• Sổ học bạ: 589
• Điểm thành tích: 2
• Điểm học bạ: 589
Nowadays, to develop city, many people decide that we should destroy historic buildings to have space for housing. In my opinion, I don’t agree with that for many reasons.
Firstly, we should preserve our cultural not only for our country but also for the next generations. If we destroy historic buildings, our descendant wouldn’t understand about our cultural and aware of its value. They don’t know about the sacrifice of our ancestor for protecting our cultural. They had to fighting with enemy to have the independence of nation. Therefore, the historic buildings can help our off-springs remember our history and our ancestors.
Secondly, historic buildings can attract many visitors from other countries. That make revenue for our country. Historic buildings have both of economic and spirit value. Especially, historic buildings are very difficult to find at other places, so we must preserve it.
In conclusion, with many benefits of historic buildings, we shouldn’t destroy them. We have many ways to develop city but it is unnecessary to destroy the building have many cultural values.
• Sổ học bạ: 241
• Điểm thành tích: 108
• Điểm học bạ: 241
Some people favour the idea that historic buildings should be demolished in order to provide space for housing. In this essay, I will explore this notion and explain why I strongly disagree with this notion.
Firstly, it is inarguable that a nation without history doesn’t have a future. Historical buildings are our heritage from our ancestors and belong to us, as well as they belong to our future generations. People do not have a right to take away an opportunity to sightsee them from our children. The Capitol building in Washington, D.C. is the place where American laws are created and it is of high importance to the nation. For example, many cities have adopted a regulation that prohibits the construction of objects exceeding certain heights which is common to the previous city architecture standard. Such ruling prevents from blocking the view of central city parts.
Secondly, historic objects of architecture are treated as a certain era’s art masterpieces. For instance, we can not imagine Moscow without the Kremlin, Rome without the Coliseum, Barcelona without the Gaudi Garden. Moreover, architectural creations with history are of tremendous interest to the tourists, thus attracting visitors from all over the world, increasing the financial income of the city and consequentially to the cultural exchange and amity.
In conclusion, I truly believe that historic objects should never be destroyed in order to free up the area for housing construction. Mainly, due to the fact that they carry our history which should be passed on to future generations. Also, they represent art and are of huge importance for tourism and cultural exchange development. ...
• Sổ học bạ: 1656
• Điểm thành tích: 488
• Điểm học bạ: 1656
The world population is still growing, this leads to the demand for more housing space. But the land is not a growable thing, and this problem has become more complex in some developed countries. A solution for this is knocking down historic buildings to save more space. I don't think it will be practical if being carried out.
In general, citizens usually regard the old buildings as the symbols of the city, and in fact, old buildings make a considerable contribution to tourism. Besides, the government often conserves them annually, so the idea of knocking them down seems to be very ridiculous, even if it does not include the "international heritage" buildings. Knocking them down also means that we are destroying our ancestor's efforts and experience through each development of human civilization, and the next generations will never have a chance to learn about them again, the things that used to be the masterpieces of the world.
However, this does not mean that we should keep all the available historical buildings. Some of which, after a very long time sustaining the weather and other natural disasters, are quite ruined. Although builders can repair the impaired parts with new technologies, they can hardly recover the main beauty of the original ones. This makes them feel discouraged and the buildings will be abandoned again. Gradually, these places will become more dangerous and can't be visited anymore. Therefore, it is no use keeping them, no matter how valuable they are. After knocking them down, we can use the remaining lands to build new houses and apartments.
In conclusion, there are not too many historical buildings in the world, and only some of those occupy a large area, so keeping them will be the better choice. It should be optional, depending on the ability of each region.
• Sổ học bạ: 152
• Điểm thành tích: 33
• Điểm học bạ: 152
Dam historic buildings should or not is everyone's opinion. But my grades shouldn't be like that. Historical buildings are where we can see the beauty of ancient times, are also historical marks for us to see the beauty of our ancestors. And, the historic buildings are also the destination for domestic and foreign tourists to admire the unique features of Vietnamese history. Instead of damaging that building, we can either build uninhabited houses or we can rent apartments to live in. That is my opinion.
• Sổ học bạ: 8
• Điểm thành tích: 0
• Điểm học bạ: 8
In the big cities, very few old houses are left. Those are the historical monuments of mankind. These historical relics have told the human formation, telling the life of the people in ancient times. To create space for the houses that must be by destroying the unique historical features of the era. That is so barbaric. Historical features must be preserved because the historic buildings have their own unique style, their own beauty, their own antiquity. That is my opinion.