World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers



Forum: Start | Profile | Search |         Website: Start | The List | Community |
General discussions about WHS www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / General discussions about WHS /  
 

New in 2011

 
 
Page  Page 4 of 4:  « Previous  1  2  3  4

Author Assif
Partaker
#46 | Posted: 29 May 2011 06:56 | Edited by: Assif 
Jamaica and Congo (Rep) are both new too (together with the above mentioned UAE, Barbados, Palau and Micronesia) so altogether 6 potential entries for countries with no nominations on the list. This could improve the distribution of sites on the list albeit only in a restricted manner.

Author Durian
Partaker
#47 | Posted: 29 May 2011 09:41 | Edited by: Durian 
Solivagant:
It looks as if ICOMOS is trying to put a stop to "catch all" nominations in which many sites ride on the back of a few stars whilst claiming to be evidential of a significance which would not be adequately demonstrated without them! I presume that the comment about "nominated individually" means a single nomination rather than 3 individual ones and the implication is that this should be done in a future year rather than that the current nomination could just be cut down and inscribed on that basis.


I'm quite agreed with ICOMOS reason; however I'm not an expert in modernism and may need someone to explain the OUV of each site and why it should be or not should be nominated all of them, maybe our meltwaterfall can lecture us :)

Btw I'm start to curious the Pile Dwelling, from the website provided by walter, I'm not sure all the archaeoligical sites mentioned in the website will be nominated as WHS, more than 100!, if true then we are gonna have another "Iberian Rock Art" situation again! and why ICOMOS agreed with Pile Dwelling, why not accept Le Corbusier?

Author meltwaterfalls
Partaker
#48 | Posted: 31 May 2011 11:02 | Edited by: meltwaterfalls 
Solivagant:
ICOMOS suggested, however, that three of the buildings--Villa Savoye in Paris, a Unite d'Habitation housing development in Marseille, France, and the Notre Dame du Haut chapel in Ronchamp, France--be nominated individually as examples of masterful architecture.

Actually I am pretty happy to see this. I think limiting it to the truly outstanding works of le Corbusier makes it a stronger nomination, I was just going to write up a review of one of his buildings I visited in Geneva which really was a very depressing spectacle and something that would have detracted from the really impressive works that he had done in France.

Durian:
I'm not an expert in modernism and may need someone to explain the OUV of each site and why it should be or not should be nominated all of them, maybe our meltwaterfall can lecture us :)
Well I can have a little go :)

The 3 sites picked out there are widely held as being his masterpieces, along with Chandigarh in India. To quote from myself
meltwaterfalls:
These four projects represent the finest points of his career; Villa Savoye, illustrates his famous five points of architecture as put forward in his manifesto Vers une architechture. Unite d'Habitation, shows his major focus on creating solutions to housing people in a modern city. Notre Dame du Haut, illustrates the mastery of form and materials that enabled him to create shapes which have defined design in the 20th century. Chandigarh, is the only place where is full ideas on town planning have been realised.
Glad that I was on the ball back in 2008 and I hope that this really does help to keep the focus on the truly Outstanding aspects of the list rather than just being reflective of different trends.

And just incase you want a bit of expanding on the OUV of Villa Savoye I wrote up a slightly longer version here, again I am pretty happy that my own criteria are in line with ICOMOS' thinking... maybe I should apply for a job :)

Author Durian
Partaker
#49 | Posted: 4 Jun 2011 06:06 
UPDATE LEAKAGE

Finally ICOMOS opinion on pending sites

Konso Cultural Landscape (Ethiopia); D
The Causses and the CÚvennes (France); R
The architectural work of Le Corbusier, an outstanding contribution to the Modern Movement (France, Argentina, Belgium, Germany, Japan, Switzerland); N
The Triple-arch Gate at Dan (Israel); I with option!!??
Fort Jesus, Mombasa (Kenya); D

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#50 | Posted: 4 Jun 2011 08:05 
Looks like 2011 will likely be a low inscription year. By my count there are only 15 total sites that either got a nod for inscription or Referal. Offcourse the WHC does not always follow the reccomendations of ICOMOS or IUCN as particularly evident last year.

I am pleased Japan did not ride on the back of the Le Corbusier nomination. Though I know little about Le Corbusier, I also prefer the path of including only the most exceptional works in any serial nomination, not bulk.

Perhaps suprisingly China and Iran will likely not succeed getting 2 sites inscribed this year, as both recieved reccomendations to not inscribe one of their nominations. While last year was a fairly diverse group of nominations, it is becoming clear there will be very few sites that will be inscribed this year from the Americas, Carribean and Africa.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#51 | Posted: 7 Jun 2011 02:05 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Among the 42 sites up for consideration this year the "The Residence of Bukovynian Metropolitans" from Ukraine has probably passed most of us by - it certainly has me! Hence, its likely upcoming "deferral", as indicated by Durian, has not been commented about at all on this forum. Just another one of those "lesser" sites from a part of Europe which few of us know!! The fault is probably with me, but if I look at Ukraine's T List I am overwhelmed by a feeling situated somewhere between indifference and tedium! What are all these places - can they really be worth my time if I know so little about them (among them, only Kiev and Odessa have figured so far in my travels)? So I look at the details on the UNESCO web site. These seem to be either excessively verbose or excessively short (The description for Tchernigov extends to about 15 words!) and fail to raise any level of enthusiasm. Even Googling the site details (e.g "Archaeological site - Stone tomb"!!) rarely brings back anything of interest.

In fact Assif has briefly reviewed this one http://www.worldheritagesite.org/sites/t5159.html - but I can't say it makes me rush to develop plans to go there!

But I found this article about the history of the Chernivtsi nomination quite interesting - the initial feeling of inferiority behind it, the length of time, the cost of developing the proposal, the hard work of a few dedicated individuals, the hope, the false starts, the learning curve, the problems of managing such sites within the ex-soviet economic/legal milieu and finally the almost paranoid "Now, in my opinion, everything depends on the image of our state," Marusyk supposes. "Had we committed any mistakes when compiling the package, the nomination bid for the residence would have failed at some stage. Given that there are no other Commonwealth of the Independent States candidates and few European ones, Chernivtsi's chances seem high enough. The bid may be undermined by Ukraine's general reputation, though."!!
http://www.day.kiev.ua/210689

Author meltwaterfalls
Partaker
#52 | Posted: 7 Jun 2011 07:20 
Just a quick note on that Ukrainian T-list. From what I have heard Kamenets -Podolski is a pretty impressive town, Lonely Planet refers to it as Ukraine's answer to Cesky Krumlov. Though its description on the UNESCO website is a laughable 10 words long.

Also I notice that the extension of St Sophia in Kiev was deferred last year, the info on this sites T-list page is correct but the actual sites page says the extension went through, only a minor change but just thought I should point it out. I think it will eventually get extended; there was a lot of work going on at St Andrew's church when I visited last year, and it seems a pretty justifiable addition to the existing site.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#53 | Posted: 12 Jun 2011 02:09 
Herewith Saudi Arabia's reaction to not getting Old Jeddah inscribed this year (see above).
http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentID=20110612102842

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#54 | Posted: 14 Jun 2011 01:57 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Further to Jeddah's failure to get inscribed this year!

It provides a wonderful example of how politicised the whole process of obtaining UNESCO inscription can get - governments are completely unable to accept that their citizens/subjects should be allowed to think that they (the Governments) may have got it wrong or that their site isn't as important/significant/well managed as they think or told it is/as it ought to be. Now such attitudes of course are not entirely limited to the less democratic countries of this world but these reports from Jeddah are classic examples of such "spin".

So Jeddah wasn't rejected because it was badly looked after or lacked OUV . Oh no - indeed it wasn't rejected at all!! It was "withdrawn" by Saudi Arabia "in order to refurbish the old Jeddah downtown area following the recent rains "!!!!

http://arabnews.com/saudiarabia/article454199.ece

I can't remember whether the fact that a site isn't even on the agenda of the WHC means that we don't get a chance to read the AB evaluation. I fear it does - in which case the veracity of these statements will not be tested. Unless the report "leaks" somehow!

Author elsslots
Admin
#55 | Posted: 15 Jun 2011 05:00 

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#56 | Posted: 15 Jun 2011 14:05 | Edited by: Solivagant 
In fact the situation regarding the Ghats seems to have emerged some time ago rather than just before this year's WHC as might appear to be the case. The following link describes how
"The Unesco team faced stiff opposition from locals when they visited Coorg. Officials were even locked up in anger. While visiting parts of the state in October 2010, Unesco officials had said that there would be no point in declaring areas heritage sites if there was such strong opposition from local communities. The agitators claimed they were not being consulted about the fate of their habitats and self-proclaimed environmentalists were setting the agenda, preventing development works and gathering large sums of money from different foreign sources."

http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_karnataka-averse-to-heritage-sites-in-wester n-ghats_1555176

Given these events it is hardly surprising that it appears to have been "Deferred"!!

Author elsslots
Admin
#57 | Posted: 19 Jun 2011 07:43 
Durian:
Ancient villages of Northern Syria (Syrian Arab Republic); I

I don't know which TWHS this refers to - do they mean the Dead Cities?

Page  Page 4 of 4:  « Previous  1  2  3  4 
General discussions about WHS www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / General discussions about WHS /
 New in 2011

Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message


 ?
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.

 
 
 
www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®
 ⇑