Some people argue that historic buildings should be preserved in their original forms. Others argue that this is both inadvisable and impossible. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

While some individuals opine that ancient constructions ought to be maintained, others believe that they are improper and unfeasible. Nevertheless, from my point of view, maintaining old buildings give more chances than the latter. Those who support the notion that historic constructions are not worth considering and impossible cite several reasons. The main consideration of this phenomenon is allocating residential areas for local people who are willing to move to other places, where people are able utilize entertainment obtains instead of those building. As a result, it may cause to decline detrimental ailments which be emerged in the air of crowded places. Another essential point to note is that they are considered as abandoned places are being converted into landfill. Therefore, this condition leads to insensitive nature toward the environment. Although, there are some drawbacks of preserving historic places, these buildings should be maintained due to offer an insight into a country's past. The major opinion is that these constraints represent the cultural identity of a nation whose ancestors used to live. As a consequence, they might be utilised as direction to our younger generation who will maintain our cultural tradition. Apart from this, another beneficial side of these constructions is that tourists are drawn towards these historical buildings. Outcomes of this, this approach might bring about a stream of foreign currency into the country. In conclusion, although, they are considered that it is improperty of maintaining historical places, I would agree that these constructions grand more chances in view of the fact that they assist generation to follow their ancestors and boosting economy of the country by drawing tourists.