Does No One Care Anymore about Jakarta Heritage Buildings? Part I: What’s Happening to 18th century Toko Merah?

Jakarta, IO – A few days ago, I went to Kota Tua or what was once the intramuros town of Batavia and was dismayed to find how much Kota Tua’s heritage buildings had deteriorated in the last few years – even just during the last year. As the former head of the City of Jakarta’s Heritage Evaluation Board, Bambang Eryudhawan put it with a sigh, “It seems no one is interested anymore in the heritage buildings of Kota Tua.”

Bambang Eryudhawan who is still a member of the Jakarta Heritage Evaluation Board as well as the Jakarta Regional Team of Heritage Experts was referring to both the central and municipal governments as well as the owners of heritage buildings around the Kota Tua area. Although a section of the public is still very much interested in heritage buildings, they do not know what is to be done about the deterioration. It is rather the municipal and central governments that seems to have lost interest.

Most of the heritage buildings in the Kota Tua area are either early 20^th century Art Deco structures or 19^th century Neoclassical buildings. There are nearly no 17^th century structures left in Jakarta. The best-preserved remaining 17^th century building is Gereja Sion, the Outer Portuguese Church which was built in 1695. As for the 18th century buildings – one can count on one hand how many still remain standing in Jakarta.

In 18^th century Batavia, a style developed known as Batavia Baroque. It is quite ornate and its colours are red and gold inspired by European Baroque but with traces of Chinese and other local traditions visible in it. Altogether, these created the Batavia Baroque style.  Jan Veenendaal, the expert in Dutch colonial furniture first coined the phrase for a style of colonial furniture but it may also be applied to an architectural style popular in the 18th century, recorded in the drawings of the artist and draughtsman Johannes Rach.

In Batavia, the height of its popularity was in the 1730s and 1760s. The only examples of buildings in the style of Batavia Baroque still standing, are Toko Merah and what is often referred to as Baron von Wurmb’s house, with both located on Jalan Kali Besar Barat. Then, there is the gem of Batavia Baroque namely, Gedung Arsip on Jalan Gajah Mada. To this, we can add the Masjid Angke and the Souw family residence both of which show elements of Batavia Baroque and finally, in Depok there is the former plantation house known as Rumah Tinggi Cimanggis or ‘the Cimanggis Manor House’ which also has elements of Batavia Baroque in it. So, there are really not many buildings left in the rare Batavia Baroque style and those that are, need special protection and care. Toko Merah together with Gedung Arsip with their exquisite wood carvings in the fanlights and on their grand staircases provide the best examples of it. Neither is receiving the sort of care and protection such special buildings truly require.

Toko Merah was originally built as two identical houses standing next to each other, by Governor General Baron von Imhoff in 1730. He and his wife lived in the house on the north side and according to the late historian and author of ‘Historical Sites of Jakarta,’ Adolf Heuken, for a time Van Imhoff’s mother-in-law lived in the neighbouring house. For a while after his death, Toko Merah became the town house of succeeding governor generals or important members of Batavia’s ruling hierarchy. During later periods, the two houses were joined and used for commercial purposes such as a store, a bank, an insurance company etc. It was nationalized by the Indonesian government in the 1950s and is now owned by the state-owned enterprise, PT. Perusahaan Perdagangan Indonesia. The house has beautiful three-hundred-year-old teak staircases, floors, doors and windows. There are in fact three splendid staircases. Toko Merah reflects the intricate grandeur of Batavia Baroque in its exquisite carvings, its grand sash windows and golden wall murals.

In the late 1990s and in the first few years of the 21^st century, Toko Merah was used as an office for PT Dharma Niaga, the-state owned trading company that preceded PT Perusahan Perdagangan Indonesia as the owner of Toko Merah. This was the time it was best used and maintained. It was well looked after and open to members of the public who wished to view the house. Later, after PT Dharma Niaga became part of PT Perdagangan Indonesia it was secretly used for a time as a gambling hall and at the time several windows were boarded up and the rooms partitioned differently. This was later shut down, and for many years the building was not used and not open to the public.

Now toko Merah has opened to the public again with a café on the second floor. After passing through the majestic teak front door and past the foyer with its white walls and golden mural, I turned left into a large room with a grand teak staircase leading upwards. The balustrade is handsomely carved in the style of Batavia Baroque. I was shocked to find this picture of elegance and dignity marred by what it seems the café or restaurant have done to the wall beside Toko Merah’s magnificent staircase.  I gazed in distressed at the wall beside the staircase where two washbasins with mirrors surrounded by garish pink retro tiles had been stuck into the wall. It is totally not in the style or the period of a grand Batavia Baroque manor house and not even aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Whoever was responsible for it clearly has no idea about heritage restoration or preservation principles.

At the top of the stairs on the second floor was a small café. This again was extremely unattractive and not in the least in the style of one of Batavia’s best 18^th century manor houses. Its minimalist style was not at all appealing in its Batavia Baroque setting and I was very distressed to find that the outstanding 300-hundred-year-old teak floor was no-where to be seen. I remember so often visiting Toko Merah in the past when it was under the management of PT Dharma Niaga and admiring the thick teak flooring. The second level floor was gone, either replaced or covered by a modern light, mixed colour flooring. It was appalling. I remember hearing someone say that two thirds of the teak floor had been replaced because the wood was no longer in good condition.

Is that what happened? If so it begs the question why it was no longer in good condition; after all that wood had survived for over 250 years in good condition.  In the late 1990s and early 2000s it was fine. So, what happened? The following is I suspect most likely what happened:

Teak usually rots and termites begin to eat it when it becomes damp. As long as the wood has been properly dried out and remains dry it is safe. However, once damp effects the wood, a type of fungus starts to grow in it and termites destroy the wood to reach the fungus which they consume. For 250 years, this did not happen in Toko Merah. Several years ago, I brought Bruce Pettman from AusHeritage (Australia’s of network of Australian cultural heritage management organisations that was created by the Australian Government in 1996.) to visit Toko Merah. He was formerly the government heritage architect of New South Wales and specialized in damp found in buildings in the tropics. When Pettman visited the building, it was raining and he pointed out to me how the water pipes along the outer walls of the building were leaking water. Once the water reached the ground it flooded the tiny courtyards to the left and right of the building as the drainage was not working well. Pettman explained that both the water leaking on to the walls of Toko Merah as well as the flooded courtyard would result in water being soaked up by the walls and being carried upwards and finally reaching the wooden floors and ceiling of the building. After a number of years, the wood would have become damp and rotted and it may even become infested with termites.

Pettman was the steward of heritage places in New South Wales and I introduced the lady in charge of Toko Merah at the time to him. The last I heard he was preparing a report on the building for her. I wonder if that report was finished and reached her and if it did whether she had the chance to act upon it for there is a frequent turn-over of people working in government owned companies and institutions in Indonesia.

Many years ago, I brought Pettman to the Jakarta History Museum, another building from the same period which suffered from the same problem, for which he prepared a report which stated the problem and provided a simple solution for it.  Pettman’s solutions are usually easy and very cost-effective. I know the museum received the report because I gave it to them. They did not follow the advice provided and indeed some years later a section of the wood in the building had to be replaced. I remember when ICOMOS sent a representative to survey Jakarta for world heritage status, how a museum staff member proudly told her that the museum had replaced two thirds of the old teak flooring. He had no idea that the first principle of heritage restoration is minimal intervention.

I was told that on the ground floor of Toko Merah, a restaurant was also being prepared. I asked if the kitchens would be in the main building and was told that it would. Cafes and restaurants are not a good use of rare 18^th century buildings with a lot of 250-year-old wood in them because kitchens are a fire hazard. We have already seen how one of the 17^th century go-downs, at the Maritime Museum caught fire and burnt and how twice the National Museum caught fire; the second time sustaining serious damage. It would be interesting to know what fire prevention systems have been placed in Toko Merah. Is there a sprinkler system and sufficient fire extinguishers in place? Did they consult with the closest fire brigade and do the staff conduct regular fire drills? Are their fire extinguishers and sprinkler system checked every year?

It appears, neither the owners nor the managers of Toko Merah understand much about heritage restoration and preservation. I fear that they might also not understand much about fire prevention. The best use for Toko Merah is as a museum or what Dharma Niaga used it for namely, an office. One of the worst uses for this rare heritage building is as a restaurant or café.

I asked Bambang Eryudhawan how it was that the Heritage Evaluation Board had not interfered with the renovation of Toko Merah’s floors and the addition of the washbasins, mirrors and garish tiles and he told me that the law requires the owner of a heritage building to provide the Jakarta Heritage Evaluation Board with the plans for restoring or renovating a heritage building as well as information regarding the materials and techniques to be used. The Board will then advise the owner about necessary changes to their plans which the owners must incorporate. Only once this is done will the Board issue a recommendation and with this the owner can obtain a permit from Dinas Penanaman Modal dan Pelayanan Terpadu Satu Pintu Jakarta or ‘Jakarta’s One Stop Investment and Integrated Services’.  However, in the case of Toko Merah they went ahead and renovated the building without such a recommendation. It was only after they finished their work on the building that they went to the Heritage Evaluation Board to ask for a recommendation. By then it was too late for the Board to intervene. Are there no sanctions for not obtaining a recommendation before commencing work? If not, why not? How will heritage preservation ever be enforced if there are never any sanctions?

“There are no implementing regulations governing that and none providing the Board with the authority to impose sanctions,” Pak Bambang explained. That makes the Board of course, a toothless tiger.

Toko Merah is a special trust held by a state-owned enterprise for the people of Indonesia and in particular the people of Jakarta. If it does not have the staff with the expertise to maintain and preserve it as it deservesto be,  then the City of Jakarta or the Ministry of Education and Culture should provide the information and training needed by them. Bambang Eryudhawan says that an MOU was in fact signed between the City of Jakarta and the Ministry for State Owned Enterprises regarding Toko Merah during Jakarta Governor Anies Baswedan term however, after that nothing further was heard about it. If state owned enterprises cannot look after a building such as Toko Merah properly, then perhaps it would be best for the building to be given to the Ministry of Education and Culture or the City of Jakarta. (Tamalia Alisjahbana)