Unmasking the city hall facade a study of its visuality in images 22

CHAPTER Masquerades: Deceptive Appearances 2.1 Signpost 2.1.1 The Faỗade as Icon At a meeting of the Municipal Commissioners held in 1920, commissioner G.R.K Mugliston proposed an ambitious scheme for the construction of a civic centre surrounding the Padang, a flat green field that marked the heart of official Singapore.1 Large, colored plans presented to the members illustrated a series of impressive buildings occupying the entire vicinity surrounding the Padang The proposed civic centre comprised of municipal buildings, law courts, and government offices around the Padang.2 As the area was already the centre of the civic district, Mugliston’s scheme was in fact a proposal for re-construction To him, the scheme was essential, as “The centre of official Singapore has been looking distinctly dingy for some time past.”3 As the capital of the Straits Settlements, Singapore was one of the most dynamic commercial centers of the British Empire.4 Due to the island’s geographical location, it was a major entrepôt on the East-West mercantile route, and the trading centre of the Netherlands East Indies and the Malay Peninsula.5 Thus, …nothing but the best is good enough for Singapore Through its wonderful position it became the leading port of the world years ago and its future growth may be anything There is no room for timid ideas in planning the development of such a city as this.6 To be erected in the neo-classical style, the buildings that made up the civic centre were envisioned to be bold, impressive, and magnificent.7 Most importantly, the facades of the building, which extended from the Fullerton Building to the port, had to be monumental.8 For the continuous faỗade, located next to the Johnston Pier, was Municipal Commission: Ambitious Scheme for a Civic Centre”, in The Straits Times, 30 October 1920, p.9 ibid “New Municipal Building”, in The Straits Times, 30 April 1929, p.10 C.M Turnbull A History of Modern Singapore 1819-2005 (Singapore: NUS Press, c2009), p.93 ibid “A Civic Centre”, in The Straits Times, 30 October 1920, p.8 ibid ibid 25 the view that greets all arriving by sea to the island.9 The continuous, monumental faỗade was to convey, in visual terms, the image of Singapore as a prosperous trade centre It was a communicative device, or a signpost that announced to visitors their arrival at the capital of the British Straits Settlement The faỗades visuality was thus of the utmost importance – it had to stake out the territory as a Crown colony at a glance The ambitious scheme to reconstruct the civic centre was forwarded in the midst of favorable economic conditions in the aftermath of World War II.10 Trade was flourishing due to the post-war boom, the British Empire had recovered from the consequences of the war, and the effects of the economic recession that was to approach at the end of 1920 had not yet been felt.11 Sentiments were optimistic, and the reconstruction of the civic center was deemed a necessity In the scheme proposed by Mugliston, the construction of a building housing the municipal offices was to be the first in a series of monumental architecture that would make up the civic centre.12 Depending on the availability of funds, the reconstruction of the civic centre was to be conceived in several phases over the years.13 The housing of the Singapore municipality, however, was forwarded as a task of “great urgency and real necessity.”14 Buildings around the civic centre were often featured in the views of Singapore from the sea See Gretchen Liu Singapore: A Pictorial History 1819-2000 London: Curzon, 2001 10 C.M Turnbull A History of Modern Singapore 1819-2005, p.139 11 ibid 12 “Municipal Commission: Ambitious Scheme for a Civic Centre”, in The Straits Times, 30 October 1920, p.9 13 ibid 14 ibid 26 The Singapore municipality came into existence in 1856, during the regime of the East India Company.15 Due to the rapid growth of the city, the municipality expanded swiftly in the following years By the beginning of the twentieth century, the municipality comprised of the president, the secretariat, and the commissioners, as well as various bureaus such as the Health Department and the Municipal Engineer’s Department.16 First housed in the Town Hall (later known as the Victoria Memorial Hall) when it was completed in 1862, the municipality shifted to a larger building in Finlayson Green in 1893.17 By 1920, the municipality was housed in different buildings scattered around various parts of the town.18 The rebuilding of an office to accommodate the expansion of the municipality was proposed as early as 1913, but no concrete plans were conceived.19 In an official survey done by the municipal architect S.D Meadows, the “badly-housed staff” located in disparate offices led to an inefficient administration, which resulted in a wastage of both time and money.20 The construction of a new building to centralise the municipal administration thus took priority amongst the various governmental institutions that were to be housed in the redevelopment of the civic center.21 At the meeting, Mugliston’s proposal for the redevelopment of the civic center and the erection of a new building to house the municipal offices was immediately approved by the president, J.R.R Farrer.22 On the same day, Farrer set up a committee to study and report on the plans for the design and construction of the new 15 “New Municipal Building”, in The Straits Times, 30 April 1929, p.10 ibid 17 ibid 18 “The New Town Hall”, in The Straits Times, 10 January 1925, p.9 19 “Municipal Offices”, in The Straits Times, 18 July 1923, p.8 20 “Proposed Municipal Offices, Singapore”, in The Straits Times, 25 July 1923, p.9 21 “Municipal Commission: Ambitious Scheme for a Civic Centre”, in The Straits Times, 30 October 1920, p.9 22 ibid 16 27 municipal building.23 Its architecture was chiefly conceived through a series of meetings between the committee and the municipal architect, F.D Meadows, in the years spanning1920-25.24 The final plans of the building were drawn up by another municipal architect, A Gordon, who oversaw the construction of the building from 1926 to its completion in 1929.25 With a frontage of 370 feet, the faỗade of the Municipal Building was the longest in Singapore at the time of its conception.26 In a report by the committee submitted in 1924, the visuality of the Municipal Building faỗade emerged as the most debated part of the design.27 In order to signpost Singapore as a prosperous British colony, the objective guiding the faỗades design was the “need for (visual) effect”, or the exudation of monumentality This was to be achieved through the employment of the neoclassical architecture style An initial design of the faỗade submitted by Meadows to the committee was rejected He was then requested to produce an additional seven alternative design proposals, each illustrating a different architectural treatment of the faỗade The final design of the faỗade was chosen due to the visual continuity of its architectural elements The committee forwarded: “in our opinion, the unbroken front shown in this scheme is an important and pleasing feature of the design.” All the other design proposals of the faỗade included the insertion of a porch at the entrance of the building as a provision for wet weather conditions, which the committee deemed to interfere with its perception as a visual whole The placement of a porch at the 23 ibid S Douglas Meadows “Report on Proposed New Municipal Offices for the Municipal Commissioners of Singapore”, in Administrative Report of the Singapore Municipality for 1924 (Singapore: The Straits Times Press Limited, 1925), pp.1-15 Many thanks to Assistant Professor Jiat-Hwee Chang at the National University of Singapore for referring me to this article 25 “Notes of the Day”, in The Straits Times, January 1935, p.10 26 “New Municipal Building,” in The Straits Times, 30 April 1929, p.10 27 “Municipal Building Report of the Special Committee”, in The Straits Times, 29 July 1924, p.11 All subsequent information on the report of the design of the Municipal Building by the committee and architect are drawn from this source, unless footnoted otherwise 24 28 symmetrical centre of the faỗade was thought to “detract from the general appearance of the building” by effecting a break between the flight of steps leading up to the main entrance and the Corinthian columns The emphasis on the visual monumentality of the faỗade in its design conception can be discerned from its disciplined geometrical forms Located at the symmetrical center of the faỗade is a wide flight of steps that leads to a podium (Figure 2) From there, a series of Corinthian columns rise three-storey high Colossal in size, the scale of the Corinthian columns defines the imposing nature of the faỗade In view of this, the placement of a porch, a horizontal element that cuts across the vertical ascendance of the columns would hinder the visual perception of the faỗade as a unified whole, thus reducing its spectacularity of scale However, the elimination of the porch meant that the main entrance could not be used in wet weather conditions Instead, the building would have to be accessed from an alternative entrance constructed beneath the flight of steps in those instances The design conception of the faỗade was thus an exercise that prioritised visual effect over use, or function The prolonged discussion and deliberation over the visuality of the faỗade was in stark contrast to the swift decisions made over the design of the building’s rear elevation and its interiority While the visuality of the faỗade subsumed function in the pursuit for a monumental “effect,” utility was the main objective guiding the design of the interiors The interiors were described as: “[on] a whole plain and utilitarian”.28 The plans of the interiors were developed after close consultation with the various departments of the municipality in order to understand their needs, with 28 “New Municipal Building”, in The Straits Times, 30 April 1929, p.10 All subsequent write-up on the design of the interiors of the Municipal Building are drawn from this source, unless footnoted otherwise 29 “comfort and convenience” being the chief concern in the design process.29 Stark, simple and minimal, furniture were arranged to maximise the use of space in accommodating the staff Floors were rubber tiled and cornices were eliminated in order “to make cleaning as convenient as it is in a hospital” In the design of the rear elevation, it was deemed, like the interiors, to have “no need for [visual] effect” Unlike the faỗade, the rear elevation did not face any public roads Hence, this elevation, like the interior of the building, was to be “of the simplest construction and design, the idea here being strictly utilitarian” The dichotomy between the spectacular faỗade and utilitarian nature of the architectural body boiled down to the issue of public visibility, or the use of the faỗade as a visual gestalt to signpost the colony Significantly, the faỗade was entirely illustrated and discussed as an image No issues were raised regarding the nature of the faỗade as an interface between interior and exterior spaces Nor was it conceived as an experiential space that formed part of the architectural approach By conceiving the faỗade as a two-dimensional drawing, the surface of the building becomes equivalent to that of the drawing board The faỗade was conceived essentially as an image Unsurprisingly, the final design of the faỗade was selected based on the architectural images, or orthographic drawings produced by 29 The design of the Board Room, now known as the City Hall Chambers, was an exception that was not in keeping with the utilitarian nature of the City Hall’s interiors As the setting to various municipal events such as annual and regular commissioner’s meetings for which reporters were invited, it needed to be “truly worthy of civic Singapore.” (“Untitled,” in The Straits Times, 21 February 1931, p.10.) Situated in the centre block of the building, the room was in actual fact a hall of great proportions rising two storeys in height Flanked on its sides by massive columns cladded in Siena marble with bronze bases, two great chandeliers designate the centre of the hall, marking the spot where the commissioners sat around a semi-circular table during municipal meetings At the head of the table was a raised dais, conceived specially for the president of the municipality The opulence and luxury of the Board Room, like the faỗade, can be attributed to its public interface, which required it to adopt a prominent visuality 30 Meadows Commenting on the use of drawings in the conception of architecture, Stan Allen posits that: The work of representation could therefore be understood as a series of provisional strategies – necessarily abstract and intangible – to negotiate difference and work within the gap between vision and visuality.30 For Allen, the “work of representation” refers to orthographic and perspectival drawings, which are used to mediate the “gap between vision and visuality.” As a physiological process, vision refers to the physical operation in which light falls on the retinas of the eyes to create a visual image of the world.31 Visuality, on the other hand, is a social process through which the knowledge and interests of the viewers, as well as the intentions and desires of the producers of visual image, inform the act of seeing.32 Visuality, or the culture of perception, is vision socialised The architectural drawing thus serves to mediate between vision and visuality In his writings, Allen is chiefly concerned with the social construction of the visual field, or the mediation of vision through orthographic and perspectival construction What the committee was interested in, however, was the visual construction of the social field, or the use of the architectural design of the faỗade to signpost Singapore as a British colony But more than a signpost that staked out Singapore as a colony, embodied within the geometrical forms of the faỗade was the British’s social and cultural conception of the colony The faỗade was not just any image It was an icon that made visible the British conception of Singapore Its visuality gave material form to the abstract idea of colonisation, or the British imagination of Singapore as a 30 Stan Allen Practice: Architecture, Technique and Representation (Australia: GB Arts International, 2000), p.12 31 John A Walker and Sarah Chaplin Visual Culture: An Introduction (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997), p.22 32 Mieke Bal “Visual Essentialism and the Object of Visual Culture,” in Journal of Visual Culture Vol 2:1 (2003), p.24 31 However, unlike the image in the postcard of 1934, local subjects were incorporated in the scene depicted Two groups of local subjects, discerned by their attire and dark skin color, were located prominently at the right foreground of the postcard It features a woman in her baju kurung, or the traditional Malay costume Clothes were also used distinguished the local men Differing from the formal attire of suit and pants that the colonials were always depicted in, they were dressed simply in shirt and trousers.116 The palm trees lining the front of the Municipal building, as well as the lush tropical vegetation framing the sides of the image also located the scene in the colony Writing on the production of postcards in the British Empire, Thomas August posits that they were a form of propaganda used to mobilise public support and revenue in Britain for the colonial mission.117 The depiction of locals in the picturesque setting of the 1939 postcard portrayed the British Empire as an altruistic and benign enterprise, one with the power to regenerate the “backward” world of the tropics And it was in the visuality, or the classical architectural forms of the Municipal Building and Supreme Court, that the conception of the British colonial enterprise as a civilising mission found its best expression As Baker forwarded, the strict geometrical forms of classicism were a metaphor for the law, order and governance imposed onto the chaotic colonies before the British arrived Its association as the hallmark of great civilizations made it a symbol of the progress and development that the British could effect in the colonies Disseminated through postcards, these images of the Municipal 116 For an example of the depiction of British colonials in postcards from the period, please refer to the “Botanical Garden, Singapore”, in Cheah Jin Seng Singapore: 500 Early Postcards, (Singapore: Editions Didier Millet, 2006), p.207 117 Thomas G August The Selling of The Empire: British and French Imperialist Propaganda 1890-1940 (Westport, Conn.: Greenword Press, 1985), p.62 63 Building faỗade were conceived for a primarily European audience, from the expatriate community living in Singapore to the receivers back in the home countries For traders arriving on the islands shores, the Municipal Building faỗade functioned as a signpost of British sovereignty over Singapore For the European community in Singapore and those back home, the faỗade was an icon used to make imaginable the British colony of Singapore As face, the architectural forms of the faỗade made visible the soul of the colony, or the civilizing and progressive nature of the colonial enterprise in Singapore In both instances, the faỗade was used as an external projection of identity, when it was originally conceived for the “resident of Singapore.”118 How much, then, did the imaging of the Municipal Building faỗade impinge on the minds of the native and immigrant population in Singapore? A week after the official opening of the Municipal Building by then governor Hugh Clifford on 23 July 1929, the faỗade was used as the setting to a ceremonial parade held at the Padang to welcome the visiting King of Siam.119 During the occasion, the visibility of the Municipal Building faỗade was heightened by a scheme of decoration.” It was flood-lit in honor of the king With the faỗade as a backdrop, the king, accompanied by Clifford, inspected the local military force While the faỗade was used to project Singapore’s identity as a British colony to the visiting king, the event also caught the attention of the native and immigrant population According to newspaper reports, the event attracted “thousands of people of all nationalities” to surround the flat, green, rectangular field of the Padang, in the hopes of catching a glimpse of the parade 118 “New Municipal Building” in The Straits Times, 30 April 1929, p.10 “King of Siam’s visit this morning’s review Brilliant state banquet”, in The Straits Times, August 1929, p.11 Subsequent information on the visit of the King of Siam is referenced from this source 119 64 Prior to the construction of the Municipal Building, only military assemblies and drills were held on the Padang.120 Conceived in 1822, the Padang was used to mark the center of the colonial town in Singapore.121 Originating as a British imperial invention, the Padang was one of eight components constituting the “Grand Model” of British colonial settlement developed after the seventeenth century.122 First installed in Calcutta in 1757, the typology of an artificial field surrounded by important public buildings around its periphery was known as the maidan The visually and defensively open field, located on high ground, was a surveillance device utilized by the British to keep law and order in the colonial town In the transfer of the spatial typology to British Malaya, it became known as the padang No longer used for surveillance, the Padang now functioned symbolically to mark the center of the colony Located around its periphery were administrative and religious buildings that served the needs of the British Following its change in function, the flat green field of the Padang was now used to endow visual access to the buildings that surround it In Singapore, this included the Parliament House (1826-27), the Town Hall (1856-62; 1902-09) and Saint Andrew’s Cathedral (183537; 1856-61) The Padang was also used for military assemblies, in a visual display of British imperial power It also functioned as a sports field, where cricket, football and rugby matches were held Crucially, the use of the Padang as a sports field was restricted to the privileged white male, or the British colonials, even though the locals 120 “Celebration of King’s Birthday”, in The Straits Times, June 1931, p.12 Lai Chee Kien “Maidan to Padang: Reinventions of Urban Fields in Malaysia and Singapore: Reinventions of Urban Fields in Malaysia and Singapore”, in Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review, 21(2), 2010, p.56 ”, p.56 The following write-up on the Padang is referenced from this source, unless footnoted otherwise 122 Robert Home “The ‘Grand Modell’ of Colonial Settlement” in Robert Home, Of Planting and Planning: The Making of British Colonial Cities (London: Spon, 1997), pp.8-35 Quoted in Lai Chee Kien “Maidan to Padang”, p.56 121 65 were invited to share the field as spectators.123 In 1867, with the transfer of the jurisdiction and control of Singapore, Malacca, and Penang from Calcutta to the Colonial Office in London, the Padang was enlarged The subsequent erection of the Municipal Building, with its neo-classical faỗade fronting the Padang and its activities, served to reinforce the visual display of British imperial power over Singapore Significantly, the completion of the Municipal Building also marked the start of the Padang as the site of imperial ceremonies and celebrations involving much pomp and pageantry This included the King’s Birthday parades, the Silver Jubilee celebrating King George V’s rule in 1936, and the Coronation ceremony of King George VI in 1937.124 During these events, the Municipal Building faỗade became a backdrop to the performances taking place on the Padang Writing on the relationship between performance and architecture, Neil Leach posits: If identity is a performative construct – if it is acted out like some kind of ‘filmscript’ – then architecture could be understood as the ‘filmset’ But it is as a ‘filmset’ that it derives its meaning from the activities that have taken place there.125 For Leach, identity, or architectural meaning, is constructed through situational exchanges that take place on site It is the culmination of social and cultural forces inscribed onto the architectural object through activities and performances The performative construct of meaning takes place when specific spatial activities are repetitively conducted in a demarcated place, imbuing the space with certain values 123 Timeline Singapore: Episode 13, Civic District, dir Huang Weixian, Channel NewsAsia, DVD, Singapore: MediaCorp News Pte Ltd, 2006 124 “Proclamation parade in Singapore today”, in The Straits Times, 22 January 1936, p.12; “Bigger Than The Silver Jubilee” in The Straits Times, 24 January 1937, p.15 125 Neil Leach “Belonging: Towards a Theory of Identification with Space”, in Jean Hiller and Emma Rooksby (eds.), Habitus: A Sense of Place (Burlington: Ashgate, 2005), p.308 66 and significance.126 And of all the imperial ceremonies that were held at the Padang, the King’s Birthday was one that acquired a ritualistic character Utilising the Municipal Building faỗade as setting, or filmset, it was conducted yearly from 1931 onwards Presided over by the governor, and attended by government officials, members of the Legislative Council, consular representatives and the colonized, the rites and rituals of the parade were highly mediated performances.127 Designed to assert the monarch as the head of empire, the performances of the parade were organised by race and ranks, putting on show the hierarchical nature of colonial society Primarily, the parade involved both British and local subjects pledging allegiance to the governor, or the representative of the monarch The ceremonies were exercises in the visual display of social order, culminating with the monarch at its apex The performances, which sometimes involved the display of military power, projected the image of order, authority and superiority enforced by the British, thus demanding the subordination of the colonial subject While there exist differences in the proceedings of events, other imperial ceremonies held on the Padang had the similar objective of asserting the monarch as the head of the empire, and the pledging of loyalty to the Crown.128 In effect, all these imperial celebrations were designed to mirror the royal ceremonies held in London, both in terms of traditions and temporality The export of British traditions overseas to their colonies, from the metropolis to the periphery, was utilised to create the impression of a vast, interconnected and united empire The synchronised ceremonies were a 126 Leach’s definition of the performative construct of architectural meaning draws from the work of Judith Butler in Bodies That Matter (London: Routledge, 1993), in which she forwards that gender is not a given ontological or biological condition, but one which is performatively produced by repetitive actions and behavior 127 “Aerial spectacle,” in The Straits Times, June 1931, p.11; “Celebration of King’s Birthday,” in The Straits Times, June 1932, p.12 Subsequent write-up on the performances of the King’s Birthday parades are referenced from these sources unless footnoted otherwise 128 “20,000 People See Volunteer Color Presentation,” in The Straits Times, 28 May 1934, p.13; “Medals Presented at Big Parade,” in The Straits Times, 13 May 1937, p.16 67 reminder to the colonial subject that while the monarch may be based in London, he still reigned over the rule of the colonies By holding the ceremonies on the Padang, the British capitalised on its historical significance as an imperial space The setting that foregrounds the performances, or the visuality of the Municipal Building faỗade, served to heighten the meaning conveyed through the performances by making visible British imperial power through its architectural forms While Leach forwards that performances were used to construct architectural identity, the Municipal Building faỗade already embodied within its visuality a set of culturally and socially constructed meaning as an expression of the British imperial enterprise In this instance, by capitalising on the faỗade as a setting, or “filmset” to reinforce the meaning of the activities taking place on the Padang, the relationship between performance and architecture operates both ways At the same time that the faỗade is used to reinforce the significance of the activities taking place on the Padang, it is also simultaneously illuminated by the performances Newspaper reports covering the imperial ceremonies often write of huge crowds surrounding the Padang to view the proceedings.129 Each time, thousands of local subjects were reported to have gathered at the Padang to watch the events unfold As a reporter forwarded, such “…occasion[s] [were] expressive of that spirit of loyalty and reverence to the Crown which is a bond of unity throughout the Empire.”130 While the native and immigrant population might have found the neo-classical visuality of the Municipal Building faỗade alien and incomprehensible, its symbolism 129 See, amongst other articles, “Singapore’s Greatest Military Spectacle,” in The Straits Times, 13 May 1937, p 15; “Singapore See Biggest Parade,” in The Straits Times, 14 June 1946, p.3 130 “King George VI proclaimed in Singapore”, in The Straits Times, 12 December 1936, p.12 68 was certainly conveyed through the imperial ceremonies held at the Padang The rites and rituals of the imperial ceremonies, rather than imbuing the faỗade, or filmset with meaning, functioned as explicatory devices for its visuality The ritualistic enactment of parade events, which asserted the power of the monarch over the colonial subjects, reinforced the function of the faỗade as an icon that made visible British colonisation of Singapore Through its role as a setting to the parades that the faỗades projection of Singapores identity as a British colony is directed internally 69 2.1.3 A Civilising Mask As the face of the city, the Municipal Building faỗade made visible the nature of imperial rule in Singapore as a solely British enterprise Its strict, geometrical classical form was a metaphor for the imposition of law, order, and governance in the colony by the British The faỗade was a symbol of the progressive and modernizing nature of the British colonial endeavor Indeed, without Raffles’ discovery of the island in 1819, and the British’s subsequent development of port facilities on the island, Singapore would not have become a major entrepot despite its excellent geographical location While the development of the island as an entrepot port by the British cannot be denied, its rule over Singapore was primarily an economic pursuit that was exploitative in nature Raffles’ decision to set up a port in Singapore was primarily due to the need to secure a base for the East India Company between Calcutta and Canton for the opium trade.131 In the first fifty years of the port’s inception, it also functioned as a major distribution point for arms and ammunition.132 Pepper and gambier agriculture were also initiated upon the transference of power from the East India Company to the British crown in 1867.133 Shipped to Europe and America, the spices were a profitable source of revenue for the British government.134 As trade was the primary motivation behind British colonization of the island, it also determined the style of governance in Singapore Historian Edwin Lee posits that: Free trade presupposed a laissez-faire style of government: no tax on imports and exports, no tax on income or company profits, and no “welfarism” either The logic 131 Carl A Trocki Singapore, p.13 ibid, p.15 133 ibid, p.88 134 ibid, p.87 132 71 of free trade underscored all thinking and action in the field of social legislation in Singapore under British rule.135 As Singapore’s value was primarily economic in nature, the British never harbored any intention of improving its social conditions.136 Despite the remarkable growth of British trade revenue in Singapore, it had a limited budget.137 Besides the development of roads and transport to facilitate trade on the island, the British adopted a laissez-faire attitude in all other aspects.138 The provision of education, health care, and housing were dependent on private contributions from philanthropic individuals.139 Due to their limited capacities, social progress was stagnant There was a shortage of schools, hospitals and homes for the population, while those operational were of dubious standards.140 An exploitative labor system also evolved from the laissez-faire style of governance The British felt no need to provide welfare benefits, or to protect the workers from unreasonable employers.141 As a result, workers had to look to their employers for medical and other benefits, which were rarely dispensed.142 They were also paid incredibly low wages.143 This led to the development of a large underclass, which formed the backbone of the colony.144 The economic prosperity of the British and merchant community was sustained by a city of underpaid coolies who were exploited for their hard labor A disjuncture thus occurs between the civilising image projected by the face of Singapore, and the social reality of the colony While the classical visuality of the 135 Edwin Lee “The Colonial Legacy”, in Paul Wheatley and Kernial Singh Sandhu (eds.), Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1989), p.4 136 Carl A Trocki Singapore, p.79 137 ibid, p.78 138 Edwin Lee “The Colonial Legacy”, p.14 139 ibid, p.40 140 ibid, p.40 141 ibid, p.38 142 ibid, p.37 143 ibid, p.38 144 Carl A Trocki Singapore, p.35 72 Municipal Building faỗade presented a progressive and benign image of the colonial endeavor, it was, in reality, an exploitative enterprise While the monumentality of the Municipal Building faỗade might be representative of its institutional function as the political headquarters of the British, it was no longer the face of Singapore, or a truthful reflection of its expanded interiority The benign image of the colonial enterprise was used to conceal the exploitative practices that took place within the colony Instead of face, it takes on the function of a surface Colomina has forwarded that: The outside is only the “cover” of the book, it is clothing, it is mask.145 The statement was made in reference to Adolf Loos’ houses In her analysis, Colomina observes that the facades of Loos’ houses were deliberately made silent and unreadable, in a disjuncture from warmth of its interior.146 She reads the disjuncture between the exterior and interior of the house as Loos’ attempt to reflect modern cultural conditions, in which man is split between his intimate and social being, or his interior and exterior self.147 The faỗades of Loos’ houses were used to hide their interiors, much like the way man employed clothing to conceal his difference from others.148 They were masks that concealed their interiority In Colomina’s conception, the faỗade as mask functioned to conceal in order to reflect larger cultural conditions The Municipal Building faỗade thus concealed the exploitative practices of the British in order to project colonialism as a progressive and civilizing mission in order to justify the imperial enterprise The faỗade was a 145 Beatriz Colomina Privacy and Publicity p.32 Italics are mine ibid, p.36 147 ibid, p.36 148 Beatriz Colomina Privacy and Publicity p.37 146 73 mask used to construct illusory visions of the colonial enterprise – as benign instead of exploitative, and also, as enduring instead of transient On 15 February 1942, Singapore fell into the hands of the Japanese when combined British and Allied forces were defeated in the Battle of Singapore.149 The Municipal Building was taken over by the Japanese, who utilized it as their administrative headquarters during their three-year occupation of Singapore.150 The occupation of the building was a symbolic act of victory by the Japanese in demonstrating the change in political leadership It subverted British imperial power at its most symbolically potent site By taking over the building, the Japanese sought to announce the defeat of the British, and to establish itself as the new authority During the Japanese Occupation, the faỗade experienced a shift in its symbolism No longer a symbol of British imperial power, it became, ironically, the image of resistance against the Crown In 1943, the president of the Indian Independence League, Subhas Chandra Bose, organized a parade of the Indian National Army at the Padang.151 Bose timed the parade to coincide with the visit of Japanese prime minister, Hideki Tojo, to Singapore, in order to rally for his support in freeing India from the British.152 The Municipal Building faỗade, as the setting for Boses resistance rally, was now a symbol of British downfall and Japanese political and military supremacy 149 Edwin Lee and Ernest C.T Chew (eds.) A History of Singapore (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1991), p.56 150 Liu, Gretchen In Granite and Chunam, p.63 151 C.M Turnbull A History of Modern Singapore, p.218 152 ibid 74 The Japanese surrendered Singapore on 15 August 1945, following the two atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on and August 1945 by the United States.153 Nearly a month later on September 1945, several hundreds of Japanese prisoners-ofwar were ordered by the British to clean the surrounds of the Municipal Building.154 Conceived as an act of humiliation, they were watched by thousands of people, including recently released British and Allied prisoners of war The act of cleansing had metaphoric overtones It was a bid to erase the Japanese Occupation from memory, an attempt to assert the triumph of the British over the Japanese Utilized as a symbol of British downfall during the Japanese Occupation, the Municipal Building was now a slate wiped clean, ready to be restored back to its original significance Thus, on 12 September 1945, immediately after the formal signing of the Instrument of Surrender in the City Hall Chambers, a victory parade was held at the Padang, which re-imbued the faỗade as the symbol of British imperial power through its rites and rituals.155 However, the Japanese Occupation stirred the first strains of nationalism, as Singaporeans came to realize that the British were not indomitable.156 In the immediate years following surrender of the Japanese, there was widespread discontent amongst the population due to high unemployment, inflation, and a shortage of food.157 British colonial authority was weakened by the war, and although there was no nationalist movement powerful enough to replace it, the resistance movements set 153 Edwin Lee and Ernest C.T Chew (eds.) A History of Singapore, p.57 “Japs Working On The Padang” in The Straits Times, 10 September 1945, p.2 Subsequent information on the Japanese cleaning the surrounds of the Municipal Building is referenced from the same source 155 “Japanese in Malaysia Surrender At Singapore,” in The Straits Times, 13 September 1945, p.1 156 W.E Willmott “The Emergence of Nationalism”, in Management of Success, p.582 157 C.M Turnbull A History of Modern Singapore 1819-2005, p.233 154 75 up during the occupation continued to operate, at times undermining its rule.158 The British, however, were still eager to project the image of undiminished control over the colony Thus in the following year of 1946, the administration organized the biggest ever celebration ever of the King’s Birthday.159 The event, held at the Padang with much pomp and pageantry, served to put on display the illusion of unabated political and military power And functioning as the central motif of the parade was the Municipal Building faỗade Despite the transient nature of colonialism, which saw the occupation of the Municipal Building by the Japanese, the British still utilized the visuality of its faỗade to reinforce itself as a power with an inevitable hold on time Thus, the faỗade was utilized not just as a civilizing mask, but also to conceal the transient nature of the colony The faỗade is a superficial exteriority, one used to project a more appealing and attractive state of affairs Significantly, the artificiality of the faỗade extended beyond the symbolic realm The faỗade is an artifice in itself The Corinthian capitals of the faỗade were not crafted in Britain, but in Singapore by an Italian sculptor named Rudolpho Nolli.160 This was despite the propagation of Italian classicism as an English building form, a national style that was fit for the British Empire After its completion, much attention was also given to the construction technique of the Municipal Building Although it was “erected in the Modern Classic Style, which has been evolved from a study of old Greek and Roman buildings[, it is] adapted to modern constructions and requirements…”161 Unlike the “old Greek and Roman buildings” which were fabricated in stone, the Municipal Building was constructed entirely out of reinforced concrete 158 ibid The communists, who sought constitutional changes, emerged as the most influential political movement after the war 159 “Singapore Sees Biggest Parade”, in The Straits Times, 14 June 1946, p.3 Subsequent information on the king’s birthday parade in 1946 are drawn from this source 160 Gretchen Liu In Granite and Chumnam, p.62 161 A Gordon “The Old Changeth”, p.2 76 By masquerading reinforced concrete as stone, the faỗade is, literally, a mask It is a disguise that passes on for something it is not The falsity of the neoclassical faỗade is thus in line with the deceptive and illusory purposes for which it was utilized Initially conceived as the face of Singapore, there remains nothing authentic about the faỗade The face is revealed to be a mask And it is this function of the faỗade that has endured in postcolonial times 77 ... creation of an “Imperial London” was the re-imaging of the Buckingham Palace with a beaux-arts faỗade in 1913.60 The refacing was part of a larger program that saw the reconstruction of the ceremonial... image and the mind, Italo Calvino describes the imagination as a “mental cinema…projecting images before our mind’s eye.”45 To Calvino, the imagination functions like a cinematic apparatus And... architectural approach By conceiving the faỗade as a two-dimensional drawing, the surface of the building becomes equivalent to that of the drawing board The faỗade was conceived essentially as an image