The emblem for the 2008 Beijing Olympics was unveiled at the beginning of the month. As the 2008 Games approach, Beijing has hastened its various construction projects for the Olympics. For China, in fact, this is not only a sporting event but also a makeover of its international image. What lies behind this event is the debate of China's political and economic development today: in the face of globalization, should China strengthen its own characteristics or accelerate the speed of getting on track with the world?
From political to academic circles, new liberalism has already become a mainstream dominating force in today's China. The establishment of a free market is believed to be not only a path to get on track with the international community, but also a shortcut for the Chinese people to pursue the dream of China's modernization. As for the development of the architectural space in Beijing, people in different eras seem to have had different ideas about China's modernization.
For example, under Mao Zedong's (
Today, 20 years after China's "reform and openness," its urban development is still linked to its modernization to a degree. But the ideology of industrialism during Mao's era has already faded away. As China's economy rapidly grows, several metropolises have suddenly become experimental grounds for architectural space, as skyscrapers rise up one after another.
Although some of them are indeed extraordinary, the development of these metropolises is obviously following in the footsteps of the world's advanced countries. Thus, tall buildings are always welcome and have been viewed as the sole index of modernization.
Two completely different scenes coexist in Beijing's architectural space at the moment: one is modern buildings, completed or under construction, and the other is old houses with the character for demolish (拆) painted in red outside. All of a sudden, those busy construction sites have become the symbols of Beijing. These two scenes have a shared goal of creating more modern buildings through which China can show off its economic development. Nevertheless, such planning and organization of space has sacrificed the city's architectural characteristic -- hutongs, the traditional alleyways in Beijing.
An ironic situation here is that China often emphasizes its "Chinese characteristics," taking them as the ground for its values that are so different from those of the West, and for its domestic nationalism as well. But in light of Beijing's spatial change, apart from the notorious Chinese characteristic of destroying historic buildings, all the imagination about modernization is Western.
In addition, one important factor is absent during the reconstruction of space -- humans! If a city's space is the demonstration of the interaction among humans, history, society and other various factors, then the human factor has been underestimated in Beijing's case.
Not all Beijing residents are remaining silent during the radical change of spatial structure. Some petitioned the government for the preservation of an old tree in their traditional community, while many others complained about being forced to be separated from their neighbors. Unfortunately, under the banner of modernization, these voices appeared to be so weak.
Not everyone is unaware of the situation. For example, writer Feng Jicai (馮驥才) was highly regarded by Taiwanese readers during the "Chinese-novel fever" in the early 1980s. But the novelist has switched his focus from writing to recording the histories of ordinary Chinese people, as well as the salvaging of historic buildings in China. His book Shou Xia Liu Qing (手下留情, have mercy), published in 2000, is his latest product of historical thinking on city space.
For China, this book shows that there is much room for introspection. Since Chinese traditions and citizens' participation are lacking in the 2008 Games, one cannot say for sure that China will not make a parade of its power through the modern architectural space of Beijing.
Hsu Tung-ming is a freelance writer based in Beijing.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS