw Par Villa may be a sleeping tiger, but what price
memory?
