DOI: https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v8i1.2083
Research on Value Evaluation of Traditional Door and Window Decoration Heritage in Jiangnan Area of China
Wang Lukun1* , Azhari Md Hashim2
1College of Creative Arts, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Kedah Branch Campus, 08400 Merbok, Kedah, Malaysia.
Email: [email protected]
2College of Creative Arts, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Kedah Branch Campus, 08400 Merbok, Email: [email protected]
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR (*):
Wang Lukun
KEYWORDS:
Value Evaluation
Traditional Doors and Window Decoration Heritage
CITATION:
Wang Lukun & Azhari Md Hashim. (2023).
Research on Value Evaluation of Traditional Door and Window Decoration Heritage in Jiangnan area. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 8(1), e002083.
https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v8i1.2083
ABSTRACT
As a heritage, traditional door and window decoration in Jiangnan area of China has the value of cultural relics. A group of people created them according to the political, economic, cultural, and artistic background at that time, which can reflect the social features, technical level, humanities, and arts at that time. Therefore, traditional door and window decoration in Jiangnan area is a shred of crucial historical evidence to study the society, economy, culture, and craft at that time. Through the evaluation of traditional door and window decoration heritage, the researcher can understand the traditional decorative art of doors and windows in Jiangnan area. The assessment based on the index system forms a quantitative result, and the quantitative data can more intuitively reflect the heritage value. The researcher can give feedback on the evaluation results to the relevant personnel, find the deficiencies and missing parts in the protection and inheritance, and provide suggestions for the follow-up protection and inheritance plan. The protection and inheritance plan can be more effective than traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area.
Contribution/Originality: This study contributes to the objective evaluation of the value of traditional door and window decoration heritage by using quantitative methods. This study has guiding significance for the follow-up tourism development and heritage protection in Jiangnan area.
1. Introduction
The Decoration of traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area is the essence of ancient architectural Decoration. It is materializing and displaying ideas, concepts, wisdom, and culture. It is an oriental idea and spirit passed down by the Chinese nation for a long time.
This idea and spirit have become a model and representative of artistic heritage with national and regional characteristics in human culture. It has essential reference value and significance for modern environmental ecology, environmental aesthetics, and interior design. Specifically, traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area have essential artistic, social, and historic heritage values.
Traditional door and window decorations in Jiangnan area have essential value.
Traditional door and window decoration in Jiangnan area crystallizes working people's wisdom. Its decorative techniques and contents cover people's views on nature, geomantic omen, and life in various periods, absorb the essence of art, literature, drama, and Confucianism, and integrate various art fields' achievements. Its connotation is extremely rich, mainly including aesthetic, appreciation, reference, and inheritance values of artistic and historical materials. With exquisite carving skills, rich decorative content, and different styles, it expresses Chinese traditional culture on doors and windows with symbols, patterns, decorations, and colors. The traditional Decoration of doors and windows in Jiangnan area opens a window for future generations to study the culture of water towns in Jiangnan area and broadens the new horizon of theoretical research. With the development of today's society, a new round of national awakening has begun, and the rich cultural connotation contained in the traditional door and window decoration in Jiangnan area deserves extensive study and in-depth study. The progress of society and the development of culture is based on the accumulation of predecessors.
The research on the value of the traditional decoration heritage of doors and windows in Jiangnan area can be realized through interviews and questionnaires with experts and senior practitioners in related fields. The corresponding protection countermeasures are put forward based on investigation and research. In order to understand the present situation more intuitively, experts or professionals can evaluate it and then make quantitative analyses according to the evaluation.
2. Literature Review
"Evaluation is a conceptual activity in which people grasp the meaning and value of objects to people" (Yuming, 1995). Evaluation permeates all aspects of human life as long as the history of human society. People are continuously evaluating nature, society, others, and themselves and simultaneously being assessed all the time by others.
Evaluation embodies an essential feature of human activities: the unity of regularity and purpose. Human beings cannot do activities that do not conform to the law; Human beings do not want to do activities that do not meet the purpose. Conforming to the law is to conform to the purpose. All human activities are to discover, create, realize and enjoy value, and evaluation is a fundamental method for human beings to discover and reveal value.
At present, value evaluation has been widely used in many disciplines. In protecting historical heritage in architecture, value evaluation of target heritage is more conducive to scientific and objective analysis of heritage value and better protection of historical heritage.
Quantitative analysis law can make intangible value tangible and use the scoring form to digitize heritage value. By summarizing the evaluation data of many experts, scholars, or
researchers, the researcher can sort out the calculation, reduce the "artificial" factors in the evaluation, simplify the complex problems, and evaluate the heritage value more directly, objectively, and scientifically.
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a mathematical weight assignment model suitable for multi-objective value evaluation and widely used in architectural heritage protection.
The complex problems are simplified by hierarchical evaluation. The nine-level calibration method is used to build a judgment matrix and establish a mathematical model by scoring the evaluation of the sub-target layer. The results are displayed more intuitively through digital information.
3. Methodology
For the heritage value of traditional doors and windows decoration in Jiangnan area, it is not easy to evaluate the heritage value comprehensively and objectively with only one value evaluation method. Combining the advantages of various evaluation methods and complementing each other to evaluate them is necessary.
The expert evaluation method is used to make an overall qualitative analysis of the heritage value. At the same time, in order to increase the objectivity of the value evaluation, the scientific analytic hierarchy process is adopted to determine the index weight and reduce the error in the process of value evaluation. On this basis, according to the characteristics of traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area, a more scientific and comprehensive value evaluation of traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area is made.
The expert scoring method is to distribute questionnaires for relevant experts and researchers to judge the importance of indicators and analyze them according to expert opinions. Therefore, the choice of experts will significantly impact the results. Experts and researchers who know something about the research field should be selected.
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) decomposes the evaluation system into a multi-level structure. After determining the importance of each element, it compares the elements in the same criterion layer.
Through the research and analysis of the existing evaluation system and theoretical results of evaluation methods, establishing a complete, scientific and objective evaluation system is essential in protecting and reusing traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area. Using the existing value-oriented evaluation methods for reference and adopting the construction mode of "value identification-value evaluation-value realization," the construction process of the evaluation system is designed (Tingxiao, 2007).
In the stage of value identification, it is necessary to carry out an on-the-spot investigation, relevant literature collection, and expert inquiry to obtain relevant information from various aspects and confirm the correctness of the obtained information.
Through summarizing, sorting out, and analyzing the obtained data, the researcher summarized the representativeness and uniqueness of traditional Decoration heritage in Jiangnan area compared with other architectural heritage. The researcher determined its historical value, cultural value, social value, scientific value, artistic value, and environmental value. “The heritage value and technological validity exhibited in these
villages and architectures can inspire us to design and build for a more sustainable future ”(Wang D, 2016).
In recent years, with in-depth research on the architectural heritage value evaluation system, AHP is a common method in the evaluation system.Many related scholars have conducted different degrees of research on the evaluation system of architectural heritage. For example, Professor Jiang Nan from Southeast University analyzed architectural heritage value from several aspects, such as historical value, cultural value, social value, artistic value, technical value, economic value, environmental value, and use value (Jiang Nan, 2016). Professor Liu Boying from the School of Architecture of Tsinghua University analyzed architectural heritage value from several aspects:
historical value, cultural value, social value, scientific value, artistic value, industrial value, and economic value (Liu Boying, 2006).
Regarding the theoretical research results of Professor Liu Boying, and other related scholars, combined with the actual investigation of the architectural heritage of traditional decorative arts of doors and windows in Jiangnan area. In this study, the appropriate evaluation index factors are selected, and a hierarchical model of the value evaluation system suitable for the traditional door and windows decoration art in Jiangnan area is constructed, and the evaluation index factors of each sub-criteria layer in the system are explained in detail (Table 1).
Table 1: Value Evaluation of Traditional Door and Window Decoration Art Heritage in Jiangnan area
Criteria
Layer Sub-Criterion Layer Explain
B1 Historical Value
C1 Relevance Degree with Historical Events or Historical Figures
Whether the buildings to which traditional doors and windows are attached were built by famous historic figures and significant historical events have taken place in related buildings.
C2 Age Degree The older traditional doors and windows are built, the higher the value.
C3 Existing Rarity How many traditional doors and windows are left?
C4 Typical Degree in Similar Heritage
Typical degree of architectural forms, materials, and traditional doors and windows skills.
B2
Cultural Value
C5 Decorative Style and
Expression of Regional Cultural Characteristics
The remains of traditional doors and windows can highlight regional architectural decoration styles and regional cultural characteristics.
C6 Recognition and Popularity Even domestic and international recognition and popularity.
C7 Preservation and Display
Related to Living Habits Preservation and display of content related to life and actual use.
B3
Social Value
C8 Residents' Emotions and Memories
Residents' emotional value factors for traditional doors and windows and residents' memory emotions contained in traditional doors and windows.
C9 Promotes Regional Cognition. Traditional doors and windows represent the local area, and the regional
characteristics are highlighted through the remains of traditional doors and windows.
C10 Cultivate the Culture and Spirit of the Situation.
Traditional architectural doors and windows display and carry the
connotation of culture in Jiangnan area and even Chinese traditional culture.
B4 Scientific Value
C11 Originality and Rationality of Materials
The characteristics and rationality of building materials used in constructing traditional doors and windows differ from those commonly used in other areas.
C12 Advanced Structure Advantages of traditional doors and windows in architectural structure at that time.
C13 Originality and Rationality of Construction Technology
Traditional door and window construction technology in Jiangnan area differs from other local construction forms.
C14 Scarcity of Traditional Techniques and Techniques
Scarcity of traditional crafts and techniques used in constructing
traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area.
B5
Artistic Value
C15 The Artistic Value of
Traditional Doors and Windows
The artistic value of traditional doors and windows in their shapes, colors, textures, etc.
C16 Embodiment of
Environmental Features Around Traditional Doors and Windows
Characteristics of the surrounding environment of traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area.
C17 Architectural Style and Modeling
The style and modeling characteristics of traditional doors and windows in in Jiangnan area differ from those in other areas.
B6
Environmenta l Value
C18 The Authenticity of
Traditional Doors and Windows
The traditional doors and windows in Jiangnan area still retain the original structures, vegetation, and other features after many years.
C19 Integrity of Preservation of Traditional Doors and Windows
Traditional doors and windows in the south Yangtze river still maintain the integrity of the original structures, vegetation, and other features after many years.
C20 Remodeling Degree of Traditional Door and Window Landscape
The existing environmental landscape in traditional windows and doors in Jiangnan area ruins can be transformed in various ways based on retaining the original form.
The standard way of quantification is to use weight to measure the role of various values in the target object. The weight determines the influence of evaluation factors at the same level. According to the value evaluation system of the traditional door and window decorative art heritage in Jiangnan area, each value evaluation factor represents a characteristic of the target object, and the order of importance of each evaluation index factor is different. The weight which can represent the importance of each factor are calculated by mathematical means. In this study, expert evaluation and analytic hierarchy process are mainly used to scientifically determine the weight of each evaluation index factor. The detailed steps are as follows.
“The evaluation of the traditional decorative art heritage of doors and windows in Jiangnan area has multiple levels and multiple evaluation index factors, so it is difficult to evaluate and determine the right. Therefore, when experts ask and select, it is necessary to consider the research field of experts. For the distribution of questionnaires, experts with specific authority in the industry can be selected”(Xiaoyan, 2009). Through consulting experts in different fields, the evaluation index factors of the heritage value of traditional door and window decoration art in Jiangnan area are graded, which makes the obtained weight data more objective, comprehensive and accurate.
Experts' scores on the value evaluation index factors of the artistic heritage of traditional door and window workers in Jiangnan area are between 0 and 10. Because each expert's research direction and background are different, the familiarity coefficient is added to the score calculation considering the differences in experts' research angles.The calculation formula is as follows:
Equation 1 :Calculation of the familiarity coefficient
In the equation : QI-The average score.
Qi—— The score of evaluation index factor.
Si—— The familiarity coefficient of experts.
K—— Number of experts.
Experts determine their own familiarity, which can be generally divided into four levels:
Very familiarity (1), familiarity (0.75), average (0.5), and unfamiliarity (0.25).
“After consulting experts to obtain the weight consultation value of the evaluation index, the analytic hierarchy process is further used to adjust the obtained weight”(Jing, 2014) Data Conversion: in order to facilitate experts to accept questionnaires, it is necessary to set the importance of each index factor in pairwise comparison. Therefore, when determining the weight, it is necessary to first convert the obtained data into the value of the importance level. According to the table, deal with the data of each layer. The difference between the highest score and the lowest score of each layer is divided into eight intervals, which are converted into Saaty 1-9 scale values accordingly. The equation is:
Equation 2 : Converted into Saaty1-9 Scale Values
In the equation:
Ci-the maximum value of the i-th scale;
Qmax-the maximum value.
Qmin—— the minimum value.
I-scale interval.
According to the obtained calculation results, the Saaty 1-9 scale value table (Table 2) is constructed.
= n Si
QI Qi*Si /
n
i Q
Q
C
i= （
max−
min） / 9 *
Table 2: Index Importance Score Difference Transformation Saaty1-9 scale
value
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Subtractive value of importance score
0-C1 C1-C2 C2-C3 C3-C4 C4-C5 C5-C6 C6-C7 C7-C8 C8-C9
Establishment of judgment matrix: compare the importance of each index factors in the evaluation system and construct judgment matrix.
After determining the relationship between the upper layer and the lower layer, it is necessary to determine the weight of each lower layer element associated with the standard layer A in the standard layer A, and set it as (W1, W2, ..., Wn). According to the scale value of Saaty1-9, compare each evaluation index factor pairwise (Table 3), and its ratio aij can form matrix A.
Table 3: Comparison of Evaluation Index Factors
Target and Criteria W1 W2 ... Wn
W1 W1/W1 W1/W2 W1/... W1/Wn
W2 W2/W1 W2/W2 W2/... W2/Wn
... .../W1 .../W2 .../... .../Wn
Wn Wn/W1 Wn/W2 Wn/... Wn/Wn
After the pairwise comparison matrix is constructed, SPSSAU, an online data analysis work, can be used for additional calculation.
Take the criterion layer as an example, according to equation 1.
Refer to the familiarity, score the questionnaire experts, and calculate the average score of each index (Table 4).
Table 4: The Average Score of Each Index
Criteria Layer Weight Average Score
B1 Historical value 7.778
B2 Cultural value 6.852
B3 Social value 7.148
B4 Scientific value 5.889
B5 Artistic value 8.630
B6 Environmental value 6.444
The Saaty1-9 scale value table (Table 5) is constructed according to the calculation.
Table 5: Transformation of Index Importance Score Difference
Criteria layer The Saaty1-9 scale value
B1 Historical value 7
B2 Cultural value 3
B3 Social value 5
B4 Scientific value 1
B5 Artistic value 9
B6 Environmental value 2
The diagonal at the bottom right of the data format must be 1, which means that its importance is equal to itself. Figures indicate the relative importance of indicators. The more important the number is, the more important the relative importance is.
(Table 6).
Table 6: Judgment Matrix of Criterion Layer
Criteria layer B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6
B1 Historical value 1.000 2.333 1.400 7.000 0.778 3.500 B2 Cultural value 0.429 1.000 0.600 3.000 0.333 1.500
B3 Social value 0.714 1.667 1.000 5.000 0.556 2.500
B4 Scientific value 0.143 0.333 0.200 1.000 0.111 0.500 B5 Artistic value 1.286 3.000 1.800 9.000 1.000 4.500 B6 Environmental value 0.286 0.667 0.400 2.000 0.222 1.000 The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) function of SPSSAU Online (https://spssau.com/en/index.html) is used for auxiliary analysis, and the analysis results are shown in the table. By default, SPSSAU uses the sum-product method to study AHP, describing each index's weight individually (Table 7).
Table 7: Hierarchy Analysis Results
Index Characteristic
vector Weight value Maximum
eigenvalue CI value
B1 Historical value 1.556 25.926%
6.200 0.040
B2 Cultural value 0.667 11.111%
B3 Social value 1.111 18.520%
B4 Scientific value 0.222 3.703%
B5 Artistic value 2.000 33.333%
B6 Environmental value 0.444 7.408%
According to the six items of B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, and B6, construct a six-order judgment matrix, and study the AHP method (the calculation method is the sum-product method).
The analyzed eigenvectors are (1.556, 0.667, 1.111, 0.222, 2.000, 0.42). Additionally, the largest eigenvalue (6.200) can be calculated by combining the eigenvectors. Then the CI value (0.000) can be calculated by using the maximum eigenvalue [CI = (maximum eigenvalue-n)/(n-1)], and the CI value is used in the following consistency test.
When using AHP to calculate the weight, it is necessary to carry out consistency check and analysis. Consistency check needs to use CI and RI. The CI value has been calculated, and the RI value can be obtained by querying the Table 8.
Table 8: Random Consistency Table
N-order 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
RI value 0.52 0.89 1.12 1.26 1.36 1.41 1.46 1.49 1.52 1.54 1.56 1.58 1.59 1.5943 N-order 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
RI value 1.6064 1.6133 1.62 07
1.62 92
1.63 58
1.64 03
1.64 62
1.64 97
1.65 56
1.65 87
1.66 31
1.66 70
1.66
93 1.6724
In this study, a 6-order judgment matrix was constructed. The random consistency RI value is 1.260, which is used for the calculation of the consistency test later (Table 9).
Table 9: Summary of Consistency Inspection Results
Maximum eigenvalue CI RI CR Consistency test result
6.200 0.040 1.260 0.032 pass
When using AHP to calculate the weight, the calculation data needs to be analyzed by consistency test and analysis CR (CR=CI/RI).
When the CR value is less than 0.1, the judgment matrix meets the consistency test. The calculated CI value of the sixth-order judgment matrix is 0.040, and the RI value is 1.260, so the calculated CR value is 0.032<0.1, indicating that the judgment matrix in this study meets the consistency test.
Through calculation, the weight of the Criteria layer is obtained (Table 10).
Table 10: The Weight of the Criteria Layer
Criteria layer Weight value（percentage） Weight value
B1 Historical value 25.93 0.2593
B2 Cultural value 11.11 0.1111
B3 Social value 18.52 0.1852
B4 Scientific value 3.70 0.0370
B5 Artistic value 33.33 0.3333
B6 Environmental value 7.41 0.0741
Refer to the calculation process of criterion layer, the weight scores of sub-criterion layers and the calculation results of Saaty1-9 scale value table 11:
Table 11: The Weight Scores of Sub-Criterion Layers and the Calculation Results of Saaty 1-9 Scale Value
AHP raw data (input data) is shown in the Table 12. Calculating the score weights of research experts using the AHP method, we get Table 13.
Table 12: The Judgment Matrix of the Sub-Criteria Layer
Sub-criteria layer Weight
score Saaty1-9 scale weight score C1 Relevance degree with historical events or historical
figures 7.296 5
C2 Age degree 7.741 6
C3 Existing rarity 8.074 8
C4 Typical degree in similar heritage 6.630 3 C5 Decorative Style and Expression of Regional Cultural
Characteristics 8.222 8
C6 recognition and popularity 7.741 6
C7 Preservation and display related to living habits 5.963 1
C8 Residents' emotions and memories 6.556 2
C9 Promotes regional cognition. 7.407 5
C10 Cultivate the culture and spirit of the situation. 8.593 9 C11 Originality and rationality of materials 7.037 4
C12 Advanced structure 8.185 8
C13 Originality and rationality of construction technology 7.704 6 C14 Scarcity of traditional techniques and techniques 7.519 6 C15 The artistic value of traditional doors and windows 8.630 9 C16 Embodiment of environmental features around
traditional doors and windows 6.963 4
C17 Architectural Style and Modeling 8.333 8
C18 The authenticity of traditional doors and windows 6.444 2 C19 Integrity of preservation of traditional doors and
windows 6.407 2
C20 Remodeling degree of traditional door and window
landscape 6.667 3
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 C18 C19 C20 C1 1.00
0 0.83 3 0.62
5 1.66 7 0.62
5 0.83 3 5.00
0 2.50 0 1.00
0 0.55 6 1.25
0 0.62 5 0.83
3 0.83 3 0.55
6 1.25 0 0.62
5 2.50 0 2.50
0 1.667 C2 1.20
0 1.00 0 0.75
0 2.00 0 0.75
0 1.00 0 6.00
0 3.00 0 1.20
0 0.66 7 1.50
0 0.75 0 1.00
0 1.00 0 0.66
7 1.50 0 0.75
0 3.00 0 3.00
0 2.000 C3 1.600 1.33
3 1.00 0 2.66
7 1.00 0 1.33
3 8.00 0 4.00
0 1.60 0 0.88
9 2.00 0 1.00
0 1.33 3 1.33
3 0.88 9 2.00
0 1.00 0 4.00
0 4.00 0 2.667 C4 0.60
0 0.50 0 0.37
5 1.00 0 0.37
5 0.50 0 3.00
0 1.50 0 0.60
0 0.33 3 0.75
0 0.37 5 0.50
0 0.50 0 0.33
3 0.75 0 0.37
5 1.50 0 1.50
0 1.000 C5 1.60
0 1.33 3 1.00
0 2.66 7 1.00
0 1.33 3 8.00
0 4.00 0 1.60
0 0.88 9 2.00
0 1.00 0 1.33
3 1.33 3 0.88
9 2.00 0 1.00
0 4.00 0 4.00
0 2.667 C6 1.20
0 1.00 0 0.75
0 2.00 0 0.75
0 1.00 0 6.00
0 3.00 0 1.20
0 0.66 7 1.50
0 0.75 0 1.00
0 1.00 0 0.66
7 1.50 0 0.75
0 3.00 0 3.00
0 2.000 C7 0.20
0 0.16 7 0.12
5 0.33 3 0.12
5 0.16 7 1.00
0 0.50 0 0.20
0 0.11 1 0.25
0 0.12 5 0.16
7 0.16 7 0.11
1 0.25 0 0.12
5 0.50 0 0.50
0 0.333 C8 0.400 0.33
3 0.25 0 0.66
7 0.25 0 0.33
3 2.00 0 1.00
0 0.40 0 0.22
2 0.50 0 0.25
0 0.33 3 0.33
3 0.22 2 0.50
0 0.25 0 1.00
0 1.00 0 0.667 C9 1.00 0.83 0.62 1.66 0.62 0.83 5.00 2.50 1.00 0.55 1.25 0.62 0.83 0.83 0.55 1.25 0.62 2.50 2.50 1.667
Table 13: Analytic Hierarchy Process Results
Index Characteristic
vector Weight Maximum eigenvalue CI value
C1 0.952 4.762%
20.200 0.063
C2 1.143 5.715%
C3 1.524 7.619%
C4 0.571 2.857%
C5 1.524 7.619%
C6 1.143 5.715%
C7 0.191 0.953%
C8 0.381 1.904%
C9 0.952 4.762%
C10 1.714 8.572%
C11 0.762 3.809%
C12 1.524 7.619%
C13 1.143 5.715%
C14 1.143 5.715%
C15 1.714 8.572%
C16 0.762 3.809%
C17 1.524 7.619%
C18 0.381 1.904%
C19 0.381 1.904%
C20 0.571 2.857%
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 C18 C19 C20
0 3 5 7 5 3 0 0 0 6 0 5 3 3 6 0 5 0 0
C10 1.80 0 1.50
0 1.12 5 3.00
0 1.12 5 1.50
0 9.00 0 4.50
0 1.80 0 1.00
0 2.25 0 1.12
5 1.50 0 1.50
0 1.00 0 2.25
0 1.12 5 4.50
0 4.50 0 3.000 C11 0.800 0.66
7 0.50 0 1.33
3 0.50 0 0.66
7 4.00 0 2.00
0 0.80 0 0.44
4 1.00 0 0.50
0 0.66 7 0.66
7 0.44 4 1.00
0 0.50 0 2.00
0 2.00 0 1.333 C12 1.60
0 1.33 3 1.00
0 2.66 7 1.00
0 1.33 3 8.00
0 4.00 0 1.60
0 0.88 9 2.00
0 1.00 0 1.33
3 1.33 3 0.88
9 2.00 0 1.00
0 4.00 0 4.00
0 2.667 C13 1.20
0 1.00 0 0.75
0 2.00 0 0.75
0 1.00 0 6.00
0 3.00 0 1.20
0 0.66 7 1.50
0 0.75 0 1.00
0 1.00 0 0.66
7 1.50 0 0.75
0 3.00 0 3.00
0 2.000 C14 1.20
0 1.00 0 0.75
0 2.00 0 0.75
0 1.00 0 6.00
0 3.00 0 1.20
0 0.66 7 1.50
0 0.75 0 1.00
0 1.00 0 0.66
7 1.50 0 0.75
0 3.00 0 3.00
0 2.000 C15 1.80
0 1.50 0 1.12
5 3.00 0 1.12
5 1.50 0 9.00
0 4.50 0 1.80
0 1.00 0 2.25
0 1.12 5 1.50
0 1.50 0 1.00
0 2.25 0 1.12
5 4.50 0 4.50
0 3.000 C16 0.800 0.66
7 0.50 0 1.33
3 0.50 0 0.66
7 4.00 0 2.00
0 0.80 0 0.44
4 1.00 0 0.50
0 0.66 7 0.66
7 0.44 4 1.00
0 0.50 0 2.00
0 2.00 0 1.333 C17 1.60
0 1.33 3 1.00
0 2.66 7 1.00
0 1.33 3 8.00
0 4.00 0 1.60
0 0.88 9 2.00
0 1.00 0 1.33
3 1.33 3 0.88
9 2.00 0 1.00
0 4.00 0 4.00
0 2.667 C18 0.40
0 0.33 3 0.25
0 0.66 7 0.25
0 0.33 3 2.00
0 1.00 0 0.40
0 0.22 2 0.50
0 0.25 0 0.33
3 0.33 3 0.22
2 0.50 0 0.25
0 1.00 0 1.00
0 0.667 C19 0.40
0 0.33 3 0.25
0 0.66 7 0.25
0 0.33 3 2.00
0 1.00 0 0.40
0 0.22 2 0.50
0 0.25 0 0.33
3 0.33 3 0.22
2 0.50 0 0.25
0 1.00 0 1.00
0 0.667 C20 0.60
0 0.50 0 0.37
5 1.00 0 0.37
5 0.50 0 3.00
0 1.50 0 0.60
0 0.33 3 0.75
0 0.37 5 0.50
0 0.50 0 0.33
3 0.75 0 0.37
5 1.50 0 1.50
0 1.000
The calculated CI value of 20 judgment matrices was 0.039, the RI value was 1.629, and the calculated CR value was 0.039, less than 0.1. It shows that the judgment matrix in this study satisfies the consistency test (Table 14).
Table 14: Consistency check result
Maximum eigenvalue CI RI CR Consistency check result
20.200 0.063 1.629 0.039 Pass
It forms the weight of the value of the traditional Decoration heritage of doors and windows in Jiangnan area (Table 15).
Table 15: The Weight of the Value of Traditional Decoration heritage of Doors and Windows in Jiangnan area
Criteria layer Weight
value Sub-criterion layer Weight
value
Relative weight value B1 Historical
value 0.2593
C1 Relevance degree with historical
events or historical figures 0.048 0.2286
C2 Age degree 0.057 0.2714
C3 Existing rarity 0.076 0.3619
C4 Typical degree in similar heritage 0.029 0.1381 B2
Cultural value 0.1111
C5 Decorative Style and Expression of
Regional Cultural Characteristics 0.076 0.5315 C6 Recognition and popularity 0.057 0.3986 C7 Preservation and display related to
living habits 0.010 0.0699
B3
Social value 0.1852
C8 Residents' emotions and memories 0.019 0.1242 C9 promotes regional cognition. 0.048 0.3137 C10 Cultivate the culture and spirit of
the situation. 0.086 0.5621
B4
Scientific value 0.0370
C11 Originality and rationality of
materials 0.038 0.1667
C12 Advanced structure 0.076 0.3333
C13 Originality and rationality of
construction technology 0.057 0.2500
C14 Scarcity of traditional techniques
and techniques 0.057 0.2500
B5
Artistic value 0.3333
C15 The artistic value of traditional
doors and windows 0.086 0.4300
C16 Embodiment of environmental features around traditional doors and windows
0.038 0.1900 C17 Architectural Style and Modeling 0.076 0.3800
B6
Environmental
value 0.0741
C18 The authenticity of traditional
doors and windows 0.019 0.2836
C19 Integrity of preservation of
traditional doors and windows 0.019 0.2836 C20 Remodeling degree of traditional
door and window landscape 0.029 0.4328
4. Result
From the quasi-measurement level, the researcher can see the significant difference between each evaluation factor, B5>B1>B3>B2>B6>B4. The artistic value is the most important among the traditional decorative arts of doors and windows in Jiangnan area, closely related to the artistic style and shape of the traditional architectural decorative arts of doors and windows. Secondly, the weights of historical value, social value, and cultural value are all above 0.1, indicating that heritage value is more important than scientific and environmental value. It has to do with the need for more scientificity in the traditional decorative arts of doors and windows in Jiangnan area and the completeness of preservation at present.
The weight data of the sub-criteria layer shows that the importance of each evaluation factor is ranked as follows.
C10 > C15 > C3 > C5 > C12 > C17 > C2 > C6 > C13 > C14 > C1 > C9 > C11 > C16 > C4 > C20 >
C8 > C18 > C19 > C7.
From this, among the specific evaluation indexes of the decorative art heritage of traditional building doors and windows in Jiangnan area, the evaluation indexes related to art and culture are more important, such as ranking. C10's culture and spirit, C15's traditional doors and windows' artistic value. C5's s decorative style and regional cultural characteristics are all indicators related to culture and art, which shows that when evaluating heritage value.
Experts pay more attention to art and related cultural content, showing to a certain extent that traditional doors and windows decoration in Jiangnan area art embody its cultural and artistic characteristics. However, its materials, structures, and other aspects are simple and play a prominent role.
After constructing the weight of each evaluation factor, the author can calculate the heritage value of traditional building door and window decoration art of a building or building group in Jiangnan area. The author can also compare several buildings or building groups by calculation to understand their heritage value. Furthermore, it is also convenient to find their heritage value factors that need to be improved by comparison in the protection process. It is convenient for future tourism, restoration, and renovation to be more targeted.
Based on knowing the weight of each evaluation factor, the author chose Wuzhen traditional architecture and Tongli ancient town traditional architecture doors and windows decoration art for comparison. Firstly, it introduces the basic situation of Wuzhen and Tongli's Ancient Town. Wuzhen is located in Hangjiahu Plain. Tongli Town belongs to Jiangsu Province. Tongli Town was built in Song Dynasty.
Investigate, study and score the two. Because these two ancient towns know less about relevant professionals, it is unsuitable for a large-scale questionnaire survey. This study selected ten experts to score. It ensures the professionalism and fairness of the evaluation of both.
Questionnaires were distributed to experts, who scored the heritage values of the traditional architectural doors and windows decorative arts in these two ancient towns,
taking into account the different familiarity of the experts with the two ancient towns.
The familiarity coefficient balanced the scores—reference equation 1.
Calculate each item's average score and then multiply each evaluation factor's score with its corresponding weights to get the final value score. Then compare and analyze the two, understand the research ideas of value evaluation, and get the actual situation of the value of related Decoration heritage. First, select ten experts who know about these two ancient towns and score them. The score is 1-10 points according to the actual situation.
The corresponding average score is obtained based on the data analysis of the decorative arts of doors and windows of traditional buildings in Wuzhen. While the sub-standard score is obtained, taking the historical value of B1 as an example, the score is equal to 7.963 * 0.2286+7.852 * 0.2714+7.593 * 0.3619+8.259 * 0.1381 = 7.840, and all items are
obtained through calculation.
7.840*0.2593+8.326*0.1111+8.541*0.1852+7.256*0.037+8.094*0.3333+6.299*0.0741=
7.972. Such as the table 16:
Table 16: Survey on the Value of Traditional Door and Window Decoration Art Heritage in Jiangnan area (Wuzhen)
Criteria layer score Sub-criterion layer Score
B1 Historical
value 7.840
C1 Relevance degree with historical events or
historical figures 7.963
C2 Age degree 7.852
C3 Existing rarity 7.593
C4 Typical degree in similar heritage 8.259 B2
Cultural value 8.326
C5 Decorative Style and Expression of
Regional Cultural Characteristics 8.222 C6 recognition and popularity 8.963 C7 Preservation and display related to living
habits 5.481
B3
Social value 8.541
C8 residents' emotions and memories 6.852 C9 promotes regional cognition. 8.519 C10 Cultivate the culture and spirit of the
situation. 8.926
B4 Scientific
value 7.256
C11 Originality and rationality of materials 6.926
C12 Advanced structure 7.778
C13 Originality and rationality of construction
technology 7.259
C14 Scarcity of traditional techniques and
techniques 6.778
B5
Artistic value 8.094
C15 The artistic value of traditional doors and
windows 8.889
C16 Embodiment of environmental features
around traditional doors and windows 6.852 C17 Architectural Style and Modeling 7.815
B6 Environmental
value 6.299
C18 The authenticity of traditional doors and
windows 5.926
C19 Integrity of preservation of traditional
doors and windows 6.111
C20 Remodeling degree of traditional door
and window landscape 6.667
Referring to the calculation process of Wuzhen, it is concluded that the total value of the traditional Decoration heritage of doors and windows in Tongli Ancient Town is 7.204, and the scores of each criterion layer and sub-criterion layer are as follows (Table 17).
Table 17: Survey on the Value of Traditional Door and Window Decoration Art Heritage in Jiangnan area (Tongli)
Criteria layer score Sub-criterion layer score
B1 Historical
value 7.807
C1 Relevance degree with historical events or
historical figures 8.222
C2 Age degree 7.519
C3 Existing rarity 7.815
C4 Typical degree in similar heritage 7.667 B2
Cultural value 7.638
C5 Decorative Style and Expression of
Regional Cultural Characteristics 7.889 C6 recognition and popularity 7.741 C7 Preservation and display related to living
habits 5.148
B3
Social value 7.926
C8 residents' emotions and memories 7.556 C9 promotes regional cognition. 7.741 C10 Cultivate the culture and spirit of the
situation. 8.111
B4 Scientific
value 6.914
C11 Originality and rationality of materials 6.704
C12 Advanced structure 7.222
C13 Originality and rationality of construction
technology 7.037
C14 Scarcity of traditional techniques and
techniques 6.519
B5
Artistic value 7.823
C15 The artistic value of traditional doors and
windows 8.407
C16 Embodiment of environmental features
around traditional doors and windows 6.593 C17 Architectural Style and Modeling 7.778
B6
Environmental
value 6.389
C18 The authenticity of traditional doors and
windows 6.111
C19 Integrity of preservation of traditional
doors and windows 6.074
C20 Remodeling degree of traditional door
and window landscape 6.778
5. Conclusion
Through comparison, it can be found that the heritage value of traditional door and window decoration art in Wuzhen is higher than that of Tongli. Wuzhen is higher than Tongli except for its lower environmental value than standard-level indicators. Only C1 (Relevance degree with historical events or historical figures), C18(Authenticity of traditional doors and windows), and C20(Remodeling degree of C20 traditional door and window landscape) are lower than Tongli at the sub-standard level. From these comparisons, it can be seen that Wuzhen has a long history, early tourism development, and high popularity. Therefore, it also has a higher value in corresponding heritage values, which can also be seen from the score gap of C6 (recognition and popularity).
However, due to the late development of Tongli Ancient Town, its traditional doors and windows are more valuable in authenticity and transformation than Wuzhen. After
constructing the value evaluation system of traditional decorative arts of doors and windows in Jiangnan area and the weight of each index, the researcher can analyze the value of traditional decorative arts of doors and windows in Jiangnan area. This thesis compares the traditional decorative arts of doors and windows in Tongli's ancient town and Wuzhen, which provides ideas for evaluating, protecting, and inheriting related traditional decorative arts of doors and windows in Jiangnan area.
The cultural connotation and artistic conception of the traditional door and window decoration in Jiangnan area is a highly concentrated display of the essence of Chinese traditional culture. Its decorative content, expressive techniques, decorative skills, decorative connotation, and aesthetic taste reflect the comprehensive strength of the tremendous social and cultural development at that time, which is worthy of our in- depth study and reference. The purpose of protection and inheritance is to draw energy for future generations and continue the context. According to different Regions, the current protection status of doors and windows in Jiangnan area is also different. The traditional building doors and window decoration in the scenic location have been repaired many times, and the overall protection status is intact.
Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate
The researchers used the research ethics provided by the Research Ethics Committee of Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM). All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee. Informed consent was obtained from all participants according to the Declaration of Helsinki.
Acknowledgement
This article was supported by Universiti Teknologi MARA, Kuala Lumpur. A grateful appreciation is also extended to Dr. Azhari bin Md Hashim for her kind guidance in completing this research work.
Funding
This study received no funding.
Conflict of Interest
The authors reported no conflicts of interest for this work and declare that there is no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship, or publication of this article.
References
Jiang Nan. (2016). Evaluation techniques and methods of industrial heritage value based on adaptive reuse. New Architecture, 3, 3–9.
Jing, J. (2014). Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process in Highway Landscape Evaluation. Enterprise Technology Development: Next Journal, 33(3), 38–39.
Liu Boying, L. K. (2006). Composition and Value Evaluation Method of Industrial Heritage. Architectural Creation, 9, 24–30.
Tingxiao, W. (2007). Research on Knowledge Measurement and Evaluation. Evaluation and Management, 1, 70–75.
Wang, D. (2016). A philosophy of Chinese architecture: Past, present, future (p. 36).
Routledge Press.
Xiaoyan, H. (2009). Discussion on quantitative evaluation method of comprehensive value of historical sites. Sichuan Architectural Science Research, 05, 237-239+266.
Yuming, Z. (1995). Reasonable scale of value evaluation. Journal of Hengyang Normal University, 05, 1–5.