Author: mjcalent

China’s modernization can be boldly compared to a revolution. This revolution is far from a grassroots one; instead, the development narrative, as told through many cities within China’s borders, document a top-down story. The nature of this city-wide modernization coincides with the erasure of both marginalized populations and traditional life. Previous discussions of village-in-the-city landscapes have described quite well the plight of migrant workers throughout China’s Pearl River Delta. Now, the focus rests on the erasure of China’s traditional roots. In “Cement Dragon”, a sculpture installation from Yang Yongliang, the reality of China’s traditional disappearance is salient. The artist, Yongliang, emphasizes that the rapid progression of the city-scape has, to a far extent, begun erasing China’s traditional roots.

“Cement Dragon” Yang Yongliang

The dragon in Chinese culture has persisted through time as a symbol of power and strength. Yongliang’s incorporation of this symbol as the main focal point of his sculpture allows for the viewer to first understand the significance of the piece. Above, we first see a Chinese dragon bursting through a cement wall. The delicate balance Yongliang strikes between a provocative foreground, the dragon, and a neutral background, the cement wall, persists as one of the core ideas of the piece. While the dragon symbolizes tradition, the wall symbolizes modern China and its built landscape. With the dragon, quite literally, breaking free from this wall, we may be able to interpret this as a way of the traditional trying to escape the modern; this idea, though, is ill-fated due to the dismal appearance of the dragon itself.

“Cement Dragon” by Yang Yongliang

This sculpture’s physical construction further echoes the contrast between traditional and modern; in some sense, it seems to shut away China’s tradition-rich past for the sake of bleak modernity. Overall, this piece is constructed entirely from cement, bricks, and steel bars(material) These elements are fundamental components of modern skyscrapers, alluding to the modern built Chinese landscape. Interestingly, we see not only the cement wall in the background clearly constructed from these elements, but we also see that the traditional Chinese dragon is, too. In fact, it appears that the dragon has a shaggy physicality due to the cement. Boldly, the dragon is cloaked in cement; the cloaking of such is far beyond the dragon’s wants. We can assert that the unkept nature of the dragon’s appearance suggests that traditional China is being overwhelmed and fully consumed by the modern built landscape.

“Cement Dragon” by Yang Yongliang

            “Cement Dragon” is an attempt to critique the loss of tradition in the modern Chinese landscape. This erasure of traditional China has been driven largely by government regimes and large corporations. This piece begs us to ask who is making city development decisions? Maurizio Marinelli’s “Urban revolution and Chinese contemporary art: A total revolution of the senses” asserts that much of city development reflects the ideas and goals of a Chinese minority – those who can afford to make such decisions. In some sense, as Marinelli also describes, this revolution in the Chinese city-scape is similar to mid-20^th century China during Mao’s era. In Yongliang’s piece, the cement dragon seems to be cognizant of this dismal revolution. It looks reluctant and quite scared to be succumbing to the revolution. On its face, we see a blank stare with furrowed eyebrows. Its mouth is open. Combined, the dragon seems to have paused mid-gasp, suggesting a hesitation to fully embody its traditional powerful nature. The process of modernity has completely dominated the dragon, far beyond the creature’s ability to counteract it. (the connection between the dragon and revolution)

While it is important to acknowledge all four VIC landscapes, the discussion of visual aspects of each would require a lengthier medium, rather than a visual analysis post. My contribution for last week’s topic focuses only on two VIC landscapes: Gangxia, Shenzhen and Dafen, Shenzhen. Images from Laurence Liaw’s essay and from various photographers aid in a conversation of how VIC spaces respond to forward-reaching efforts of development and modernization, or, more generally, city modernity.

 

Laurence Liaw’s “Village-in-the-City as a Sustainable Form of Social Housing Communities for China: A Tale of Four Villages in Shenzhen” captures the existence of four very different Village-in-the-City (VIC) settings, Songgang, Gangxia, Dafen, and Honggang. These VICs have similar histories, broadly, but their persistence through time is subject to distinctly specific influences and adaptations, or lackthereof. Liaw spends most of his time documenting the evolution of four VICs as a way of emphasizing the loss, and subsequent importance, of social housing in Shenzhen, China. Coupled with the imagery within and beyond the article, Liaw’s argument allows for an understanding that VICs indeed are individual landscapes, but their presence, persistence, and battle against modernity is shared (Image 1).

Image 1: Gangxia, Shenzhen. From Laurence Liaw’s “Village-in-the-city as a sustainable form of social housing communities for China: a tale of four villages in Shenzhen”

 

Image 2: Computer-generated image of Gangxia (center) and developed high-rises of Shenzhen (peripheral buildings). From https://grabcad.com/library/shenzhen-gangxia-china-city-mass-study-1

 

Gangxia and Dafen have both been encompassed by development, but these two spaces have responded in contrasting ways. The VIC of Gangxia is towered by surrounding high-rise buildings and modern developments (Image 2). In contrast, residential village spaces are ostensibly limited to set heights, around three-story height, often times with dilapidated housing frames/construction. Gangxia’s history is strongly influenced by the construction of civic centers and government spaces; the developing peripheral space has suffocated the development of the VIC community through high demand for housing and high land-costs. Dafen, though similar to Gangxia, has persisted through modernity in the formation of a collective VIC identity. As a symbol of this, the state of Leonardo da Vinci stand, encompassing Dafen’s core identity as a global art powerhouse (Image 3). From mere images alone, we understand that Gangxia and Dafen are responding to modernization in starkly different ways. While Gangxia crumbles to the ground (Image 4), Dafen thrives (Image 5). The collection of visual representations of these villages transforms the identity of the VIC spaces away from mere villages. We could argue that Gangxia will cease to remain a village in the near future and that Dafen, because of the communal core identity, appears to have molded into a thread of the larger city-scape.

Image 3: Statue of Leonardo da Vinci in Dafen, Shenzhen. From Laurence Liaw’s “Village-in-the-city as a sustainable form of social housing communities for China: a tale of four villages in Shenzhen”

Image 4: Man sleeping next to pile of concrete blocks, Gangxia, Shenzhen. Imaged by Jesse Warren. From http://www.shenzhenparty.com/blogs/shenzhen-party-info/66118-gangxia-west-village-photo-colle

 

Image 5: Corridor covered with various oil paintings in Dafen, Shenzhen. From https://www.szcchina.com/blog/dafen-oil-painting-village.html

Through images alone, we understand the liveliness of these two built landscapes. Gangxia is crumbling; its beige, neutral concrete blocks are strewn in piles throughout the closely-packed village area, while Dafen is vibrant. The paintings produced in Dafen paint Dafen, itself, in a bright light. Photographs of these built landscapes demonstrate two responses to city modernity: one that has fallen victim to pressures of development and another that has managed to remain autonomous and ostensibly self-sufficient. (if this is the central argument, then introduce it at the beginning) Can we expect all pockets in a city to persist through time? Perhaps not. We may be able to assume that there is some degree of persistence, whether that persistence is fostering continued housing and residential living or whether that persistence is through ruins. The persistence, regardless, is an aspect of city development. In the case of Shenzhen, visual reminders of different VICs and city-scapes continuously serve as a means of detailing how different communities have responded to the same pressures. It would be easy to assume all VIC spaces have responded in the same way, but these visual moments in time allow us to understand that each VIC, though similar with its original history, are not all that similar with adaptations to modernization and continuity with city modernity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Buildings located on the Bund in Shanghai, China are pillars of the city’s global history. Elements including the concept of each buildings, construction materials, and outside versus inside building appearances reflect ideas of historical significance and change/continuity through time. The Russell & Company Building in Shanghai, China captures, and sequesters, Shanghai’s history in its outward facing exterior. Like many elements of the built city landscape, the Russell and Company building has persisted through time, yet components of this structure have been molded by the evolution of the Chinese state; this evolution and subtle changes alongside posit the Russell and Company building an important component of Shanghai’s global history. (specify the notion of “global history” as the bund as the treaty port speaks for a special identity and history)

Historical photo of the Russell and Company Building, late 19th Century – 1881. Eric Politzer, 2007

            The Russell and Company Building’s original exterior reflecting modernization attempts from Chinese stakeholders, while still incorporating neo-classical European elements. Built in the late 19^th-century under architectural designers Morrison & Gratton, the building reflected neo-gothic and neo-classical elements, in addition to red brick design and colorful window awnings. Pictured above, we get a vague sense that the building was unlike other buildings along the Bund at the time. The red brick colors and window awning elements separated the Russell and Company building from different monolithic buildings, such as the HSBC building and the Customs House; both these buildings are washed out by their granite exteriors and harken back to ideas of neutral monument and building palettes provided by buildings and monuments in Tiananmen Square. At the time of construction, the Russell and Company building reflected attempts at modernizing China, but once the ownership of the building transferred from American stakeholders to Chinese stakeholders, the building’s outward expression changed, too. (if the intention of modernization in terms of the architecture is the focal point in this section, then use all the visual elements to support whether the attempt of modernization is achieved or failed and why)

A “modernized” Russell and Company Building, now the China Merchants Bank. Tour-Beijing. com

            Chinese ownership of the Russell and Company Building changed the structure from colorfully unique to neutral and ordinary (what does the transition speak for: need a topic sentence that introduces a topical idea). The building was purchased by the China Merchants Bank in the early 20^th-century. At this time, the building was re-worked and renovated to better adjust the building for its new purpose of banking (define what is the “new purpose”). Above, we see that the building adopted a neutral, gray color scheme, devoid of color and devoid of unique building character. Though the exterior is not dominated by granite blocks, there is now a monumentality of the exterior, which allows it to blend into the larger Bund landscape. The transition from red-brick color to painted grays may be reflecting shifts in the Chinese state’s view of their built landscape (if this is the focal point, then introduce it at the beginning of the paragraph) or shifts in the use of the building. It would be erroneous to assume that the burgeoning communist state alone was the driver in “neutralizing” the Russell and Company Building’s appearance (or rendering the colonial impact); it very well may be the case that the shift into a Chinese bank induced desires for building owners to want the building to blend in with other banking buildings on the Bund.

 

Aspects of changing ownership and state influences are omnipresent in consideration of our built landscape. The Russell and Company building demonstrates both ideas beautifully. For a building which was once lauded as unique and exemplary, with regards to modernization, the reality of it now being lost in the larger strip of the Bund has allowed us to understand that the Bund consumes all potential for buildings to stand out. We understand that each building was constructed with competition for riverfront access in mind; this doesn’t necessarily allow for uniqueness of the structure to come through. Instead, it would make sense for individual building elements to allow for each building to shine, but if we consider all buildings together, there ceases to be uniqueness; the only uniqueness is the Bund itself, for its history of a littoral landscape makes it contrasts against other built landscapes, particularly the Pudong, another critical aspect of the Shanghai city identity. The Russell and Company Building is now consumed by the Bund’s littoral identity, yet in doing so, there story of the building’s consumption is telling of how the Bund has shaped up to be the iconic, yet monochromatic, historical landscape we see it as. (if littoral identity or space is the key issue, then may make it as the overarching central thesis)

 

Citations:

Politzer, Eric , “Number 6 on the Bund: Looking back. New facts about an old building” (2007)

http://www.tour-beijing.com/blog/category/shanghai-travel/shanghai-attractions/page/7

 

 

Credit: Vector Architects, Hybrid Courtyard, Baitasi (Pechino)

The image above captures, in clear detail, last week’s topic. The foreground shows a network of hutong arrangements in Beijing, while the background, lingering above, has a number of skyscrapers and high-rises. The contrast between residences beckons to issues of a modernizing society. Several elements elucidate this contrast, from the fish-bone network of the hutong to the blurriness of the skyscrapers under a cloak of fog/smog. Together, this image is aiming to demonstrate an eerie arrival of modern architecture; in that vein, in order to maintain a city’s distinct culture, what are ways these creeping ploys at modernization can maintain a city’s dynamic? From this image alone, it would be difficult to prescribe.

The structuring of the foreground and the background illustrates a means of a creeping future juxtaposed onto a sprawling past. There appears to be intentionality in the photographer’s depiction of this built landscape. A similar image could have been captured once the fog burned off during the day, yet, with the fog/smog cloak containing the skyscrapers, it seems as if these residences are a bleak omen for the future of the city. As the fog/smog cloak approaches, it will consume the hutong network below it, acting as a metaphor of the skyscraper’s encroachment onto the traditional residential network of historic Beijing. The hutong network is protected, but as the fog approaches, just as modernization does in the city landscape, the hutong will be suffocated. (if the fog/smog used as visual symbols, you may introduce it at the beginning of this paragraph)

This vantage point depicting the hutong against the larger apartment structure provides another example of a departure from tradition. In considering the layout of the traditional hutong structure, Liangyong Wu’s architectural analysis titled “Traditional Courtyard Houses and a New Prototype” describes the intentionality of these landscapes. In simplest terms, the network of alleyways, streets, and corridors collected within the hutong provides flow for the larger residential layout. There is a cognizant understanding of each street, with the ability to connect with neighbors and form an individual and communal identity. In stark contrast, the skyscrapers of Beijing’s modernized residential landscape hesitate to provide the similar aspects of flow and identity. The photographer of this image has captured the ostensibly chaotic, yet strikingly beautiful, network of hutong in the foreground. The vantage point favors this view over the view of Beijing’s skyscraper, which, from the view captured, provides a wall.(good point) We don’t gain a view of this particular built landscape’s arrangement. All we see, from a direct view, is the impermeable front that the buildings provide. While there may be intentionality in how these structures are designed and laid out, the vantage point of the image ceases to elucidate any of this information.

The fabric of Beijing’s built landscape has been hemmed under the influence of 20^th-century modernization and industrial advances. The radicalization of the built landscape has provided stark contrasts between the traditional and the modern. China’s hutong network is under the influence of modern architecture, highly influenced from the West. To preserve traditional practices and customs, architecture must reflect earnest efforts to do so. In the image above, there is no sense of effort in maintaining a city identity of traditional customs and practices; instead, the built landscape is dichotomous, with the past under siege of the present. The photograph aims to show the ignorance of the modern built landscape with respect to traditional built forms, and, to some degree, this image aims to evoke a consideration of how cities progress into the future. (a wonderful work)

 

Image source: http://www.abitare.it/en/habitat-en/urban-design-en/2017/12/31/pechino-hutong-modernizzazione/?refresh_ce-cp

 

Liangyong Wu – “Traditional Courtyard Houses and a New Prototype”

We’ve discussed, at length, the role that Tiananmen Square’s size plays in establishing the Square as a socio-political gathering place. We have also discussed the iconography of different monuments surrounding the Square, as well as the structures tucked inside the Forbidden City, adjacent to the Square. The stark differences in construction of buildings around the Square compared to those inside the Forbidden City not only demonstrate ideas of imperialism and socialism, but I believe the shift in building practices are also signifying ignorance of China’s specific geography and the implications of being situated in a tectonically-active region of the world. The adoption of socialist architecture follows closely with the strict adherence of state and collective identity (strong statement)

Modeled with influences from the Soviet Union, buildings around the Square are monolithic in nature. The Great Hall of the People, shown below, towers in size. Elements of the structure, from the neutral colors, cement facade, and tall and repeated columns, harken to eastern European architecture, where emotion and culturally-significant colors, icons, and elements are stripped away; all that is shown is a neutral with state icons (flags, symbols, etc.) (and monumental)

The comparison between socialist architecture and imperial architecture becomes interesting when we consider building elements that reflect China’s relation with the natural world. Structures such as the Great Hall of Supreme Harmony incorporate aspects of Chinese culture into the design, and, to a high degree, are antithetical to the structure, design, and influence of socialist-era buildings surrounding Tiananmen Square.

Though there is a noticeable shift from imperial architecture to socialist architecture, we have not discussed the importance of these shifts beyond discussing shifting ideologies. I believe the departure from imperial architecture to socialist architecture reflects a shift from connections to the natural world/environment to an emphasis on state ideology (good comment). China is situated in a tectonically-active region of the world. To accommodate the natural world in this capacity, imperial structures in the Forbidden City incorporate a building/architecture element called a duogong, which evenly distributes weight across a complex, crossing wooden tie. This design allows for weight to compress the wooden structures, preventing splintering, shattering, and breaking under intense shaking. Duogong elements are found at the top of imperialism-influenced structures, and the clear exhibition of these building elements reflects, to some degree, China’s historic connection to geography. As with other elements in imperial-influenced structures (colors, statues, iconography, etc), the incorporation of design is intentional and substantial. In socialist-influenced architecture, the connection to land and culturally-relevant icons in design are stripped. Instead, the only icons that persist are reflecting state-driven ideologies. The intentionality behind these structures, including the Great Hall of the People, the Monument to the People’s Heroes, and Mao’s Mausoleum, is reflecting state-shaped ideologies. Rather than emphasizing traditions, there is an emphasis on the state. The only colors that decorate the otherwise neutral, concrete, emotion-less structures are a blazing red, symbolizing the People’s Republic of China.

A bird’s eye view of Tiananmen Square and the Forbidden City shows two contrasting, yet oddly similar, landscapes. The former harkens state-driven architecture, while the latter reflects culture, tradition, and connection to place. In our understanding of China’s architecture, we can begin to understand the importance of imperialism and that of socialism; by identifying present building designs and/or the lack-thereof, we can, again, comment on ambitions/goals/intentions during the respective time period. We could hypothesize that imperial China was rooted in historical identity, while, more modern socialist China was rooted in state identity.

comments: the work sounds strong and persuasive as the argument is clear and the visual supports. I see the persuasion when one discusses architectural issues via its language terms. in a short work like this, however, you may concentrate on the focal claim of comparison and contrast between the imperial and the socialist through a number of architectural elements, as we don’t have space to cover everything. there is also clear cut between the imperial and socialist as architecture calls for multifaceted reading potentials. any citations from the reading or other sources?