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
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS