This article was downloaded by: [National University Of Singapore]

On: 5 February 2011

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 779896407]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Heritage Studies

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713685629

Archives and Heritage in Singapore: The Development of 'Reflections at

Bukit Chandu', a World War II Interpretive Centre
Donna Brunero

To cite this Article Brunero, Donna(2006) 'Archives and Heritage in Singapore: The Development of 'Reflections at Bukit
Chandu', a World War II Interpretive Centre', International Journal of Heritage Studies, 12: 5, 427 — 439
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/13527250600821613
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13527250600821613

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 International Journal of Heritage Studies
Vol. 12, No. 5, September 2006, pp. 427–439

Archives and Heritage in Singapore:

The Development of ‘Reflections at
Bukit Chandu’, a World War II
Interpretive Centre
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

Donna Brunero

On 15 February 2002 a new World War II interpretive centre was opened in Singapore. A
50DonnaBrunero
12
donna.brunero@bristol.ac.uk
00000September
International
10.1080/13527250600821613
RJHS_A_182099.sgm
1352-7258
Original
Taylor
2006 and
& Article
Francis 2006
(print)/1470-3610
Francis
Journal
Ltd
of Heritage
(online)
Studies

colonial bungalow was redeveloped by the National Archives of Singapore to commemorate

the Malay Regiment and particularly the officers and soldiers who made a heroic stand
against Japanese forces in one of the last battles before the fall of Singapore. This centre,
Reflections at Bukit Chandu, has significance in terms of local heritage development, public
memory of war, national education initiatives, and also in relation to the changing role of
archives in Singapore. This paper serves as an exploration of this heritage site and uses this
as a starting point for considering public history in Singapore and importantly a new direc-
tion for the National Archives of Singapore, as it played the key role in developing this site.

Keywords: Singapore; Archives; Heritage; War; Malay Regiment

On 15 February 2002, a World War II interpretive centre was opened in a renovated

bungalow at 31-K Pepys Road in the Pasir Panjang area, Singapore. This was the last
remaining colonial bungalow in this vicinity and was redeveloped to commemorate the
soldiers of the Malay Regiment who died defending Pasir Panjang Hill against the
Japanese forces in February 1942. The centre was developed as part of a wider heritage
context as part of a trail connecting Labrador Park and Kent Ridge Park (each being
battle sites), ideally integrating all existing World War II sites into a wider narrative of
the Japanese conquest.1 Responsibility for the project was passed through the National

Donna Brunero, University of Bristol. Correspondence to: donna.brunero@bristol.ac.uk

ISSN 1352–7258 (print)/ISSN 1470–3610 (online) © 2006 Taylor & Francis

DOI: 10.1080/13527250600821613
 428 D. Brunero
Heritage Board to the National Archives of Singapore (NAS), marking a new direction
for this institution.
The official opening of ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’, a World War II interpretive
centre, had significance in terms of heritage, local connections, technology and the
archival profession. This opening marked an important juncture in Singapore’s public
history arena as the centre was the realisation of long-held public interest in recognis-
ing the sacrifices of the Malay Regiment through a memorial or museum. In addition,
the development of the centre ensured the preservation of this colonial bungalow on
Pepys Road for public use rather than seeing it pass into the private rental domain. This
new heritage centre had a local focus and broke new ground in terms of the technolo-
gies used and approaches taken. In terms of its conceptualisation and development, the
centre marked the NAS’s first foray into a new aspect of public service. These signifi-
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

cances come to the fore in a textual analysis of this site and its place in official discourses
and Singapore’s National Education initiative.
This paper explores the development of ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ by the NAS
and the significance of this site in the larger Singapore heritage movement. This centre
is key for examining the changing role of the NAS within Singapore’s national heritage
movement. The ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ project was an unprecedented move for
the NAS and one that brought claims that it was trespassing on to others’ professional
territory. It was not to be its last venture, however, and in mid-February 2006 it opened
‘Memories at the Ford Factory’, a new World War II centre located in the newly
restored Ford factory premises on Bukit Timah Road and site of the British surrender
in February 1942. Again, this site was developed by the NAS, and this reflects the level
of approval that the NAS received by the National Heritage Board (the main govern-
ment body) for its efforts with ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’; it also indicates that this
new facet of responsibilities for the NAS will not be short lived.

Professional Conflict? The Changing Role of Archivists in Singapore

As the NAS developed ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’, the dynamics between archivists,
museum professionals, and historians need exploration. This work by the NAS gives
rise to a view that in Singapore such ‘traditional’ boundaries are under revision. The
NAS was originally established as the National Archives and Records Centre in 1968,
and took on its present form in 1993. In the general sense an archivists’ mission is the
collection and preservation of documents of enduring value that represent the collec-
tive memory of society. Their role also is to make such documents accessible and
promote their use in the wider community. On their Web site, the NAS echoes the
above mission as it outlines its responsibilities and services to both government and the
public; it also states that it has ‘moved beyond’ the role of ‘record keeper of the nation’.2
The development of ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ and more recently ‘Memories at the
Ford Factory’ is cited as evidence of this evolution from record keeping to heritage
development and management, and the interpretation of history.
Through postmodern critiques, archives have come under scrutiny as sites of power
and knowledge. They are no longer seen as merely the storehouses for society’s
 International Journal of Heritage Studies 429
collective memory and documentary heritage but as places where a transformation
takes place.3 Within the archive, records move from private to public, or the reverse,
and their institutional identity also undergoes change. Archives are examined from
both within and outside the profession as sites where knowledge is created and
protected.4 Archives are no longer viewed as just preserving records but as interpreting
their significance by providing their context. In light of these contentions, archivists
can be understood as playing a mediating role between the record and the researcher.
Archives are seen as playing an important role in preserving cultural landscape and
ensuring that the effacement of sites does not become complete.5 In the Singapore
context, debate surrounding who should write history saw archivists being described as
only ‘keepers’ of the corporate memory of the nation, with the belief that any interpre-
tation should be left to historians.6 The launching of ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ has
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

shown how quickly this debate has moved on. By having direct control over the devel-
opment of the centre, the NAS has asserted a new relevance for archives and archivists
in Singapore.
Archivists and historians often have an uneasy relationship. Archivists hold the
privileged position of seeing a collection in its entirety whereas the historian or
researcher must rely on archivists and finding aids to uncover the ‘gems’ in the collec-
tion.7 For almost the past two decades there has been a move by archivists to recognise
and build on the importance of the connection between archivists and historians.8
According to Dearstyne, one of the challenges for archivists is to develop the archivist–
researcher relationship with the idea of fostering allies in the wider community.9 Such
alliances would bring benefits to archivists in terms of public awareness, access and
research. Dearstyne explores the relationship between historians and archivists, stating
the view held by some archivists that ‘the historian makes the best archivist … The
archivist must be a historian, at least by inclination, and preferably by calling.’10 He
does, however, describe how there is a fundamental difference between the two, which
can be seen in the following proposition: archivists identify, preserve and ensure access
to records while historians research, analyse and interpret them.11 Through this
process historians can ‘reconstruct history’ and present narratives about the past. What
this article suggests, then, is a partnership of sorts—archivists as ‘handmaidens of
history’ may be a clichéd but effective way to characterise this. In the case of the NAS,
an historical consultant advised on the history of the Malay Regiment for ‘Reflections
at Bukit Chandu’ but the main control and development of the centre rested with the
archival staff. This reflects an awareness of the need to maintain contact with research-
ers but, at the same time, the confidence of NAS in developing this site meant that it
was clearly archive led.
Public history is one domain where there is some common ground, but again this is
a contentious field, with many possible definitions. The actions of the NAS officers in
developing this site, not only in identifying material but also interpreting it for the
centre, are a clear addition to the more traditional roles of an archivist’s purview. This
is indicative of the postmodern era in which archives have taken on a more prominent
role in the presentation of knowledge to the community. Here the NAS is not only
preserving and promoting records but is drawing on these records to create heritage
 430 D. Brunero
centres. This clearly also moves into the domain of museum curatorship and raises
further questions for the future relationship between the archival, curatorial, and
historical professions in Singapore.
In developing ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ the NAS has moved into new territory
for the archival profession, in Singapore at least. No longer is it confined to developing
travelling exhibits or online exhibitions but instead now has two heritage centres that
it has developed and maintains. Comparisons are difficult to find; certainly public
outreach programmes, and exhibitions drawn from collections, are not unusual
throughout the archive world, and neither is the idea of archivists as consultants for
heritage projects. Developing a heritage centre, however, brings a new dimension.12
There may be community archives that are served by an archivist-historian, and archi-
val institutions may have assisted in preparing exhibits for museums and interpretive
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

centres. but this is not the same as an archive taking the lead in developing a centre.

A Localised Centre for Remembering World War II

‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ is a recent addition to Singapore’s heritage landscape,
prompted by larger national agendas for the cultivation of the arts.13 The idea of muse-
ums as nation-building tools and sites of socio-political influence is not new.14 In the
case of Singapore, this emphasis on museum and heritage development is heightened
by relatively recent nationhood and is affected by the legacies of the colonial era.15 This
centre is a government-directed project but the precursor to its development was
through calls from the community (the Malay community in particular) for the need
to remember the Malay Regiment soldiers. The following section examines the centre
in relation to the wider Singapore heritage movement and then critiques the develop-
ment of several exhibits.
In Singapore in the mid- to late 1990s there was a flurry of remembrance relating to
World War II, pointing to a greater openness, a public sharing and desire to capture
recollections of the military campaign and the subsequent Japanese occupation. The
Battle of Pasir Panjang was one of the last battles prior to the British surrender and the
Opium Hill (Bukit Chandu) area was seen as one of the six key battle/historical sites
that warranted signposting for national historical purposes.16 Other sites included
Kranji Beach Battle site, the Jurong-Kranji Defence line, Bukit Timah Battle site, the
Sook Ching Centre and the Indian National Army Monument site.17 It is significant to
note the diversity of experiences and events captured in each of these memorials. Of
these six sites, three have particular resonance in moving from the idea of commemo-
rating the battle between British and Australian forces against the Japanese (or the ‘war
between imperialists’ view) to that of local participation. These include the Sook Ching
Centre—for the cruelties exacted against the Chinese community at the hands of the
Japanese kempetai, the Battle of Pasir Panjang for the sacrifices of the Malay Regiment
and the Indian National Army (established by the British in 1942, disbanded, and then
revived by the Japanese to harness Indian nationalism) Monument site where a monu-
ment to the unknown warrior had once been erected.18 Following this, in 1995 (the
50th anniversary of the end of the war) a total of 11 plaques were produced to designate
 International Journal of Heritage Studies 431
the various war sites.19 These all reflect a localisation of the war, and a willingness to
remember these sites as part of the cultural landscape. These can be contrasted with the
Changi Chapel and Museum, which arguably reflect more the ‘imperial’ experience of
war—their development also largely a result of lobbying on the part of foreign ex-pris-
oners of war.20
The need to preserve the Pasir Panjang site had already been raised in the public
arena prior to the government initiative. In 1992 The Straits Times featured the Urban
Development Management Corporation’s plans to renovate the bungalow for private
rental. This had reportedly led some Malay members of the community to suggest that,
instead, the building should be turned into a museum to commemorate the Malay
Regiment.21 The need to honour the Malay Regiment for its defence of Pasir Panjang
Hill was raised in a number of letters published in The Straits Times in 1992,22 as well
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

as a suggestion to remember the fallen heroes on Opium Hill by shooting an epic film
of their last stand against the Japanese.23 In most of these articles and letters the bunga-
low at Pepys Road was specifically mentioned as part of the need to remember the hero-
ism of the Malay Regiment. So in this way the official announcement of the
development of this site had its precursor in the public arena; the colonial bungalow
was already recognised in the cultural landscape and hence the desire for the restora-
tion of the site. This is a reflection of what Kreps describes as the ‘new museology’
movement where a key to development is community interest and participation.24
The redevelopment of the site cost S$4.8 million (€2.4 million) and the official
launch was timed to coincide with the 60th Anniversary of Singapore’s surrender to the
Japanese (see Figure 1). One of the important factors that influenced the development
of the site was its name. Many names were discussed when seeking to capture the inten-
tions of the site, including suggestions such as: Tribute to the Malay Regiment, Last
Defence at Pasir Panjang, Pasir Panjang War Memorial, and Bukit Chandu Battle
site.25 The use of ‘Bukit Chandu’ (Opium Hill) does not create an immediate associa-
tional link to the Battle of Pasir Panjang or the Malay Regiment but it is in keeping with
the local name for this area and so again makes connection to place. The naming of the
centre reflects an attempt to localise the history of this site and to redraw the connec-
tions to the community level.26 Furthermore, the absence of reference to war or battle
in the name is also indicative of the NAS’s intention with this centre.
While localising the Battle of Pasir Panjang, the transformation of the site was
Figure 1 Reflections at Bukit Chandu. Photograph taken by the author in 2003.

sympathetic to the bungalow’s colonial past. The origins of the Malay Regiment and its
involvement in the Battle of Pasir Panjang are, however, inextricably linked to the colo-
nial experience. By retaining the colonial bungalow there is a reflection of the underly-
ing colonial legacies that are present in terms of Singapore’s cultural landscape. Close
attention was paid to trying to recreate some of the ‘colonial landscape’ in the types of
plants that surround the centre. The planting of tapioca and lalang trees creates a more
historically sympathetic setting. In doing so, the NAS wanted to create a sense of what
the site may have been like during the 1940s and also to invoke that sense of connection
to items remembered as synonymous with shortages of rice and other commodities
during the Syonan era.27 These connections would be lost, however, on visitors unless
they were specifically alerted to them. Original conceptualisations of this site had
 432 D. Brunero
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

Figure 1 ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’. Photograph taken by the author in 2003.

included a children’s interactive centre with camping facilities but these plans did not
come to fruition28 and instead a more traditional centre was developed under the
direction of the NAS but bearing in mind the appeal to a younger audience. In this way,
the NAS was fulfilling part of its mandate in terms of public outreach. This centre was
intended not only to attract an adult audience but also secondary-school students.
The main focus of this site was to remember the sacrifices and bravery of the Malay
Regiment soldiers. This regiment (formed in the 1930s) was the only indigenous unit
fighting in the regular forces (see Figure 2). Recruits were drawn from the Federated
and Unfederated Malay States as well as Singapore, Penang, and Malacca.29 Initially all
officers and NCOs were British but by 1941 Malay soldiers joined the ranks of leader-
ship within the unit.30 The figure of 2nd Lt Adnan Saidi has, however, arguably eclipsed
that of the Malay Regiment and he has become a legendary figure for Malaysians, and
particularly for Singapore’s Malay community. Adnan Saidi’s torture and execution at
the hands of the Japanese in the Battle of Pasir Panjang contributed to his status as a
war hero. Illustrative of the emotive power of Adnan Saidi’s memory is the fact that in
September 1995 his brother visited the site of his death for the first time and this then
triggered calls for a memorial to the Malay Regiment.31 The centre pays tribute to
Adnan Saidi but also places his heroism within a broader context of his fellow soldiers
and the battle. This correlates with the idea of war monuments being both about the
loss of many and, at the same time, about the individual.32 The local focus, however, is
 International Journal of Heritage Studies 433
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

Figure 2 Sculpture of Malay Regiment soldiers located in the grounds of Bukit Chandu.
Photograph taken by the author in 2003.

clear; while Australian war veterans were consulted in the development stage, the
centre does not specifically represent the other forces also engaged in the defence of
Singapore.
The ideas of heroism, sacrifice, and connection to home dominate this centre. A
Figure 2 Sculpture of Malay Regiment soldiers located in the grounds of Bukit Chandu. Photograph taken by the author in 2003.

plaque attached to a bronze sculpture located outside the centre includes the following
excerpt:

If we don’t remember our heroes, we will produce no heroes. If we do not record their
sacrifices, their sacrifices would have been in vain … the greatest strength we have as
a people is our common memories of the past and our common hopes for the future …33

These sentiments provide a signpost for how the NAS intended ‘Reflections at Bukit
Chandu’ to be understood. The quote reinforces the idea of remembering and learning
from the heroism displayed by these soldiers, not only because of their bravery in battle
as part of the British forces but for their defence of their communities and homeland.
It also reflects the NAS’s awareness of current government concerns with forging a
common identity in a multi-ethnic community. The idea of the Malay Regiment
soldiers, and Adnan Saidi in particular, as national heroes, however, does not sit well
with Singapore’s national agenda.34 Historians Hong and Huang discuss Adnan Saidi’s
hero status in Malaysia (he is held as a role model and inspiration for the Malaysian
 434 D. Brunero
armed forces) and the unsuitability, in terms of political sensibilities, of his being
accorded such status in Singapore.35 This ambivalence is further highlighted by
Muzaini and Yeoh in their description of the centre as a site of contested significance.
They explore the way in which the Malay-oriented focus of the site was diffused better
to fit the needs of Singapore’s multi-ethnic national ethos (of which the Malay culture
is but one part).36 Indeed, exhibits also include material from a Chinese man who
witnessed his family being killed by Japanese troops, and a small display relating to
prisoners of war, based on sketches held in the NAS collection.
In light of the introduction to the Malay Regiment, a brief comparison can be drawn
in the Australian context. The primacy of the legend of the ANZAC (Australian and
New Zealand Army Corps) emerged on the Australian cultural landscape after their
heroism in the First World War.37 The ‘creation of the ANZAC legend’ is seen as a
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

defining point in how Australians view themselves—it was representative of a national

‘coming of age’. Through the development of ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’, the Malay
Regiment and its actions in the Battle of Pasir Panjang are accorded a special place in
the Singaporean cultural landscape, as an important moment in shaping identity.
‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ was developed by the NAS to remember the sacrifices of
the Malay Regiment but not to designate national heroes. This seeming contradiction
is raised for discussion with the idea that there is ambivalence surrounding memory
and that a ‘society’s need to remember is balanced against its desire to forget’.38 In this
instance, NAS director Pitt Kuan Wah reflected an awareness of this tension by assert-
ing the universal values of the centre, rather than a solely Malay focus.39 And this is
echoed again in the promotional brochure for the centre which reads:

31-K Pepys Road is not just another World War II museum. It is not about P.O.W.s
only. Neither is it just a memorial to the last moments of the 1st and 2nd Battalion of
the Malay Regiment. It is a place for reflection—a place for the people of today.40

The centre is not represented, then, as a definitive site for national ‘coming of age’ but
rather for considering the sacrifices of the past in the shaping of the present. The
emphasis here is clearly to think beyond the Malay Regiment to wider ideas of connec-
tion to homeland and sacrifice.
The exhibits at the centre reflect some of the tensions between attempts to localise
events and at the same time retain their broader context. The ground floor galleries
introduce the Battle of Pasir Panjang in the larger Malayan Campaign, the origins of
the Malay Regiment and also the broader idea of the defence of Singapore and its devel-
opment as a British stronghold in Asia. The larger view of British imperial policy is
under-addressed; the detachment of the Malayan Campaign from the grand strategy of
defence of empire is, according to historian Farrell, a weakness of popular accounts of
the fall of Singapore;41 the centre does not go beyond the standard accounts of the
Malayan Campaign. A small number of artefacts were selected to reinforce the main
narrative; these include an air raid siren, Japanese soldiers’ mess equipment and a
Malay Regiment crest. They are utilised to ‘set the scene’ for the text rather than to form
the basis of a substantial collection. A panel focuses on a history of the Malay Regiment
and this features historical photographs. In spite of the intended local focus of this
 International Journal of Heritage Studies 435
centre the Malay Regiment is clearly represented through the colonial viewpoint, as
evidenced by the fact that information is sourced predominantly from British official
documents. In an attempt to give voice to the soldiers, by peering inside a replica
pillbox visitors view a narrative of the battle from one of the Malay Regiment soldiers
(this utilises ‘Pepper’s Ghost technology’) in an attempt to recreate their thoughts and
feelings as battle draws near.42 Furthermore, representations of the Japanese military
tend to remain stereotyped and this is reinforced through the audiovisual displays, with
historical footage and modern recreated footage being spliced together. One must
ponder whether the heroism of the Malay Regiment could only be expressed in this
centre through the almost obligatory demonisation of the Japanese.43
Most of the documents and photographs used in the development of the exhibits
were drawn from the NAS’s extensive holdings. These were supplemented with
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

materials from the Australian Archives and Britain’s Imperial War Museum.
Singapore’s Ministry of Defence also loaned a number of items for the centre. Other
artefacts were sourced from overseas, with the focus resting on the acquisition of weap-
ons and then other World War II artefacts to become exhibits.44 Staff of the NAS also
conducted a field trip into Malaysia, during which time private collectors were visited
as part of the sourcing process. It is significant that NAS staff were deployed at each
stage in the development of the centre, including the sourcing of items for display.
The NAS sought to capitalise on the significance of this centre by underscoring its
close proximity to the actual battlefield. An audio guide informs the visitor that the
bungalow had been used as a military store by the British defence forces and that some
Malay Regiment soldiers may have spent some time in this house before going out to
battle on 14 February.45 This clarification is pertinent in that for many visitors their
understanding of the actual significance of the bungalow may be misconstrued or
confused in relation to the battle or the site of the execution of Adnan Saidi for exam-
ple. Undoubtedly, sites where battles have taken place are difficult to represent or
introduce to visitors and the changes which have taken place often render the site
unrecognisable from earlier times;46 the representation of the bungalow at this centre
highlights these difficulties.
The Hall of Memories exhibit places the Battle of Pasir Panjang into a more personal
setting. Each frosted glass frame features a quote or excerpt, drawing on war diaries, the
memories of Adnan Saidi’s family, and thoughts from other families and soldiers of the
Malay Regiment. These memories are attributed as memories of tradition, patriotism,
death before dishonour, struggle, and of a father, a warrior.47 These panels reinforce
the notion that these events were not merely about soldiers and overall strategies but
families and communities. The panels capture not only soldiers but also brothers,
husbands and fathers. Again a small number of artefacts is displayed with accompany-
ing recorded testimonies; this includes a tin cup donated by a Malay Regiment
widow—her only keepsake from her husband—highlighting personal loss. This
emotive and empathetic approach to artefacts and records of war is indicative of what
Tunbridge and Ashworth discuss as reflective of the historical revisionism evident in all
museums but particularly for military museums where the traditional honouring of the
use of armed force has been reinterpreted according to changing societal concerns and
 436 D. Brunero
values.48 Another feature of the centre is the large circular Well of Reflections diorama,
which is flanked by exhibits of the Malay Regiment’s uniform and ceremonial dress. To
view this diorama, visitors must lean over and peer into a display reflected from the
diorama that is suspended upside down overhead. This ties in with the idea of ‘reflec-
tions’ in the very literal sense but also engages visitors more directly in that they are also
included in the images by virtue of being reflected onto the landscape. It is this idea of
connection that again harks to the ideas of ‘rootedness’ and identification with place.

In Reflection
From the outset we must realise that how we value the past is predicated on concerns
of the present. So the rising heritage movement and the desire to see a more ‘historically
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

in-touch Singapore’ is not only about the value of the past but also the role it is seen to
play for the present day. Concerns for remembering the past and sharing of memories
can be seen through the National Education movement (launched in 1997), oral
history projects and preservation movements. In his article ‘To Remember and Forget:
Archives, Memory and Culture’, Foote presents a number of possibilities for sites
where tragedy or violence has taken place; these include: the sanctification of the site
(through construction of a memorial or building and a dedication of the site to a
memory or martyr), designation of the site (the marking of an exceptional event), recti-
fication (when the place is ‘put right’) and effacement (where traces and memory are
removed).49 ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ can be seen in terms of sanctification and
designation in that this centre was developed by the NAS specifically for remembering
not only the Malay Regiment but also for reflecting on present-day nationhood.
Ideas of connection, of memory and shared experiences surround ‘Reflections at
Bukit Chandu’. In the opening ceremony, guest-of-honour Deputy Prime Minister Dr
Tony Tan reflected: ‘We are mindful that a state without a sense of its past can never
become a nation. The nation becomes stronger only when it has a soul, cultural pride
and historical memory.’50 These comments on remembering the past and on history
making are particularly significant as they underpin the rationale of this centre. They
also show the way in which the centre is reflective and productive of an ‘official
discourse’ on connections and rootedness with Singapore.
Within ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ there is a conscious remembrance of World
War II within a local setting. For too long this conflict had been viewed as a colonial
one, or as a war of Asian liberation. In both instances, the local population had been
viewed as ‘nothing more than spectators or victims of “someone else’s war”’.51 The
propensity for a society to remember or forget tragic events links closely with the idea
that archives play a major role in the collective memory (or amnesia) of their society.52
This remembrance of the sacrifice and heroism of the Malay Regiment provides a gene-
sis for a sense of connection with place that precedes the 1965 founding of Singapore
as a nation-state. In the proceedings published from the 1995 workshop on War and
Memory in Singapore and Malaysia (held at the National University of Singapore), an
introductory article by Wong commented that World War II was more forgotten than
remembered in Singapore, a reflection of the unease in which these memories were
 International Journal of Heritage Studies 437
held.53 The 1992 announcement of the creation of the National Heritage Board, and a
new era of developing arts and culture for Singapore society, created a turning point
for giving voice to collective memories. ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ embodies this
new era in that this site remembers not only the sacrifices of the Malay Regiment but
also presents a new national agenda to encourage thoughts on connection to home and
the strength of such connections.
‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ marks a significant juncture in the cultural landscape
of Singapore. It indicates the shifting focus from the ideas of struggle and the migrant
experience to that of connection, sacrifice and shared experiences. This centre was
developed by the NAS in recognition of the historical importance of this site for the
Malay Regiment and as an attempt to localise the Malayan Campaign. This site presents
a number of juxtapositions: it reflects the colonial past in the post-colonial present, and
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

it also casts the local against the international. ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu’ covers new
ground in terms of its development. It indicates a localisation of history and depicts the
shifting of national rhetoric from that of the struggle for survival to the celebration of
nationhood, of connection to place. The tribute to the Malay Regiment focuses on
heroism, sacrifice and of connection to homeland. In developing this centre, the NAS
has moved beyond the traditional realm of archives and is embracing new possibilities
for the face of archives in Singapore.

Notes
[1] Drawn from National Archives of Singapore, working file Projects—Pasir Panjang District,
1

00/128. The project was given a S$5 million budget and a commitment of financial support
for the first five years.
[2] National Archives of Singapore, Available from http://www.nhb.gov.sg/NAS/AboutNAS/
2

AboutNAS.html (accessed 27 February 2006).

[3] Derrida, Archive Fever, 2–3.
3

[4] For a recent discussion of archives and postmodernity see Nesmith, ‘Seeing Archives’, 24–41.
4

Nesmith provides an overview of Derrida’s Archive Fever and its implications for understand-
ing archives. Steve Lubar and Verne Harris have also made significant contributions to this
area.
[5] Foote, ‘To Remember and Forget’, 391–92.
5

[6] Comment by Dr Lily Tan, ‘Who Writes History? A World of Complexity, a Diversity of
6

Views’, The Sunday Times, 13 July 1997.

[7] Brazier, ‘The Archivist’, 11.
7

[8] Ibid., 9–13.

8

[9] Dearstyne, The Archival Enterprise, 194.

9

[10] Ibid., 23.

10

[11] Ibid., 22.

11

[12] The author posted a query to the aus-archivists listserv and it appears that there is no direct
12

comparison in the Australian context.

[13] This stems from a 1992 speech announcing the intention of a five-museum precinct and in
13

addition the creation of the National Heritage Board as a statutory body to oversee the
museum precinct and to work with community museums and the Singapore Heritage Society.
Speech by BG (RES) George Yeo, Minister for Information and the Arts at the opening of the
‘Gems of Chinese Art’ exhibition on 30 January 1992, NAS document: yybg19920130s
[14] Henderson, ‘Exhibiting Cultures’, 184–85.
14
 438 D. Brunero
[15] See Kreps, Liberating Culture, for discussions on new museology in a post-colonial and globa-
15

lised environment.
[16] ‘New Road Signs to Point the Way to History’, The Straits Times, 19 November 1998.
16

[17] Ibid.
17

[18] Ibid.
18

[19] ‘Weighty Plaques to Commemorate Singapore War Sites’, The Straits Times, 19 June 1995.
19

[20] Muzaini and Yeoh, ‘War Landscapes as “Battlefields” of Collective Memories’, 348.
20

[21] Yohanna Abdullah, ‘Make Bungalow at WWII Battleground a Museum’, The Straits Times, 1
21

March 1992.
[22] Abdul Rahman B Mohd Said, ‘Lessons of Patriotism We Must Never Forget’, The Straits
22

Times, 22 February 1992; and Derek Da Cunha, ‘Honour WWII Defenders of Pasir Panjang
Ridge’, 25 February 1992.
[23] Second Last Word, ‘Remembering the Fallen Heroes on Opium Hill’, The Straits Times, 28
23

June 1995.
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

[24] Kreps, Liberating Culture, 9–10.

24

[25] National Archives of Singapore, working files—Pasir Panjang Historic District, 01/271.
25

[26] The idea of localising history is discussed by Lim, ‘War and Ambivalence: Monuments and
26

Memorials in Johor’, in Lim and Wong, War and Memory in Malaysia and Singapore, 155.
[27] The landscaping and horticultural considerations in developing Reflections at Bukit Chandu
27

will be the subject of a documentary.

[28] Drawn from National Archives of Singapore, working files.
28

[29] The Straits Times Annual 1939, 27.

29

[30] Farrell, The Defence and Fall of Singapore 1940–1942, 372.

30

[31] ‘Man Sees Spot where his War Hero Brother was Killed’, The Straits Times, 11 September
31

1995.
[32] Moriarty, ‘Review Article’, 657.
32

[33] Excerpt from the bronze plaque attached to a commissioned sculpture of artillery of the
33

Malay Regiment in action, in the grounds of the centre. This extract is taken from a speech by
George Yeo, Minister for Information and the Arts at the launch of the book The Price of Peace
on 21 June 1997.
[34] ‘In Search of National Heroes’, The Straits Times, 5 June 1999.
34

[35] Hong and Huang, ‘The Scripting of Singapore’s National Heroes’, 226.
35

[36] Muzaini and Yeoh, ‘War Landscapes as “Battlefields” of Collective Memories’, 350.
36

[37] Hoffenberg, ‘Landscape, Memory and the Australian War Experience, 1915–1918’, 112.
37

[38] Foote, ‘To Remember and Forget’, 385.

38

[39] Muzaini and Yeoh, ‘War Landscapes as “Battlefields” of Collective Memories’, 350.
39

[40] Excerpts taken from the Reflections at Bukit Chandu brochure.

40

[41] Farrell, The Defence and Fall of Singapore 1940–1942, 8.

41

[42] This dialogue is fictitious but existing accounts were drawn on to help create an ‘authentic’
42

feel.
[43] Work by the late Professor Henry Frei has done much to examine the accounts of Japanese
43

soldiers during the Malayan Campaign. See Frei, ‘The Island Battle: Japanese Soldiers
Remember the Conquest of Singapore’, in Farrel and Hunter, Sixty Years On, 218–39.
[44] National Archives of Singapore, working files. For the centre, plans were delayed as a result of
44

the 11 September attacks in the USA, as it was extremely difficult to have the weapons
(disabled and carrying certification that they could no longer have use as weapons) shipped in
the wake of the attacks.
[45] ‘Reflections at Bukit Chandu: A World War II Interpretative Centre’, Audio Tour transcript
45

(English) kindly provided by Reflections at Bukit Chandu staff member.

[46] Tunbridge and Ashworth, Dissonant Heritage, 116–17.
46

[47] ‘Hall of Memories’ transcript.

47

[48] Tunbridge and Ashworth, Dissonant Heritage, 120–21.

48
 International Journal of Heritage Studies 439
[49] Foote, ‘To Remember and Forget’, 387.
49

[50] Speech by DPM Tony Tan Keng Yam at the opening of Reflections at Bukit Chandu, 15
50

February 2002.
[51] Muzaini and Yeoh, ‘War Landscapes as “Battlefields” of Collective Memories’, 347.
51

[52] Foote, ‘To Remember and Forget’, 378–92.

52

[53] Lim and Wong, op. cit., 1–8.

53

References
Brazier, J. ‘The Archivist: Scholar or Administrator?’ Archives and Manuscripts 16, no. 1 (May 1988).
Dearstyne, B. W. The Archival Enterprise: Modern Archival Principles, Practices and Management
Techniques. Chicago and London: American Library Association, 1993.
Derridas, J. Archive Fever. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986.
Farrell, B. The Defence and Fall of Singapore 1940–1942. Stroud: Tempus, 2005.
Downloaded By: [National University Of Singapore] At: 16:42 5 February 2011

Farrell, B. and S. Hunter, eds. Sixty Years On: The Fall of Singapore Revisited. Singapore: Eastern
Universities Press, 2002.
Foote, K. ‘To Remember and Forget: Archives, Memory and Culture’. American Archivist 53
(Summer 1990): 378–392.
Henderson, J. C. ‘Exhibiting Cultures: Singapore’s Asian Civilizations Museum’. International
Journal of Heritage Studies 11, no. 3 (2005): 183–195.
Hoffenberg, P. H. ‘Landscape, Memory and the Australian War Experience, 1915–1918’. Journal of
Contemporary History 36, no. 1 (2001):111–131.
Hong, L. and J. Huang. ‘The Scripting of Singapore’s National Heroes: Toying with Pandora’s Box’.
In New Terrains in Southeast Asian History, edited by A. T. Ahmad and L. E. Tan. Singapore:
Singapore University Press, 2003.
Kreps, C. F. Liberating Culture: Cross-cultural Perspectives on Museums, Curation and Heritage
Preservation. London: Routledge, 2003.
Lim, P. H. and D. Wong, eds. War and Memory in Malaysia and Singapore. Singapore: ISEAS, 2001.
Moriarty, C. ‘Review Article: The Material Culture of Great War Remembrance’. Journal of Contem-
porary History 34, no. 4 (1999): 653–62.
Muzaini, H. and B. S. A. Yeoh. ‘War Landscapes as “Battlefields” of Collective Memories: Reading
the Reflections at Bukit Chandu, Singapore’. Cultural Geographies 12 (2005): 345–65.
Nesmith, T. ‘Seeing Archives: Postmodernism and the Changing Intellectual Place of Archives’.
American Archivist 65 (Spring/Summer 2002): 24–41.
Tunbridge, J. E. and G. J. Ashworth. Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in
Conflict. Chichester: Wiley, 1996.