| 题名 |
次一等古蹟或另一類文資？論「歷史建築登錄制」之定位 |
| 并列篇名 |
Secondary Monuments or Alternative Cultural Heritage? On the Positioning of ＂Registration of Historic Buildings＂ |
| DOI |
10.6686/MuseQ.202110_35(4).0003 |
| 作者 |
洪伯勳(Po-Hsun Hung) |
| 关键词 |
文化資產保存法 ； 指定制 ； 登錄制 ； 歷史建築 ； 私有老建築 ； Cultural Heritage Preservation Act ； designation ； registration ； historic buildings ； private old buildings |
| 期刊名称 |
博物館學季刊 |
| 卷期/出版年月 |
35卷4期（2021 / 10 / 01） |
| 页次 |
53 - 74 |
| 内容语文 |
繁體中文 |
| 中文摘要 |
過去「歷史建築」因適用拆除無罰則的「登錄制」，往往被視為《文化資產保存法》內的爭議類別。然而歷史建築何以適用「登錄制」而非「指定制」，以及歷史建築與登錄制的結合是否仍有意義，卻缺少充分討論。筆者整理歷史資料與相關政府文書，發現「登錄制」最初係用以補充古蹟指定的「強制性」，故採取「鼓勵」的性質，並與數量較多而價值較低的「歷史建築」相結合。但歷史建築表彰的在地性，卻隨時代演變開始挑戰古蹟的獨特性，且兩者在概念與法規上的難以區分，則引發政治操縱文資審議的疑慮。為此，政府採取修法與函釋將「強制」的特性加入登錄制內（特別是取消毀損的罰則），並重新強調歷史建築與古蹟屬性不同之處，試圖再次完善「歷史建築登錄制」的保存功能。但筆者分析指出，這樣的發展與修正，一方面未能有效解決古蹟與歷史建築之間既有的模糊性，另一方面又因為登錄制度的鼓勵性質已於近年產生變化，同時為文化部2017年推出的「私有老建築保存再生計畫」挪用，而讓「歷史建築登錄制」（包含2016年修法後出現的子類別「紀念建築」）的定位顯得更為曖昧。是否應尊重現實發展而將歷史建築併入古蹟指定體系之下，成了迫切需要討論的問題。 |
| 英文摘要 |
In the past, the category of ＂historic building＂ in the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act was controversial as registered historic buildings could be demolished without penalty. However, the ＂registration＂ versus the ＂designation＂ of historic buildings and the meaning of historic building registration have rarely been discussed. In this study, relevant historical and official documents were analyzed. From the results, in contrast to the ＂compulsory＂ designation of monuments, the registration system for historic buildings was meant to be ＂encouraging＂ in nature, due to their large numbers. Over time, the locality of historic buildings challenged the uniqueness of monuments. In addition, the legal and practical ambiguity between historic buildings and monuments raised suspicion of political manipulation by review committees. Therefore, the central government incorporated a ＂compulsory＂ feature into the registration system through legal amendments and official declarations (no need for owner's consent and addition of penalties for demolition). Moreover, an attempt was made to clarify the differences in the attributes between historic buildings and monuments and to revamp the system for registration of historic buildings. However, this study argues that, on the one hand, such developments and amendments have failed to provide a clear legal and conceptual distinction between monuments and historic buildings. On the other hand, recent changes in the nature of the registration system and the launch of the preservation and revitalization of private old buildings program by the Ministry of Culture in 2017 have led to ambiguity in the positioning of the registration system for historic buildings (including the sub-category of commemorative buildings). Whether historic buildings should be incorporated into the monument designation system, based on the current reality, must be urgently addressed. |
| 主题分类 |
人文學 >
人文學綜合 人文學 > 藝術 |
| 参考文献 |
|
