At the last City Council meeting, architects Emilio Raimondo and Peter Lam introduced their vision for Thorold’s future museum. There has been backlash from various quarters regarding the proposal. As a historian and passionate advocate for heritage preservation, as well as chair of Thorold’s heritage committee, I would like to add my two cents worth. I must stress that what follows is my opinion and might not represent the view of the committee as a whole.
I understand Council’s hesitation towards the proposed project. The cost has been jacked up from just under eight million dollars to just under twelve. While we should keep in mind that over 6.2 million dollars of that total were granted to the City of Thorold by the Federal Government, it can be challenging for a small municipality to make up the difference. If finances are a problem, then solutions must be found to make the project work for Thorold, whether by simplifying the design or by starting with a more modest approach and adding to the project as more funds become available.
The resistance towards a modern design, however, is a different matter. Preserving the accomplishments and wisdom of our past for their own sake and in their own bubble defeats the purpose. All we would achieve is to hold on to ideas which for many are no longer relevant. What we should be striving for is to use what our heritage can teach us for a better and more sustainable future.
We cherish our heritage buildings for their craftsmanship, for their quality, for their longevity, and for their beauty. But in the absence of a suitable heritage site to house a museum collection, a contemporary design, built for the specific purpose of showcasing the artifacts displayed within in it, is a solution that is not only acceptable but desirable. If the building fulfills the criteria to become a heritage site of the future, so much the better. Museums are not simply about the past, they are about ideas which in their time were original, innovative, and progressive, be it in art, science, architecture, literature, or socio-politics. They are about history making as much as plain history.
The site is not located on quaint Front Street, but behind it, on Towpath. While Towpath is a historic part of Thorold, its architecture was destroyed decades ago. The old canal was filled in, the old factories and warehouses torn down, as much as we would wish it otherwise. Its regeneration must be as much about the future as about what it once represented. Our beautiful Old Firehall would not be diminished by a modern building which is beautiful in a different way. Culture is not a static entity. It changes with every generation. Our goal is to preserve the achievements of our past which, let’s face it, often were cutting-edge at the time, and weave them into a vibrant, diverse, and creative future.
I personally love old buildings and strive to preserve every original architectural element which is left in my own heritage home. But a museum is not a house. A museum is a place where generations come together to celebrate culture in all its forms.
