▶ Your Answer :
Undoubtedly, a city which has old,
historical buildings plays a significant role in people's
daily lives in many of the places where they work or
play. Some people think that a city
should destroy old, historic building and replace them with modern buildings, while others do not. Both sides may have their own reasons to
support their views. If I were
asked to choose one, I would say that it is better
to try to preserve its old, historic building. There are several reasons as follows.
To
begin with, each countries can make culture images. Old and historic building
usually present their cultures and arts at that time. It is important for
keeping their assets to have their own distinct characteristics. For example,
when I traveled Kyoto in Japan, which is well preserved, I watched various
buildings which contain historical events, moments, and inventions. After I go
on a trip, the images of Japan is changed. By watching historic buildings, I
realized that maintaining their own country's old and historic building allows
people to make culture images.
Second,
children can learn valuable things from old, historic buildings. Buildings
which have historical meanings give the opportunity to think something for
children themselves; how they can make it, what is it made of, or how they can
move it, and so on. For example, after my younger sister went on a trip with
her friend in Gyeong-ju, which has a lot of historical buildings, she began to
study the buildings which she watched. She said that there were a lot of
curious things. As a result, she could broaden her knowledge through historical
buildings. This example shows that if a city preserve old and historic building, it will help children to learn
valuable things.
As
I mentioned above, I agree that a city should try to preserve its old, historic
building rather than destroy them and replace them with modern buildings.
|