1. I come from a country where several Chinese temples have been restored, gazetted as national heritage sites. Some time ago I was visiting one of them. The temple was one of the oldest in the country, founded in the 1840s, and in the heart of the city-- its oldest part.
2/ When I was walking about it, it felt ... odd. Strange. Nothing like any of the Chinese temples I used to visit with my family, and continue to operate in other parts of the island. Then it struck me. The reason why it was so odd, was its smell-- or rather the lack of it.
3/ It did not possess the pungent odour of joss sticks, that ordinary Chinese temples have. True, there were incense burners and the like, but within them were smouldering only one or two sticks—
4/ I could tell from the smell they were burning good quality incense, but even that was not right. Indeed, the whole situation was almost the exact opposite of how the Chinese describe a thriving temple “香火鼎盛” “The incense-tripod luxuriant with smoke”
5/ The more I looked, the more and more and more it seemed out of place. The tables before the statues were neatly laid with one dish of fruit, some cakes, etc. It looked too orderly, too neat.
6/ Even the statues of the deities looked odd. They were all colourful and true to form, but every one of them was covered with a sort of chalky-white layer. Each one of them had a placard, explaining who he was and what were his powers.
7/ I have been in some deserted temples before, but none of them looked like this. The tables would usually have some traces of incense ash in them, no mater how neat.The statues of deities would usually be black with incense smoke, and covered with elaborate silken robes.
8/ The statues of deities would typically not be placed on altars in ones or twos, as they were in the present temple, but rather massed- many small statues placed in ranked rows, like seats in a lecture theatre.
9/ At this point, it struck me. What I was seeing was not a temple—It was in effect a museum that happened to function as a temple occasionally.
10/ A functioning temple would not need placards to tell you who was who. all would know that gentleman in white with a grin and lolling tongue was Tua-ya-pek, the bailiff of hell, and the other man by side, dressed in black and scowling was Di-ya-pek, his blood brother.
11/ Nor would there be any worry for incense smoke damaging the statues or beams or any of the wonderful ‘heritage’ things. The building is one thing, but what really matters are the gods.
12/The devotee , intoxicated with joy at surviving another voyage, bowing in thanks before Mazu, the temple’s central deity, would doubtless care little about the fine figures on the roof, and delicate carvings on the beams.
13/ To put it bluntly, this temple resembled a stuffed bird in the museum. Colourful, easy to study, but hardly alive. Or to put it more subtly, The temple and gods remain, but their old worshippers have gone. Now the gods must get used to a different crowd altogether-tourists.
14/ I recall one of the anthropological accounts here talking about a wooden idol worshipped in Sweden ;till the 1940s. An irate pastor removed the idol and placed it in a museum.
15/ The user finished by saying something like this “This how we destroy idols in the 20thc: We Throw them into museums. And this is a far more complete way of destroying them than burning them”
16/ Those who decided to preserve this temple, have, in effect, have done effectively the same thing unintentionally. The temple has become more of museum, a tourist piece, a piece of 'education on Chinese culture' than it is a palace of the living gods.
17/ True, things must change. The temple is now in the middle of a business district; far from the main population centres. It could hardly have avoided a better fate if it stayed as it was, "authenthic" and "untouristifed"
18/ And besides, how accessible or welcoming would a more living temple be to an outsider, with its scowling deities and dark, sooty beams?
19/ Besides, keeping this temple alive in this half-life—is it not better than turning it into a hotel, which what happened to one temple in the 1990s?
20/ True, true, a hundred times true. But perhaps reflect. All this accessibility, all this heritage, all this conservation was predicated on one thing: the temple hollowing out, dying.
21/ Afterword: In all fariness, this temple represents the mid 2000s state of restoration of old monuments. Last year I visited yet another temple that was restored more recently. This time the restoration was done more sensitively...
22/ The lights were dim, the placards more subtle- but as is inevitable in such cases, it still feels different from a working temple. Nonetheless, it is a much more sensitive restoration than the ones alluded to above. We can still hope.
23/ There is a peculiar irony, when, in the interests of 'historical preservation' the burning of incense is hugely restricted: Thus preserving the temple's physical structure comes at the expense of preserving the temple's spiritual structure.
24. I should stress that there are other Chinese temples in this country, that have *not* been touristified, and are thronged with worshippers. It is just this temple that been so transformed. The worship of the gods is still going on strong elsewhere.
