Dan Becker asks:

>>And in fact, does this ritual serve to better preserve the construction
techniques and principles over time than would preserving the original
building for 1,000 years, where all we might be able to do is look at the
construction marks and wonder what tool might possibly have made that mark,
and how was it used, and what did it look like?<<

The preservation of the structure is exactly the same as the preservation of
the craft in Japanese culture. The tools that are used are part of an acient
tradition and the craftsmen who make the tools are protected as national
treasures themselves, as are the temple builders.

The entire layout for the temple is carried on story poles (I think they are
call Ken(?) sticks????) which remain with the structure for its lifetime.
The tradition of the temples are as much in their building (as an act) as
their being.

I don't think the argument (is this one?) is in whether the artifact is more
valuable than the use of it. Rather, that conservation of the traditional
building crafts is as important as the conservation of the buildings
themselves. They both need to be used to be preserved, and I believe the one
is dependent on the other. (And vicy versy)

Rudy

--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>