BEIJING,
It’s the newest
dreamscape in a capital clotted with them. When it opens in two years on
the east side of this city, Chaoyang Park Plaza, a ring of glass towers
moulded to look like mountains in a classic Chinese landscape painting
and designed by the renowned architect, Ma Yansong, will feature
apartments, offices and shops.
But in
an unusual online ad campaign that began in late October, the project’s
developer is saying that the complex “could be Beijing’s last
abnormally shaped landmark building to enter the market in the coming 10
years”.
Recently, a saleswoman eagerly warned that the government might not permit “this type of artsy shape” any longer.
While
the warning might turn out to be just sales hype, it was also a clear
attempt to capitalise on President Xi Jinping’s recent call for an end
to “weird architecture”.
Ever since
he issued his admonishment at a high-profile symposium on the arts on
October 15, government officials, planners and builders across China
have been scrambling to figure out what it means for them.
No
official elaboration has emerged on what Xi might have meant by
“weird”. But a report on a social media platform carried by People’s
Daily, the Communist Party newspaper, predicted that “in the future, it
is unlikely that Beijing will have other strangely shaped buildings like
the ‘Giant Trousers’” — a colloquial reference to the China Central
Television headquarters, a hulking, long-limbed edifice designed by Rem
Koolhaas and Ole Scheeren.
REVISED COMMISSIONS
There
are other examples. As Communist uniformity gave way to a tangle of
political and market forces over the past three decades, avant-garde
foreign and overseas-trained Chinese architects have burst on the scene,
making booming Chinese megacities staging points, critics argue, for
radical visions that would be unbuildable elsewhere.
Scandals
over cost, corruption and safety have hounded the construction of
imposing new marvels in Beijing, including the television headquarters,
the National Centre for the Performing Arts (also known as the Giant
Egg) and the National Stadium (built for the 2008 Olympics and nicknamed
the Bird’s Nest).
Xi’s rebuke has
reverberated among China’s architects and planners. In interviews,
central and local government planners said they had been asked by their
superiors to apply stricter design guidelines on project approvals.
Criteria
in some local competitions for public commissions have been revised.
Designers and developers said it had reignited debate over the financial
and aesthetic excesses of urban design in China. Many wondered if it
would dampen creativity more than it would curb freakish designs.
“General
Secretary Xi’s speech is of great significance to our industry,” said
Wang Kai, vice-president of the China Academy of Urban Planning and
Design here. Since Xi’s statement, Wang and other urban planners with
state institutions, under the direction of China’s Ministry of Housing
and Urban-Rural Development, have been exploring ways to translate his
prescription into tangible measures.
“We’ve been in meetings practically every day,” Wang said.
Official
statements vary as to what form these measures might take and when. But
some suggest that the government will take overt steps to classify and
pre-empt “weird” buildings.
In late
November, the state-owned Legal Daily quoted an official with the
Housing Ministry as saying that it was establishing standards to
identify “weird architecture” that should be rejected. Beijing Deputy
Mayor Chen Gang said the city would apply more detailed urban planning
requirements to prevent “weird architecture” and “implement necessary
rules on the size, style, colour, form, shape and materials of
buildings,” newspapers reported.
SHOCKING BUILDINGS
Yang
Shichao, deputy director of the Guangdong Provincial Academy of
Building Research, said the ministry was seeking to establish general
standards. A building will not be deemed “weird,” said Yang, “if it does
not consume excessive materials, if it suits the local climate, if it
fits the local culture and if it provides the necessary functions.”
Wang
said that based on discussions he attended, the ministry would probably
not define weirdness based solely on a building’s shape, colour or
materials.
Instead, planners are
focused more on controlling costs and constructing green and low-carbon
buildings. But local governments will also set broad style guidelines
for architects and adopt stricter procedures for approving public
projects, he added.
The Housing Ministry did not respond to requests for comment.
Many
“shocking and weird buildings” around China have been the vanity
projects of officials out to advance their own careers, with
insufficient regard for the costs, Wang said.
“Why
does everyone have objections to certain buildings in Beijing?” he
asked. “Because it’s public funds, ordinary people’s money being spent.”
As
for Chaoyang Park Plaza, whose developers celebrated it as possibly the
last stand of architectural weirdness in Beijing, on a single day in
November it sold more than 1 billion renminbi (Sh14 billion) worth of
space, a sales agent said. She said she could not measure how much the
ad had helped.
This does not mean Beijing will grow dull
Since
taking power, President Xi Jinping has waged a far-reaching campaign
against official corruption and extravagance, and targeting “weird
architecture” appears in line with that.
His
appeal has won mixed reviews from architects and developers, however.
Wang Shu, who in 2012 became the first Chinese architect to receive the
Pritzker Prize, said that Xi was addressing a real problem. “The
greatest quantity of strange buildings in the world has converged on
China,” he said.
No comments :
Post a Comment