印度為何不借鑒中國的古城保護(hù)模式，復(fù)興古城吸引游客？
Why doesn’t India take a similar approach? China has been revitalizing, expanding, and even rebuilding hundreds of ancient towns across the country. Indian architecture is equally rich and historic, yet many older city areas predominantly feature British colonial buildings.
譯文簡介
中國正在全國范圍內(nèi)復(fù)興、擴(kuò)建，甚至重建數(shù)百座古城鎮(zhèn)。
正文翻譯
Why doesn’t India take a similar approach? China has been revitalizing, expanding, and even rebuilding hundreds of ancient towns across the country. Indian architecture is equally rich and historic, yet many older city areas predominantly feature British colonial buildings.
印度為何不借鑒中國的古城保護(hù)模式？
中國正在全國范圍內(nèi)復(fù)興、擴(kuò)建，甚至重建數(shù)百座古城鎮(zhèn)。印度擁有同樣豐富且歷史悠久的建筑遺產(chǎn)，但許多老城區(qū)卻主要以英國殖民時期的建筑為特色。
印度為何不借鑒中國的古城保護(hù)模式？
中國正在全國范圍內(nèi)復(fù)興、擴(kuò)建，甚至重建數(shù)百座古城鎮(zhèn)。印度擁有同樣豐富且歷史悠久的建筑遺產(chǎn)，但許多老城區(qū)卻主要以英國殖民時期的建筑為特色。
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 7 )
收藏
likes: 101
My maternal grandmother lives at chittorgarh fort and the whole fort is like abandoned not a single ounce of effort in rebuilding or preserving it
我的外祖母住在奇托爾加爾堡，但整個堡壘像是被遺棄了一樣，完全沒有進(jìn)行任何重建或保護(hù)工作。
likes: 40
Because it’s with the government. Theirs the hill forts that are considered UNISCO site are with Government with minimal repairs; Gagaron, Bundi, Chittor, Jaiselmer etc. Compare them to Trust and Private owned Forts-Palaces. Mehranghar, Nagaur, Umaid Bhawan, City Palace Udaipur, Jaipur Palace etc. they have been restored with funds and trusts with each year work being done to showcase and restore even the paintings.
The sad part is al long as the Royal Family’s are capable of doing it, it shall be done. But that’s not the right way. Private entities have their own problems when they own or maintain a structure however, Untill our Government does anything substantial (never!) we will only see bylaw violations, Corruption and destruction of old and beautiful cities or ancestors build.
這是因?yàn)楣袍E的維護(hù)掌握在政府手中。那些被聯(lián)合國教科文組織列為世界遺產(chǎn)的山地堡壘，如加格隆堡、本迪堡、奇托爾加爾堡、齋沙默爾堡等，政府只進(jìn)行了最低限度的修繕。
相比之下，那些由信托基金或私人擁有的堡壘宮殿，如梅蘭加爾堡、那格浦爾堡、烏邁德宮、烏代浦城市宮殿、齋浦爾宮殿等，都得到了資金和信托基金的支持，每年都會進(jìn)行展示和修復(fù)工作，甚至包括繪畫作品的修復(fù)。
令人遺憾的是，只要皇室家族有能力，這些古跡就會得到維護(hù)。但這并非長久之計(jì)。私人實(shí)體在擁有或維護(hù)建筑時也會遇到問題。然而，除非我們的政府采取實(shí)質(zhì)性行動（但這似乎永遠(yuǎn)不會發(fā)生?。駝t我們將只會看到違規(guī)行為、腐敗以及古老而美麗的城市和祖先遺產(chǎn)的破壞。
likes: 3
Unfortunate we
真是太不幸了。
likes: 2
>Compare them to Trust and Private owned Forts-Palaces. Mehranghar, Nagaur, Umaid Bhawan, City Palace Udaipur, Jaipur Palace etc.
The issue there is that they either inaccessible to the public as private luxury hotels or with very expensive entry fees that exclude large chunks. You could argue that they are necessary to maintain the structures, but let's not forget to acknowledge the very real trade offs involved. Plus the issue with a lot of the forts that you mention is that many families and businesses residing there for generations making them living structures, so as much as the government is responsible (or lacking it) the fact is many local residents also do not help with conservation as they have their own very valid need to upgrade their essentially medi dwellings with modern amenities. This is aside from the usual issues with lack of civic responsibility among our folks in general.
“相比之下，那些由信托基金或私人擁有的堡壘宮殿，如梅蘭加爾堡、那格浦爾堡、烏邁德宮、烏代浦城市宮殿、齋浦爾宮殿等?！?br /> 問題在于，這些地方要么因?yàn)槭撬饺撕廊A酒店而無法讓公眾進(jìn)入，要么收取高昂的入場費(fèi)，將大部分人拒之門外。你可能會說，這些措施對于維護(hù)建筑是必要的，但我們也不要忘記承認(rèn)其中涉及的非常現(xiàn)實(shí)的權(quán)衡。
此外，你提到的許多堡壘的問題在于，許多家庭和企業(yè)世代居住在那里，使它們成為了“活”的建筑。因此，盡管政府負(fù)有責(zé)任（或者說缺乏責(zé)任），但事實(shí)是，許多當(dāng)?shù)鼐用褚矡o助于文物保護(hù)，因?yàn)樗麄冏陨碛蟹浅：侠淼男枨?，需要用現(xiàn)代化的設(shè)施來升級他們基本上還處于中世紀(jì)狀態(tài)的住宅。除此之外，我們的民眾普遍缺乏公民責(zé)任感。
likes: 3
I agree with you completely. We are at the mercy of Private entities with good heart or keep being hopeful that one day our government will actually do something.
If you're interested I wrote a research paper on this exact problem taking Toorji ka Jhalra as an example for privatization of monuments.
Me personally, I 'd rather not be able to access a historical structure as painful as it is.. than see it be destroyed to make way for a cheap-tall building. Not to mention, most lesser heritage -building were given to government services during independence and are still with the said authorities ex. police station, banks etc. and they can't be accessed or studies/documented either. In fact most restored lesser-monuments are barred access just like private owned structures.
At the end of the day it comes down to what you've mentioned, Civic responsibilities of the community that lives along the city, fort, structure, statue and government bylaws and funding.
我完全同意你的觀點(diǎn)。我們要么寄希望于有良知的私人實(shí)體，要么繼續(xù)期待有一天我們的政府能真正做些什么。
如果你有興趣，我寫過一篇關(guān)于這個問題的研究論文，以托爾吉卡杰拉為例，探討了古跡私有化的問題。
就我個人而言，我寧愿無法進(jìn)入歷史建筑（盡管這很痛苦），也不愿看到它被摧毀，為廉價的高樓讓路。更不用說，大多數(shù)次要的遺產(chǎn)建筑在獨(dú)立期間被移交給了政府部門，現(xiàn)在仍然由這些部門使用，例如警察局、銀行等，這些建筑同樣無法進(jìn)入或進(jìn)行研究/記錄。事實(shí)上，大多數(shù)經(jīng)過修復(fù)的次要古跡都禁止進(jìn)入，就像私人擁有的建筑一樣。
歸根結(jié)底，這取決于你提到的：社區(qū)的公民責(zé)任感（這些社區(qū)生活在城市、堡壘、建筑、雕像周圍）、政府法規(guī)和資金。
likes: 0
China is around 100 years ahead of India in terms of development
在發(fā)展方面，中國比印度領(lǐng)先100年
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 2
Bullshit, china is at most 10-15 years ahead of India. The only thing you could say 2 decades behind is--our infrastructure.
胡說八道，中國最多領(lǐng)先印度10-15年。唯一可以說落后二十年的是我們的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施。
likes: 30
Indian governments are not even revitalizing and even not taking care of their forts . If u can't handle it at least give it to the rightful owner of the forts at least they can make it a hotel or something .
The fort of Maharashtra is in an even worse state.
Even some money is given 60% of it got lost due to corruption. Even china has corruption but not at the level of india
印度政府甚至沒有對堡壘進(jìn)行振興，甚至沒有好好維護(hù)。如果政府無法管理，至少應(yīng)該把堡壘歸還給合法的擁有者，讓他們可以把堡壘改造成酒店或其他用途。
馬哈拉施特拉邦的堡壘狀況更糟。
即使有一些資金投入，其中60%也會因?yàn)楦瘮《魇?。即使是中國也存在腐敗，但遠(yuǎn)沒有印度的程度嚴(yán)重。
likes: 7
Precisely. On paper there are probably hundreds of revitalisation projects. On ground, sirf chief engineer Saab ke ghar ki revitalisation ho rahi hai
正是如此。在紙面上，可能有數(shù)百個振興項(xiàng)目。但在實(shí)際操作中，只有首席工程師的家得到了“振興”。
likes: 96
There have been efforts from private groups for instance the Tijara Fort in Alwar.
https://preview.redd.it/lypg1vgziroe1.png?width=744&format=png&auto=webp&s=3d734884d98be36769d18095caccbfb717c2e089
Across the border I remember there being some projects about restoring parts of old Lahore which I thought turned out pretty nice.
已經(jīng)有一些私人團(tuán)體在進(jìn)行努力，例如阿爾瓦爾的蒂賈拉堡。
（圖片鏈接）
在邊境另一側(cè)（巴基斯坦），我記得有一些項(xiàng)目是關(guān)于修復(fù)古老的拉合爾部分地區(qū)的，我覺得這些項(xiàng)目做得相當(dāng)不錯。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 34
While converting old forts into luxury hotels is a great way to preserve them and give them new purpose that is not at all what OP is talking about.
雖然將古老的堡壘改造成豪華酒店是保護(hù)它們并賦予它們新用途的好方法，但這與樓主所說的完全不是一回事。
likes: 4
Debatable maybe, though I'm having trouble understanding how its unrelated.
The most sustainable method of preservation is tourism or leisure, modern lifestyle preferences (windows, A/C, scalable, etc) and old architectural designs (open, appliance unfriendly, costly) are largely incompatible. Definitely many elements can be carried over, and should be, but conserative restoration and large scale recreations are best suited for recreation purposes... Check the images OP posted, all of them seem to be from what appear to be tourist resorts.
也許有爭議，但我不太明白這怎么會不是一回事。
最可持續(xù)的保護(hù)方法是旅游或休閑。現(xiàn)代生活方式的偏好（如窗戶、空調(diào)、可擴(kuò)展性等）與舊的建筑設(shè)計(jì)（開放式、不利于電器使用、造價高昂）在很大程度上是不相容的。當(dāng)然，許多元素可以而且應(yīng)該被保留，但保守的修復(fù)和大規(guī)模的復(fù)原最適合用于娛樂目的……看看樓主發(fā)布的圖片，所有這些圖片似乎都來自旅游度假區(qū)。
likes: 10
The pictures OP posted appear to be them revitalizing towns and bringing new life into them.
In India a fort gets made into a luxury place, but the surrounding town is still India.
People will come, stay in the fort and not bother going into the town to even eat.
I’m sure some of the places OP posted are touristy towns.
So I’m sure there’s a luxury hotel or a few in those towns, but people staying in those hotels would actually leave and go explore the town…. People would also benefit from living in such a town that’s been cleaned up and modernized.
It’s really not comparable what they are doing at all.
樓主發(fā)布的圖片顯示的是他們正在振興城鎮(zhèn)，并為它們注入新的活力。
在印度，一座堡壘被改造成豪華場所，但周圍的城鎮(zhèn)仍然是“印度”（沒有得到改善）。人們會來，住在堡壘里，卻懶得去鎮(zhèn)上吃飯。
我敢肯定，樓主發(fā)布的一些地方是旅游城鎮(zhèn)。所以，我敢肯定這些城鎮(zhèn)里有一家或幾家豪華酒店，但住在這些酒店里的人實(shí)際上會離開酒店去探索城鎮(zhèn)……人們也會受益于生活在這樣一個經(jīng)過清理和現(xiàn)代化的城鎮(zhèn)。
所有兩者所做的根本無法相提并論。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 0
I see.... you're just talking about size. Yeah it would be nice if this could be done on a larger scale.
我明白了……你只是在說規(guī)模大小。是的，如果這能在大規(guī)模上實(shí)現(xiàn)，那就太好了。
likes: 6
It’s not about size, it’s about India doing it primarily for the benefit of rich tourists whereas in OP it’s about transforming and uplifting towns.
這不是規(guī)模大小的問題，而是印度這樣做主要是為了富裕游客的利益，而在樓主的例子中，這是為了改造和提升城鎮(zhèn)本身。
likes: 1
I understand, I just genuinely think this is a difference of scale and also a misunderstanding of intention. This is a centrally managed resort town spearheaded by the Jinan Culture & Tourism Development Group and backed by hefty government-private partnerships, not a town upliftment scheme. Yes it might be part of a government initiative to bolster the tourism industry locally but its not for the direct and unqualified benefit of the old townspeople. The fort is more exclusive because of its smaller capacity and private investment, it will inevitably have to cater to richer tourists. Had the surrounding region also been bought up and then a larger city been created or recreated drawing from historical sources the fort at Alwar would be about the same.
For context, aside from slide 4 (which seems to be in western parts of the country) the rest of the pictures are from the Mingshui resort town, in Jinan. There is an entrance fee of 98 RMB (this isnt residential land). This is about curated tourism rather than directly renovating community residential complexes. I felt like I kept misunderstanding your point apologies.
我理解，我只是真誠地認(rèn)為這是一種規(guī)模上的差異，也是對意圖的誤解。這是一個由濟(jì)南文旅發(fā)展集團(tuán)牽頭的、由政府和私營部門大力合作支持的中央管理的度假小鎮(zhèn)，而不是一個城鎮(zhèn)提升計(jì)劃。是的，這可能是政府在當(dāng)?shù)卮龠M(jìn)旅游業(yè)發(fā)展的一項(xiàng)舉措的一部分，但這并不是為了老城區(qū)居民直接和無條件的利益。這座堡壘之所以更具排他性，是因?yàn)樗娜萘枯^小，而且是私人投資，它不可避免地要迎合更富有的游客。如果周圍地區(qū)也被收購，然后根據(jù)歷史資料創(chuàng)建或重建一個更大的城市，那么阿爾瓦爾的堡壘也會是類似的。
作為背景信息，除了第四張幻燈片（似乎位于中國的西部地區(qū)），其余的圖片都來自濟(jì)南的明水古城度假區(qū)。入場費(fèi)為98元人民幣（這不是居民區(qū)）。這是關(guān)于精心策劃的旅游，而不是直接翻新社區(qū)住宅。我感覺我一直誤解了你的觀點(diǎn)，抱歉。
likes: 1
If I’ve learned anything as an architect and working with people practicing and publishing about heritage and conservation. You can not tell people to not use Morden services, yet have them everywhere. A proper way is to understand how the services can be installed without destroying or harming the building and restoring according. Too bad most service oriented devices are planned according to western-spaces yet they are more careful with them than us.
如果我作為一名建筑師，以及與從事遺產(chǎn)和保護(hù)實(shí)踐和出版的人一起工作中學(xué)到了什么的話，那就是：你不能告訴人們不要使用現(xiàn)代服務(wù)，但同時又讓這些服務(wù)無處不在。一種適當(dāng)?shù)姆椒ㄊ橇私馊绾卧诓黄茐幕驌p害建筑物的情況下安裝這些服務(wù)，并進(jìn)行相應(yīng)的修復(fù)。遺憾的是，大多數(shù)以服務(wù)為導(dǎo)向的設(shè)備都是按照西方空間的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來規(guī)劃的，但他們對這些設(shè)備的使用比我們更謹(jǐn)慎。
likes: 10
With Lahore at the same time , the government literally built a ring Riad around the old fort and destroyed a lot of old historic buildings.
The other issue is that “ South Asian upper classes/upper Middle classes” will go to Europe/Mediterranean to say all these picturesque historical cities, yet will destroy their old traditional homes for modern ugly homes.
I’ve seen this happen with my dad’s city in Pakistan and all across Pakistan. All my relatives have destroyed their old traditional homes and just built ugly homes, the beautiful streets have been destroyed, cities are being dominated by “ American style suburbs”, who house a 5th of the population, yet take up just as much land, it’s really sad.
說到拉合爾，與此同時，政府實(shí)際上在古堡周圍修建了一條環(huán)路，并摧毀了許多古老的歷史建筑。
另一個問題是，“南亞的上層/中上階層”會去歐洲/地中海地區(qū)，說那里有風(fēng)景如畫的歷史名城，但卻會為了建造現(xiàn)代的、丑陋的房屋而毀掉他們自己傳統(tǒng)的舊房子。
我看到這種情況發(fā)生在我父親的家鄉(xiāng)（在巴基斯坦）以及整個巴基斯坦。我所有的親戚都拆除了他們傳統(tǒng)的舊房子，建造了丑陋的房屋，美麗的街道被摧毀了，城市被“美國式的郊區(qū)”所主導(dǎo)，這些郊區(qū)只容納了五分之一的人口，卻占用了同樣多的土地，這真的很可悲。
likes: 2
This looks amazing
這些圖片看起來很棒
likes: 12
For that we need a
Non corrupt parliamentary
Non corrupt Bureaucracy
Non corrupt public
Do we have that ? No , so not possible
要做到這一點(diǎn)（古跡保護(hù)和城鎮(zhèn)振興），我們需要：
一個不腐敗的議會
一個不腐敗的官僚體系
不腐敗的公眾
我們擁有這些嗎？沒有，所以不可能實(shí)現(xiàn)。
likes: 14
Money, little issue.
People, bigger issue.
Our local people are way too resistive to change and outside involvement.
資金，只是小問題。
民眾，才是更大的問題。
我們當(dāng)?shù)氐木用襁^于抵制變革和外部介入。
likes: 4
And why do you think is that?
Any decision that a top bureaucrat takes sitting in Delhi, gets muddied by bottom bureaucracy in actual site. They don't come out of AC rooms in their district collector offices. They hire local mafia to scare off people, take away land by crooked means. They don't care if a local mafia kills off innocent people or drugs them to insanity for a mere piece of land. This is the way, they say, quoting Star Wars which they show to their own children and send 'em to Europe. Brown sahibs, that's what we all aspire to be. No one wants to do good, as "neki kar, dariya mein daal" is our favourite idiom.
你認(rèn)為這是為什么呢？
坐在德里的高級官員做出的任何決定，都會被實(shí)際執(zhí)行中的基層官員攪渾。他們不走出地區(qū)專員辦公室的空調(diào)房。他們雇傭當(dāng)?shù)氐暮趷簞萘砜謬樏癖?，用不正?dāng)?shù)氖侄螉Z取土地。他們不在乎當(dāng)?shù)氐暮趷簞萘κ欠駳⒑o辜的人，或者為了區(qū)區(qū)一塊土地就給他們下藥，讓他們精神失常。他們說，這就是生存之道，還引用他們給自家孩子看的《星球大戰(zhàn)》中的臺詞，然后把孩子送到歐洲。我們都渴望成為“棕色紳士”（指那些在殖民時期崇尚西方文化的印度上層人士）。沒有人想做好事，因?yàn)椤昂檬伦鐾昃蛠G到河里”（印地語諺語，意為行善不求回報(bào)）是我們最喜歡的格言。
likes: 1
Last point, the sensitivity is not unfounded. We don’t trust that anyone has honest intentions, because rarely do people have honest intentions.
最后一點(diǎn)，這種敏感并非毫無根據(jù)，我們不相信任何人有誠實(shí)的意圖，因?yàn)楹苌儆腥擞姓\實(shí)的意圖。
likes: 19
A lot of stuff in Delhi has been restored but then it's because it's Delhi. Honestly I am okay even if it's not restored, just don't frikking use concrete to rebuild artefacts. They put ugly ass concrete in Khahuraho temples, ruins the whole vibe. They could have sued stones, but no
德里的很多古跡都得到了修復(fù)，但那是因?yàn)樗堑吕?。老?shí)說，即使沒有修復(fù)，我也能接受，但請不要用混凝土來重建文物。他們在克久拉霍神廟里使用了丑陋的混凝土，破壞了整體氛圍。他們本可以用石頭的，但沒有。
likes: 3
Where is the money?
錢從哪里來？
likes: 9
Ladli behaen yojna, freebies, pocket of politicians.
拉德麗·貝漢·約杰納計(jì)劃,各種免費(fèi)贈品，全都進(jìn)入政客腰包
likes: 1
Let’s be realistic, you think any politician would risk electoral power to make lives of people better against their own will?
讓我們現(xiàn)實(shí)點(diǎn)，你覺得任何政治家會冒著失去選舉權(quán)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，去做真正對人民好，而不是為自己的事嗎?
likes: 1
I am sure there would be a few but those will never get elected, or get any media coverage.
我肯定有這樣的人，但他們永遠(yuǎn)無法當(dāng)選，或得到媒體關(guān)注
likes: 3
In China, the Government owns all the land. In India, we need something like a Land Value Tax to ensure something similar can be pulled off in India.
Japan also has land readjustment schemes that realign privately owned lands and improve the city's layout.
Join /r/GeorgismIndia for more discussion.
在中國，政府擁有所有土地。在印度，我們需要類似于土地價值稅之類的東西，以確保類似的項(xiàng)目能夠在印度推行。
日本也有土地調(diào)整計(jì)劃，可以重新劃分私人擁有的土地，并改善城市的布局。
加入 /r/GeorgismIndia 社區(qū)參與更多討論。
likes: 7
Because we aren't china
因?yàn)槲覀儾皇侵袊?/b>
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 2
Honestly, i think even the old laneways in delhi and atuff could be cleaned up nice to become like medi parts of european cities (like barcelona) unfortunately huge uphill battle with the chaos thats in those areas now
老實(shí)說，我認(rèn)為即使是德里的老巷道之類的區(qū)域也可以被清理得很好，變得像歐洲城市的中世紀(jì)區(qū)域一樣（比如巴塞羅那）。但不幸的是，要與這些區(qū)域現(xiàn)在的混亂狀況作斗爭是一場艱苦的戰(zhàn)斗。
likes: 2
Real reason is that local governments in China have a heavy reliance on expanding the real estate to provide for income. They sell land usage rights and collect land and taxes on it. All land continues to be owned by the government and no private ownership of the land exists. By creating areas such as the one you have shown, people will want to rent leading to higher income for government.
India is the opposite, government doesn’t own land indefinitely and neither does it rely heavily on income from it thus no reason for them to invest. That’s best left to private parties to exploit for personal gains.
真正的原因是，中國的地方政府非常依賴擴(kuò)大房地產(chǎn)來提供收入。他們出售土地使用權(quán)，并從中征收土地稅。所有土地仍然歸政府所有，不存在土地的私人所有權(quán)。通過創(chuàng)建像您展示的這樣的區(qū)域（經(jīng)過改造的古城），人們會想要租房，從而增加政府的收入。
印度的情況正好相反，政府不會無限期地?fù)碛型恋?，也不?yán)重依賴土地收入，因此他們沒有理由投資。這最好留給私人機(jī)構(gòu)去利用以獲取個人利益。
likes: 2
We are busy rewarding politicians that divide our society. Hindu vs muslim, north vs south, caste vs caste. While in china they have leaders working for working class’s victory over capitalists.
我們正忙著獎勵那些分裂我們社會的政客。印度教徒與穆斯林、北方與南方、種姓與種姓之間的對立。而在中國，他們的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人致力于讓工人階級戰(zhàn)勝資本家。
likes: 1
I wish they would implement this in some areas, at least by making it mandatory for exteriors to follow regional architectural styles. Imagine a modern village in the hills showcasing Pahadi architecture, streets in the South where all houses reflect traditional southern designs, or entire neighborhoods inspired by Rajasthan's royal palaces. Such initiatives would not only help preserve architectural heritage but also boost the tourism economy.
我希望他們能在一些地區(qū)實(shí)施古建筑保護(hù)和城鎮(zhèn)改造，至少可以強(qiáng)制要求建筑物的外觀遵循當(dāng)?shù)氐慕ㄖL(fēng)格。想象一下：一個展示帕哈迪建筑風(fēng)格的山區(qū)現(xiàn)代村莊；南方街道上所有房屋都反映著傳統(tǒng)的南方設(shè)計(jì)；或者整個社區(qū)都受到拉賈斯坦邦皇家宮殿的啟發(fā)。這樣的舉措不僅有助于保護(hù)建筑遺產(chǎn)，還能促進(jìn)旅游經(jīng)濟(jì)。
likes: 2
In TN,Kerala and karnataka\\\\[mysuru division\\\\] the original architecture of the states are good to look but are bad in practice especially for TN due to the extreme monsoon \\\\[Older houses of rich people have courtyard and poor people's houses were not elevated enough\\\\] and mosquitoes \\\\[Older houses here were mostly open\\\\] so it is not ideal, but I would like to see every houses in our state like that . Rajastan's architecture is amazing, hope their government preserves it unlike our state
在泰米爾納德邦,喀拉拉邦和卡納塔克邦（Mysuru地區(qū)），這些邦最初始的建筑很好看，但不太實(shí)用。尤其是泰米爾納德邦,由于極端的季風(fēng)氣候（有錢人的老房子有庭院，窮人的房子沒有抬高）還有蚊子很多（這里的老房子基本都是開放式），所以并不理想，但是我希望我們每個邦的房子都能像那樣。拉賈斯坦邦的建筑風(fēng)格很棒，希望他們的政府可以保存好，而不是像我們邦一樣。
likes: 1
There are bylaws on paper like any other law in India. No body is bother to follow it and most u bother are government to implement it properly.
像印度的任何其他法律一樣，相關(guān)的規(guī)章制度都只是寫在紙上。沒有人愿意遵守，而最應(yīng)該遵守這些規(guī)章制度的政府卻也沒有正確地執(zhí)行。
likes: 1
lots of issues like availability of money, legal hurdles, protests(look at dharavi issue), lack of civic sense and constant elections.
存在很多問題，例如資金的可用性、法律障礙、抗議活動（看看達(dá)拉維的問題）、缺乏公民意識以及持續(xù)不斷的選舉。
likes: 1
Old Ahmedabad has wonderful old buildings. Some of them come under unesco heritage. Unfortunately newer buildings being constructed do not have the same facade.
Europe also does this in their “old city centres”. Even new buildings have to have the same Facade as their older counterparts.
古老的艾哈邁達(dá)巴德?lián)碛忻烂畹睦辖ㄖ?。其中一些被?lián)合國教科文組織列為世界遺產(chǎn)。不幸的是，正在建造的新建筑沒有采用相同的外觀風(fēng)格。
歐洲也在他們的“老城中心”這樣做。即使是新建筑也必須具有與舊建筑相同的外觀。
likes: 1
For a couple of reasons. Maybe quite controversial
1. While the British Empire was a net negative to India, it was there long enough such that the colonial architecture was a part of the daily life of Indians for generations. For better or worse, they are a part of the rich Indian culture and heritage. And because they’re more recent, they’re generally in better condition than pre-British buildings.
2. Indians by and large are uninterested in history or historical preservation. This community is not representative of Indian people at large. It’s unfortunate, but it’s true. The actions of the democratic government need to serve the needs and wants of the people, and unfortunately I don’t believe this is a need or want of the people.
3. History is waaay too politicized in India. The reality of history doesn’t always tell the story people want to hear. Indian people often want a simple narrative that props up their own culture and religion, while the reality is much more grey than that. People will end up arguing on the implementation of this kinda thing.
3. There is waaay too much corruption. Doing stuff like this would require money given to ASI to really understand what a historical Indian city would look like. You would want something real, not a “Disneyland” facsimile of a historical Indian city. Then you’d need contractors who can build some of this old stuff, but with modern materials and to modern safety standards, with modern features like WiFi, plumbing and electricity. In India, as soon as money is involved, it starts to leak away… disappearing into the night to line the pockets of various politicians, functionaries and workers.
有幾個原因?？赡芎苡袪幾h：
1. 雖然大英帝國對印度來說總體上是負(fù)面的，但它存在的時間足夠長，以至于殖民時期的建筑成為了幾代印度人日常生活的一部分。無論好壞，它們都是豐富的印度文化和遺產(chǎn)的一部分。而且由于它們年代更近，所以它們通常比英國統(tǒng)治之前的建筑狀況更好。
2. 總體而言，印度人對歷史或歷史保護(hù)不感興趣。這個討論歷史保護(hù)的社區(qū)并不代表廣大的印度民眾。這很不幸，但卻是事實(shí)。民主政府的行動需要服務(wù)于人民的需求和愿望，但不幸的是，我不認(rèn)為這是人民的需求或愿望。
3. 歷史在印度被過度政治化。歷史的真相并不總是講述人們想聽的故事。印度人通常想要一個簡單的敘述，來支持他們自己的文化和宗教，而現(xiàn)實(shí)要比這灰暗得多。人們最終會對這種事情（歷史保護(hù)和城鎮(zhèn)改造）的實(shí)施爭論不休。
4. 腐敗太嚴(yán)重了。做這樣的事情需要資金，讓印度考古調(diào)查局真正了解一個歷史悠久的印度城市應(yīng)該是什么樣子。你會想要一些真實(shí)的東西，而不是一個“迪士尼樂園”式的歷史印度城市的復(fù)制品。然后你需要承包商，他們可以用現(xiàn)代材料、按照現(xiàn)代安全標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，并具備現(xiàn)代功能（如WiFi、管道和電力）來建造一些這樣的老建筑。在印度，一旦涉及到資金，它就會開始流失……消失在夜色中，落入各種政客、官員和工人的口袋。
likes: 1
We are busy in debating aurangzeb and shivaji maharaj and what not.
我們正忙于爭論奧朗則布和希瓦吉·馬哈拉杰，以及其他等等。
likes: 1
Imagine a cart drawn by 8 horses. Now if all 8 horses want to run in different directions, the cart will not go anywhere and end up breaking and all horses will be frustrated.
Now imagine if all horses are trained to work together and achieve a common goal of moving forward- nothing can stop the cart now.
This is the difference between China and India.
Everyone in China sees themselves as one unit and see its development as a move forward.
India however so many religions, castes, groups each with their own agenda and due to overwhelming amount on democracy everyone is doing their own this thing instead of working as one.
想象一輛由8匹馬拉的車?，F(xiàn)在，如果所有8匹馬都想朝不同的方向跑，馬車將無處可去，最終會散架，所有的馬都會感到沮喪。
現(xiàn)在想象一下，如果所有的馬都被訓(xùn)練成一起工作，并實(shí)現(xiàn)共同的目標(biāo)——前進(jìn)，那么現(xiàn)在沒有什么可以阻止這輛馬車了。
這就是中國和印度的區(qū)別。
中國的每個人都將自己視為一個整體，并將自身的發(fā)展視為前進(jìn)。
然而，印度有如此多的宗教、種姓、群體，每個群體都有自己的議程，而且由于過度的民主，每個人都在做自己的事情，而不是作為一個整體工作。
likes: 1
In such cases I believe that more power to the states may subdue this problem because indian states are more like european countries .
在這種情況下，我相信各邦擁有更多權(quán)利可能會緩解這個問題，因?yàn)橛《雀靼罡袷菤W洲國家.
likes: 1
Mm I'm not quite convinced the before and after photos really show the same places. Especially that first pair.
嗯，我不太確信這些“之前”和“之后”的照片真的顯示的是同一個地方。尤其是第一組照片。
likes: 1
Money, corruption and the lack of political will.
資金、腐敗和缺乏政治意愿。
likes: 1
Because we're busy finding 'temple remains' under mosques and busy dancing with swords in front of Masjids.
因?yàn)槲覀冋χ谇逭嫠孪旅鎸ふ摇八聫R遺跡”，忙著在清真寺前舞刀弄劍。
likes: 1
Our patriotism is only for votes, we dont have a real govt, just a goondagiri
我們的愛國主義只是為了選票，我們沒有一個真正的政府，只是一群流氓。
likes: 1
majority indian states are on debt //indians like freebies despite them make the state coffer dry
印度的大多數(shù)邦都負(fù)債累累 // 印度人喜歡免費(fèi)的東西，盡管這些東西讓國庫空虛。
likes: 1
When was the last time Indians put effort into something that can’t be exploited for immediated gratification/profit? Things like these need time, due diligence, planning, funding and most importantly, will power. All of those are rare in today‘s country. Also I can already feel how somehow this will get a communal spin and end in a religious cultural casteist shitshow.
印度人上一次把精力投入到不能立即獲得滿足感/利潤的事情上是什么時候？這樣的事情需要時間、盡職調(diào)查、規(guī)劃、資金，最重要的是，意志力。所有這些在當(dāng)今的印度都很罕見。此外，我已經(jīng)能感覺到，這不知怎么地會演變成一場宗教、文化、種姓的鬧劇。