The renovation of areas of Luxor has been of interest not only to writers and newspapers in Egypt but also in the rest of the world. Most of the foreign articles such as those in the Times and the Sunday Times about the West Bank renovations are immotive and designed to invoke sympathy for the settlers on the 'mountain' despite the fact that the Egyptian Government has spent sixty years trying to dislodge squatters from living in and above the tombs. The problem of saving the tombs from pillage and destruction seemed insurmountable until the Egyptian Government just built another village and moved all the settlers into it.
Whether this was the right or wrong thing to do is open to question. However, I wonder what the reaction of the British Government in the 1960s would have been had Egyptian newspaper written numerous critical articles about the building of new towns and the demolition of Victorian slums. That the houses were provided freely and many families were given up to four homes is partially ignored by the press Tristrams who come from the elite areas of the world's cities and then get up in arms about 'poor people being thrown out of their homes' that had no water and no sanitation. What would they be writing if people started living in the middle of Stonehenge?
Articles written by archaeologists, Egyptian newspapers and local residents are much more balanced. It is interesting to note that the local resistance to change has come mainly from ex-pats who want Luxor to stay in the dark ages and look charming even if its residents have to live in a level of squalor that they would never accept.
Read the articles and judge for yourself whether Luxor should have been left alone or dragged kicking and screaming into the 21sts Century.