Don’t Mourn It, Reborn It!
12 reasons destroyed cultural heritage sites and tourist attractions should be rebuilt
- Cultural heritage should always be preserved.
- Communities have the right to their own identity.
- It would benefit cultural continuity.
- It would prevent the “out of sight, out of mind” problem.
- It would drive global unity.
- Reconstruction is good for the economy.
- Certain sites’ restorations present environmental benefits.
- Rebuilt sites hold educational value.
- It would benefit modern creativity.
- We live in the technological age.
- It would help level the tourism “playing field”.
- There is no such thing as a fair removal.
When a cultural landmark, historic building, or natural wonder is lost, a part of our shared human story disappears. These sites connect people across time, geography, and belief. Their destruction, whether through natural or human-made processes, is a blow to our collective identity.
Destroyed tourist and heritage sites deserve to be reconstructed wherever humanly possible. We have the technology, resources, and global communication networks to do so. Ideally, this would be done by a politically neutral charity. (Some exceptions are necessary, e.g. statues of certain formerly celebrated people.)
One possible roadblock is setting limitations on what qualifies as a “tourist attraction”. It could be determined by public demand, e.g. sites that are missed by at least 10,000 people in the area or 100,000 worldwide.
Below are 12 compelling reasons for reconstruction, supported by examples of past successes, ongoing restorations, and future opportunities for sites to rise anew!
Reason 1: Heritage preservation
When a cultural site is lost, a piece of humanity vanishes with it. Restoration helps combat the erasure of cultural identity, for the benefit of future generations. Most agree that a replica of a lost site is better than nothing, and there are historical examples to prove it.
Replicas, when clearly identified, do not diminish the importance of the original site. Rather, they amplify it by making its story accessible to more people.
Sites that have been restored:
- Warsaw’s Old Town was rebuilt after WWII, and is now a UNESCO site.
- Hiroshima Castle was rebuilt in 1958.
- Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Stari Most (Mostar Bridge) was destroyed in 1993 during the Croat-Bosniak War. It was rebuilt in 2004 and is now a UNESCO site.
- The Old Bridge of Konitsa in Greece has been repaired multiple times since its original construction in the 1800s.
Restoration in progress:
- After Notre Dame Cathedral caught fire in 2019, restoration work began almost immediately. While it reopened to the public in 2024, work continues on the façade and surrounding grounds.
Sites that should be restored:
- The Buddhas of Bamiyan, dismantled by the Taliban in 2001, represent a significant cultural and religious loss.
- The Temple of Bel in Palmyra, Syria, was destroyed by ISIS in 2015.
Reason 2: Community identity
Restored landmarks reinforce a community’s identity and instill pride, serving as symbols of resilience and hope. Restoring beloved landmarks can provide emotional healing and psychological comfort to communities grieving their loss, showing the ability to overcome obstacles.
Restored:
- Detroit’s Michigan Central Station stood abandoned for decades and was restored in 2024.
- The Frauenkirche in Dresden rose again after WWII bombings, using many of its original stones.
Should be restored:
- The Anhalter Bahnhof in Berlin was once one of Europe’s grandest train stations. A reconstruction would revive a powerful symbol of Berlin’s 19th-century cosmopolitanism and reconnect the city with its railway heritage.
Borderline case:
- Niger’s Tree of Ténéré (the only tree within a 400 km radius) was hit by a drunk driver in 1973. Its former site is marked by a metal tree sculpture, which has become a local attraction in itself. Attempts to plant a new tree in its place have failed, but part of the Great Green Wall will fall within 400 kilometres of the site.
Reason 3: Cultural continuity
Civilizations are built on continuity. Leaving a site destroyed is like tearing a chapter out of the history books. Rebuilding fills that gap, allowing a community’s story to continue unbroken. Again, rebuilding is part of the process of healing, and this holds true not only for human emotions but also for communities.
Restored:
- Berlin’s Reichstag was burned in 1933 and reconstructed in 1948.
- The Royal Castle in Warsaw was demolished in 1944 and rebuilt between 1971 and 1984.
Restoration in progress:
- After the 2011 earthquake in New Zealand, Christchurch Cathedral’s reconstruction became a rallying point for recovery.
Should be restored:
- In 2013, De-Mar’s Stone Company demolished the Mayan pyramid at Nohmul, Belize. The company was fined for the incident, but so far, there seems to be no plan to rebuild the structure.
Reason 4: Prevention of cultural amnesia
Sites that are left neglected can fade from memory. Reconstruction keeps their stories alive. When ruins are left untended, or when destruction is accepted as final, whole stories risk slipping into obscurity. Reconstruction is a safeguard against cultural amnesia.
Restored:
- Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre in London was demolished in 1644. Reconstruction began in 1970, and the rebuilt theatre opened in 1997.
Restoration in progress:
- Babylon, Iraq, has seen some restoration, but further work could revive this cradle of civilization.
Should be restored:
- The six destroyed Ancient Wonders would be easy to rebuild. They have already had detailed digital models built. Physical replicas would make millions of people happy.
Reason 5: Global unity
Tourism promotes peace and cooperation among different communities and nations. Similarly, rebuilding iconic sites can and should become a global effort, symbolizing shared commitment. Engaging people in rebuilding efforts fosters an international sense of solidarity and encourages volunteerism.
Conversely, politics have foiled some reconstruction attempts. But even so, proposed reconstructions highlight the global interest in reclaiming what’s been lost. Increased awareness is all this mission needs! Restoration projects can inspire community service on a global scale.
Restoration in progress:
- Efforts to restore large portions of the Amazon rainforest have been hindered by the priorities of Brazil’s government and international policies. A politically neutral organization would make strides without such constraints.
- The Great Mosque of al-Nuri in Mosul, Iraq, was severely damaged by war, but has seen international efforts for its restoration. UNESCO’s “Revive the Spirit of Mosul” project invited people from around the world to participate in reconstructing the mosque and the surrounding city.
- Angkor Wat, Cambodia’s famous temple complex, is in the process of being restored. Restoration began in 1908 under French rule, and has been supported by international teams.
Should be restored:
- The restoration of Great Zimbabwe has been prevented by lack of funding and political disputes over ownership. A neutral organization could mediate the process.
Reason 6: Economic benefits
Heritage sites are not only vessels of culture but also major economic engines. Tourist attractions generate significant economic activity. When a landmark is lost, so too are countless livelihoods. Rebuilding helps restore those flows of income. The financial return on investment can be immense, not only for locals but also for national economies.
Restored:
- Pompeii, buried by Mount Vesuvius, was rediscovered and has since been carefully restored. As a “snapshot” of Roman life, it draws millions of visitors annually.
Should be restored:
- The destruction of New York City‘s iconic Pennsylvania Station continues to generate regret. While the subway station remains, the aboveground structure was demolished in 1963 to make way for the Madison Square Garden arena. A replica of the original station (elsewhere, of course) would certainly be popular.
Reason 7: Environmental benefits
Some reconstruction projects would go hand-in-hand with environmental restoration efforts, helping to rehabilitate surrounding ecosystems and promote sustainability. Rebuilt sites can be designed with sustainability in mind, minimizing environmental impact and promoting eco-friendly tourism practices. Restored heritage districts often promote walkability, public transport, and eco-tourism, all of which lower carbon footprints.
Restoration in progress:
- Efforts to restore Machu Picchu have included ecosystem preservation.
- In Iceland, rebuilding trails and signage after volcanic eruptions often includes reforestation and soil restoration.
- The Aral Sea supported vibrant communities and ecosystems, until it started shrinking due to Soviet-era irrigation. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have begun restoration projects, but their efforts remain underfunded.
- Some of Southeast Asia’s mangrove forests have been restored. Large-scale restoration is an ongoing challenge.
- Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, a natural wonder suffering from climate change, offers unique volunteer and research opportunities. Programs involve reef restoration, coral planting, and marine biodiversity conservation.
- The destruction of forests around the Mount Kenya region for agriculture threatens eco-tourism. Restoring these areas could reinvigorate the local economy.
Reason 8: Educational benefits
Rebuilt sites offer accessible educational resources for schools, researchers, and the public, fostering learning about history, culture, and architecture. The world deserves the best possible educational resources.
Replicating destroyed works of art and destroyed artifacts presents even greater educational and cultural benefits; it is possible for multiple replicas of the same item to be displayed in different museums and galleries around the world. As long as all of said replicas are clearly identified as such, there are no downsides whatsoever!
Restored/replicated:
- The cave paintings in Lascaux, France, and Altamira, Spain, have been sealed off to protect them from tourists. Replicas of each have been created for the public to enjoy.
- Destroyed in WWII bombings, Coventry Cathedral was deliberately left partly in ruins alongside a newly built cathedral. This pairing served to symbolize resilience and reconciliation.
Restoration in progress:
- Petra, an ancient city in Jordan, has been described by UNESCO as “one of the most precious cultural properties of man’s cultural heritage”. Restoration and conservation efforts are ongoing.
Should be restored:
- Museums are invaluable educational resources, and as such, should have the right to be treated with the same respect as schools and public libraries. This means they should only ever close temporarily, and only with extraordinary justification. France’s Musée des Arts et Traditions Populaires closed in 2005, and its closure has never come up for fair public review. This museum and all other closed ones should have the right to be rebuilt.
- More recently, the 2024 closure of Ontario’s Science Centre demonstrates how even flagship educational institutions can be removed from public access overnight, with no democratic process and no guarantee of timely or equivalent replacement. In both cases, the underlying assumption is the same: that museums are discretionary amenities rather than vital educational infrastructure.
Reason 9: Artistic benefits
For certain sites, reconstruction demands traditional craftsmanship, contributing to the preservation of endangered trades. Furthermore, not all reconstructions are exact; some blend old with new to inspire fresh cultural achievements.
Sites that have been faithfully restored using traditional skills:
- Warsaw’s Old Town restoration (1945-51) revived stone-carving and fresco techniques.
- St. Mark’s Campanile in Venice, which collapsed in 1902, was rebuilt “as it was, where it was”. The rebuild helped to keep stonemasonry alive.
Sites that have been creatively restored:
- Les Halles, Paris, consisted of two market halls until its closure in 1973. It was reimagined in 2010 as a partially underground shopping centre, the Westfield Forum des Halles. In 2016, an undulating canopy was added to the development.
- New York’s Twin Towers were replaced with the One World Trade Center, which has been praised for its modern design and structural innovations.
Reason 10: Technology
With today’s advanced technology, reconstructing destroyed sites is easier than ever before. Not only that, but reconstruction allows the use of modern technology and methods. This means the process could double as a showcase for innovation and engineering marvels.
Restored:
- After its destruction in 2015, Syria’s Palmyra Arch was replicated via 3D printing and digital models, a beautiful demonstration of how modern technology can revive iconic landmarks.
Restoration in progress:
- Digital models and laser scanning are being used for the ongoing restoration of the Great Wall of China.
Should be restored:
- Many destroyed natural formations, such as Prince Edward Island’s Teacup Rock, have had 3D models made using computer programs. Following its collapse in September 2022, Teacup Rock saw memorial art and petitions for restoration. All the necessary technology exists, and there is certainly no shortage of public demand. The same goes for many other famous fallen formations, such as:
- New Brunswick’s Elephant Flowerpot (also collapsed in 2022)
- England’s Birmham Stones (collapsed 2018)
- Malta’s Azure Window (2017)
- Morocco’s Arch of Lezgira (2016)
- Australia’s Wedding Cake Rock (2015)
- Spain’s Dedo de Dios (2005)
- New Hampshire’s Old Man of the Mountain (2003)
Reason 11: Tourism disparity
Today, in the post-COVID world, a growing number of destinations are facing overtourism. Rebuilding certain destroyed sites may mitigate this problem, especially considering the fact that some of said sites may have to be rebuilt far from their original locations.
Conversely, reconstruction can help economically disadvantaged areas to regain competitiveness. Some countries or regions that have lost attractions are attracting fewer visitors than they used to.
Even some non-destroyed sites could be replicated elsewhere. Several countries and cities are working to protect their heritage sites from both destruction and overtourism, which often overlap. In cases such as this, replicas could easily coexist with the original. Said replicas should be far enough from their respective genuine articles that one cannot be seen from the other, thereby accommodating visitors without diminishing the original site’s value.
Restored:
- In October 2019, Denmark’s Rubjerg Knude Lighthouse was saved from collapsing into the North Sea. A team of experts and volunteers put the lighthouse on wheels and rails to move it 80 metres inland.
Should be restored:
- London’s Crystal Palace was built in 1851 and burned down in 1936. Its former site houses a stadium and a park. Rebuilding the Crystal Palace elsewhere could attract some tourists away from central London.
- Japan is attempting to ease the tourist traffic in Tokyo, Kyoto, and Osaka (three of the world’s most overburdened cities) by encouraging its visitors to travel to other destinations. One possible partial solution would be to replicate these cities’ destroyed sites elsewhere. This includes Frank Lloyd Wright’s Imperial Hotel, which operated in Tokyo from 1923 to 1967, and was subsequently dismantled.
Not destroyed but should be replicated:
- The Leaning Tower of Pisa sees thousands of visitors a day, with hours-long lines to get in. Many tourists have deemed the tower “not worth it” due to the long wait.
A special case:
- Damage is an iconic part of some existing sites. This includes the Colosseum (in Rome, Italy), the Parthenon (in Athens, Greece), and the Great Pyramid and Great Sphinx (both in Giza, Egypt). Rather than altering these originals, fully restored replicas could be constructed nearby, allowing visitors to experience how they might have looked in their original form.
Reason 12: Fairness to future generations
Cultural and natural landmarks belong to humanity as a whole, transcending national or political boundaries. Ideally, they would be protected from ever being destroyed or neglected, as this contradicts public interest and is blatantly a negative change. Justice means only positive changes.
You might think fairness simply means voting on whether to remove something, but I disagree. Even a worldwide public referendum would not be fair. Future generations cannot advocate for themselves. Therefore, there is simply no such thing as a fair removal. As temporary custodians of nature and human culture, it is important that we act with humility and foresight.
In short, tourist attractions and heritage sites should never be removed or destroyed. They belong to the entire human race, not just the currently living. Complete justice would include rebuilding as many destroyed sites as possible, a move which would be appreciated by the present generation as well as future ones.
Appendix: Why a Politically Neutral Charity?
1) Transparency and Trust: By being politically neutral, it would not alienate potential supporters.
2) Global Appeal: Neutrality attracts donors and volunteers by emphasizing shared values over divisive politics.
3) Focus on Mission: Staying neutral would ensure that the charity’s resources are dedicated to the preservation and restoration of heritage, rather than politics or bureaucratic waste.
4) Prohibitive Costs: Many museums and other attractions have been closed for cost reasons, despite public demand. Lawmakers have also voted against rebuilding some destroyed buildings and natural formations for cost reasons. Cases such as this are where a volunteer- and donation-run global charity could truly work wonders; those costs need not remain prohibitive!
5) Disaster Response Speed: Governments often take years to decide on funding. A neutral charity could mobilize resources immediately after destruction, reducing the risk of abandonment due to delays.
6) Global Crowdfunding Model: Much like how Kickstarter campaigns attract global backers for creative projects, a dedicated platform could do the same for heritage restoration, giving ordinary people a say in which sites are prioritized. By relying on volunteer efforts and donations, these projects can achieve meaningful results with minimal administrative overhead, directly benefitting the communities and global citizens they serve.
Conclusion
Every landmark lost is a wound to our shared memory. Every reconstruction is proof that humanity refuses to forget. Just as the Red Cross responds to human emergencies, a World Heritage Restoration Corps could respond (non-urgently, of course) to sites in need of reconstruction. Humanity deserves no less. Leaving sites destroyed benefits no one.
thanks for info.
No problem. Thank you for reading. If you’d like to add your name to the petition, every signature makes a difference.