Singapore has reinvented itself every few decades.
If there’s any city in the world that can be called protean, it is Singapore. The city has reinvented itself not once or twice but innumerable times.
Historically a trading post, it was a British colony for a while before it fell to the Japanese in the second world war; it acquired its own government in 1956, then became part of Malaysia for two years before gaining independence in 1965. In less than half a century, Singapore has gone from colonial bastion to global metropolis of ‘first world’ standards. Despite its stringent laws, the city has become a benchmark as both an economic and planning model.
Like most colonial cities, Singapore was burdened with the legacy of imperial power. This meant a grand city centre and square, while the rest of the island remained haphazard and unregulated. Vestiges of this are still visible, epitomised by Raffles Place. The island was also divided along ethnic lines.
The Singapore Improvement Trust was created to devise a master plan for the increasing population, improving the inadequate housing and infrastructure. It proved fairly unsuccessful and was dissolved in 1960, making way for the Planning Ordinance. The then newly independent country sought aid from the United Nations to establish a concept urban plan for — not five or 10, but for 20 years. This was an entirely different approach from that of other countries with post-colonial baggage.
The ‘ring’ plan provided for residential estates, industrial areas and commercial centres around the central water catchment area, all connected with expressways and a mass rapid transit system. It also set aside land for Changi Airport. These measures allowed the petroleum-rich island to promote itself as an export manufacturing hub.
In the second avatar, the Urban Redevelopment Authority in 1971 focussed on transforming Singapore into a ‘tropical city of excellence’ by breaking the ring plan and dividing Singapore into four zones. The plan introduced greenery, better housing and leisure facilities and decongested the city centre considerably. The city was also reincarnated as the nucleus for the services sector in south Asia, with services accounting for 63.5 per cent of its economy.
In 1985, it sought yet again to inculcate the idea of a ‘thriving world class city’, leading to the creation of the crisp metallic skyline that now greets visitors as they land.
With the economic crises of 2001 Singapore’s services industry took a hit, so the city state transformed itself into a tourist destination with amusement and leisure parks such as the Sentosa island resort, the casinos on the Marina and the Esplanade.
Facing allegations of being culturally sterile, Singapore is again seeking to devise a new garb, one that merges art and tradition with modernity. The new redevelopment plan for the waterfront injects theatre, music, art, design and sport into the city. Older parts have been restored, offering new reuse strategies.
What is evident in its many ‘avatars’ is that Singapore has, unlike many other cities, not succumbed or permitted politics or tradition to impede its progress. The avatar city has moved forward not by renaming streets but by changing direction, not by creating red-tape but by determinedly implementing policies. In the process, Singapore has added layers, making it more intriguing.
[The author is a Delhi-based architect]
