‘Critical’ Practice in State-owned Design Institutes in Post-Mao China (1976-2000s): A Case Study of CAG (China Architecture Design and Research Group)
By
Feng LI
Submitted in total fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of: Master of Architecture (by Research) (by Thesis) July 2010 Faculty of Architecture, Building, and Planning The University of Melbourne
Abstract
During the past three decades, China has witnessed an unprecedented upsurge of construction at astonishing speed. Architectural design firms from all over the world have participated in China’s design and building practice. One of the leading forces of this progress, however, is the state-owed design institute, which is a unique type of architectural design practice originally formed in the Maoist era (1949 - 1976) in China. Different from private practices, the design institute is institutionally associated with the government and significantly influenced by governmental policies. Taking the China Architecture Design and Research Group (CAG) as an example, this thesis aims to summarize the common and consistent features of the practice in the design institute in the post-Mao era (1976 - present) and to find an underlying socio-political mechanism that is perhaps driving the design practice in specific settings.
In this research, the practice in the design institute is studied with a focus on the design agenda of architects. In order to capture a picture of the evolution of design ideas, I employed the concept of ‘criticality’ into my research from the ‘critical’ and ‘post-critical’ discussion in North America and East Asia. The formal characteristics of CAG’s works are tested in this measurement for an analytical interpretation.
The investigation of CAG is conducted through both data analysis and fieldwork. Information from books, journals and the internet is collected to develop a comprehensive understanding of the design institute. During my fieldwork in Beijing, I visited important buildings designed by CAG and interviewed the chief architect of this institute. The evolution of its institutional system and its common design features in architectural language are at the core of this study.
Through empirical studies on the relevant issues of CAG, I try to examine a
i relationship between a government-orientated operation of the institute and the design approach of the architects, and further explore the significance of this practicing mode in the socio-political context of contemporary China.
Despite the criticism often raised in the existing literature, this thesis argues for a collectivist perspective for evaluations of the design institute. With the economic conditions of a developing country in mind, this thesis suggests that the design agenda of architects in the design institute reflects long-term considerations of public welfare. Consequently, the participation of the government in architectural practice, as I would propose at the end of this thesis, is an effective and necessary mode, especially for developing countries. This standpoint can help establishing a more cross-cultural and international framework in theorizing the architectural practice of different countries and cultures including nations such as China in contemporary world.
ii Declaration
This is to certify that the thesis comprises only my original work except where indicated in the preface; due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used; the thesis is approximately 30,000 words in length, inclusive of endnotes, but exclusive of tables, charts, glossary, and bibliography.
Feng LI July 2010
iii Acknowledgements
During the past two years, I devoted myself to the research in this subject area and finished the thesis with general help from my advisors, colleagues and friends. I would like to express my sincere appreciation to all those who offered me assistance and support in this study. The gratefulness also goes to the Melbourne University, for offering the MIFR and the MRS scholarships, which have given me the opportunity to dedicate myself into the research without economic pressures.
First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Associate Prof. Jianfei Zhu for his guidance and patience through the duration of this thesis, who gave me illuminating instruction, enlightening guidance and inspiration, which helped and encouraged me during my research time in the faculty.
Furthermore, I would like to thank Dr. Greg Missingham and Dr. Hao Wu as my panel members for reading my thesis, providing useful discussions and valuable advices on my research topic. Thanks must also go to Ms. Jane Trewin, research support officer of the faculty, for her kind help and assistance during my research.
Special thanks to Associate Prof. Qinghua Guo, for giving me suggestions on the application of human ethics, and to the librarians of East Asian collections in the Bailieu Library, for the assistance in ordering Chinese publications. I am thankful to my fellow postgraduates (Chiu Chenyu, Gu Yan, Lin Chia-Hui, Liu Xin, Sima Yina, Wu Ming, You Jia, Zhang Lu and Zhang Yanjing) for their warm-hearted help in my study. Gratefulness to Fang Wanli for her encouragement and accompany at the last stage of this study.
Finally and especially, I would like to dedicate my thesis to my father and mother, for their persistent encouragement, moral support, thoughtful considerations and great confidence in me, whose continuing love has enabled me to complete this work.
iv Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF CHARTS xi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem statement 1
1.2 Literature review 3
1.3 About this research 9
CHAPTER 2: HISTORICAL REVIEW AND THEORETICAL DISCUSSION
2.1 A Brief history of the Chinese architect 13
2.2 Theoretical discussion about the ‘critical’ discourse 21
CHAPTER 3: CASE STUDY ON A STATE-OWNED DESIGN INSTITUTE
3.1 Introduction 27
3.2 A history of CAG 29
3.3 CAG’s reform 35
3.4 Review and analysis of CAG’s works 41
3.5 Review and analysis of Cui Kai’s works 63
3.6 A formal and ‘critical’ agenda: Analysis 73
3.7 A pragmatic strategy: Analysis 81
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION
4.1 Pragmatism 95
4.2 A Working mechanism underlying practice 97
4.3 Theoretical assessment on the practice of design institutes 99
NOTES 107
BIBLIOGRAPHY 115
GLOSSARY 119
v
List of Figures
Figure 3.1 National Library, Beijing, 1981. The figure is from Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Selected Works of Chinese Famous Architectural Design Institutes in Series: Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Harbin: Heilongjiang Science and Technology Press, 1998, p. 13. 44
Figure 3.2 Beijing International Hotel, Beijing, 1980.
The figure is from Beijing Shi Guihua Weiyuanhui, Beijing Chengshi Guihua Xuehui,
Beijing Shida Jianzhu Sheji (Beijing Ten Prominent Buildings), Tianjin: Tianjin
University Press, 2002. 44
Figure 3.3 a: The Headquarters of P.L.A , Beijing, 1987. b: The Media Center, Beijing, 1988. c: The office building of Ministry of Forestry, Beijing, 1995. d: The
Ministry of Foreign Affairs , Beijing, 1993.
The figures are from Building, Selected, Harbin: Heilongjiang Science and Technology
Press, 1998, p. 87, p. 122, p. 79, p. 74. 46 Figure 3.4 a: The Exhibition Hall No.1 of the International Exhibition Center of China, Beijing, 1988. b: The Medical Treatment Building of P.L.A General Hospital, Beijing, 1990.
The figures are from Building, Selected, Harbin: Heilongjiang Science and Technology
Press, 1998, p. 37, p. 62. 47
Figure 3.5 Shenzhen People’s Congress, Shenzhen, 1986.
The figure is from Building, Selected, Harbin: Heilongjiang Science and Technology
Press, 1998, p. 91. 50
Figure 3.6 High-rise buildings designed by CAG, Shenzhen.
The figures are from Building, Selected, Harbin: Heilongjiang Science and Technology
Press, 1998, p. 191, p. 175, p.179. 51
Figure 3.7 a: National Theatre designed by Paul Andreu (winner), Beijing, 1998. b: National Theatre designed by CAG, Beijing, 1998.
vi The figures are from Jianzhu Chuangzuo Zazhishe, Guojia Dajuyuan Sheji Juan (National
Theatre: Design Works), Tianjin: Tianjin University Press, 2008, p. 54, p. 52. 54
Figure 3.8 a: CCTV new site designed by OMA (winner), Beijing, 2002.
The figure is from the website of OMA. Available at <
http://www.oma.eu/index.php?option=com_projects&view=portal&Itemid=10&id=55>
(accessed 17 June 2009).
b: CCTV new site designed by CAG, Beijing, 2002.
The figure is from China Architecture Design & Research Group (ed.), Selected Projects
of China Architecture Design & Research Group 2003, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press,
2003, p. 84. 55
Figure 3.9 a: National Museum designed by GMP (winner), Beijing, 2003.
The figure is from the internet. Available at <
http://www.abbs.com.cn/usd/200501/p0511.jpg> (accessed 17 June 2009).
b: National Museum designed by CAG, Beijing, 2003.
The figure is from China, Selected Projects 2003, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press,
2003, p. 78. 55
Figure 3.10 a: National Library designed by KSP (winner), Beijing, 2003.
The figure is from the internet. Available at <
http://img.hc360.com/cm/info/images/200809/200809100953125505.jpg> (accessed
17 June 2009).
b: National Library designed by CAG, Beijing, 2003.
The figure is from China, Selected Projects 2003, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press,
2003, p. 79. 56
Figure 3.11 a: The Innovation Center of Tsinghua Science Park, Beijing, 2000.
The figure is from China Architecture Design & Research Group (ed.), Selected Works of
China Architecture Design & Research Group 2004, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press,
2005, p.85.
b: Anhui Press Group, Anhui, 2002. c: No.5 Research Building of CAS Software Park, Beijing, 2004.
These two figures are from China Architecture Design & Research Group (ed.), Selected
vii Works of China Architecture Design & Research Group 2007, Beijing: Tsinghua
University Press, 2008, p. 139, p. 105. 59
Figure 3.12 Beijing Daxing Cultural Center, Beijing, 2002.
The figures are from China, Selected 2007, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2008, p.
19, p. 21. 60
Figure 3.13 Huaersen Digital Center, Beijing, 2000.
The figure is from China, Selected Projects 2003, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press,
2003, p. 47. 61
Figure 3.14 Fengzeyuan Hotel, Beijing, 1991
The photo was taken by the author in May, 2009. 64
Figure 3.15 Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press, Beijing, 1995.
The figure is from Cui Kai, Gongcheng Baogao (Projects Report), Beijing: Zhongguo
Jianzhu Gongye Chubanshe, 2002, p. 24. 65
Figure 3.16 a: Modern Town Apartment Tower, Beijing, 1996. b: Phase II of Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press, Beijing, 1998.
The figures are from China Architecture Design & Research Group (ed.), Selected Works
of China Architecture Design & Research Group 2002, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press,
2002, p. 94, p. 31. 66
Figure 3.17 a: Innovation Center of Tsinghua Science Park, Beijing, 2000. b: Office Building of China Academy of Urban Planning & Design, Beijing, 2001.
These two figures are from China, Selected 2004, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press,
2005, p.85, p. 93.
c: Anhui Publishing Building, Hefei, 2002.
The figure is from China, Selected 2007, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2008, p. 139.
67
Figure 3.18 a: Yifu Building in Beijing Foreign Studies University, Beijing, 2000.
The figure is from China, Selected 2002, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2002, p. 53.
b: College of Life Science in Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 2002.
The figure is from China Architecture Design & Research Group (ed.), Selected Works of viii China Architecture Design & Research Group 2006, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press,
2006, p. 130. 68
Figure 3.19 a: International Conference Center of FLTRP, Beijing, 2001.
The figure is from China, Selected 2004, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2005, p.31.
b: Artron Color Printing Center, Beijing, 2002.
The figure is from China, Selected 2006, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2006, p.
109.
c: Ziwei Resort Village, Xi’an, 2002.
The figure is from China, Selected 2004, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2005, p.207.
d: Sofware Engineer Apartment of Dalian Software Park, Dlian, 2003.
The figure is from China, Selected 2007, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2008, p. 117.
69
Figure 3.20 a: Beijing Digital Press Information Center, Beijing, 2003.
The photo was taken by the author in May, 2009.
b: Chinese Embassy in South Africa, Pretoria, 2004.
The figure is from the official website of CAG. Available at <
http://www.cadreg.com/works/content.asp?workclass=0&worksubject=0&id=210>
(accessed 17 June 2009).
c: Liangshan Nationality Cultural Art Museum, Xichang, 2005.
The figure is from the official website of CAG. Available at <
http://www.cadreg.com/works/content.asp?workclass=0&worksubject=0&id=335>
(accessed 17 June 2009).
d: Suzhou Railway Station, Suzhou, 2008.
The figure is from the official website of CAG. Available at <
http://www.cadreg.com/works/content.asp?workclass=0&worksubject=0&id=374>
(accessed 17 June 2009). 70
Figure 3.21 a: Wunvshan Ruins Museum, Liaoning, 2003. b: Yin Ruins Museum, Anyang, 2003.
The figures are from Cui Kai, Native Design, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2008, p.
90, p. 76.
ix c: Dunhuang Museum, Dunhuang, 2003.
The figure is from the official website of CAG. Available at <
http://www.cadreg.com/works/content.asp?workclass=0&worksubject=0&id=200>
(accessed 17 June 2009). 71
Figure 3.22 Children’s Hospital by Hua Lanhong, Beijing, 1952.
The figure is from the internet. Available at <
http://www.chinabaike.com/article/UploadPic/2007-5/20075623503377.jpg> (accessed
17 June 2009). 83
Figure 3.23 Telegraph Building by Lin Leyi, Beijing, 1955.
The photo was taken by the author in May, 2009. 84
x List of Charts
Chart 2.1 A brief history of the Chinese architect.
The chart is made by the author. 14
Chart 3.1 Relationships among the design institute and other parties in architectural design practice in different periods in the post-Mao era.
The chart is made by the author. 39
Chart 3.2 Design fee as percent of total construction.
The chart is from Chuihua Judy Chung, Jeffrey Inaba, Rem Koolhaas, Sze Tsung Leong
(eds), Great Leap Forward, Cologne: Taschen, 2001, p. 704. 89
xi CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem statement
China’s architectural practice has attracted attentions from all over the world. Despite our increasing knowledge about the quantity and speed of architects’ practice, however, critical issues concerning the working mechanism of architects remain not well explored. If we try to acquire a deep insight into the architectural practice in contemporary China, it is inevitable that we include the government-directed system of design institutes, which has played a leading role in the design industry for approximately six decades. The grand scale and tremendous influence in huge constructions secured large design institutes an exceptional position in the design market of China, even though there has been a rise of private design firms in the new century.
Originally formed in the Maoist era (1949 - 1976), state-owned design institutes experienced several waves of reform in the post-Mao era (after 1976) but have continued the use of an institutional framework to present. With public ownership, these institutes are influenced by governmental policies more than market factors. They play a delicate role in between working for state demands and that for commercial interests. This unique way of operation distinguished the design institute from other forms of architectural practice, especially private practice commonly accepted in western countries.
In relation to this particular mode of architectural practice, three issues must be raised. One concerns common and consistent features of the practice in design institutes in the post-Mao era. The condition of design institute was widely discussed in terms of the management, the reform and the optimization of the institutional system. Yet distinctiveness of architectural forms and languages is rarely mentioned in the current 1 scholarship. From the perspective of architecture discipline, an analytical summary of the institutes’ works must be made. The second issue concerns a socio-political mechanism underlying the practice of design institutes. Beneath the surface of practice, how do the design institutes facilitate the objectives of the government? What is the relationship between a government-orientated operation and the design strategies of individual architects? What are the approaches adopted to mediate these forces or considerations? This deserves a further exploration.
The third issue concerns a perspective needed in examining the practice in design institutes. Current observations usually adopt viewpoints of the architectural profession and promote the autonomy of professionals in the argument. Based on this perspective, interaction between the design institutes and the government is constantly criticized as found everywhere in existing studies. However, since the design institutes bear more than the specific interests of the individual professionals, I think there is potentially a larger-scale perspective needed for a critical inquiry, in which long-term objectives of the state as reflected in the design institute should be concerned. Given the demands of the country’s modernization, in what way shall we evaluate the significance of the design institutes? Is there any rationality for such a system in a fast developing country such as China? Placed in a geo-global context, what are the implications of this system for theorizing China’s architectural practice?
I would like to deal with the first and the second issues continuously in a case study in the following chapter and then propose a theoretical framework in conclusion, which seeks to answer the questions relevant to the third issue.
2
1.2 Literature review
The condition of the state-owned design institute has been a hot topic in the academic circle since the beginning of China’s reform. A large amount of work has been dedicated to empirical research of the design institute since the late 1970s, although analytical study remains absent in the following years. In this research, first of all, I will review the relevant literature concerning the practice of design institutes in the post-Mao era.
A History of Modern Chinese Architecture (2000), written by Zou Denong, is possibly the most integrated and informative book concerning the practice of state-owned design institutes, which particularly has described the development of the design institutes by collecting and compiling materials from architectural journals and official documents of public sectors. Within a grand historiography of modern Chinese architecture, the author refers to the design institutes from the following perspectives: the changes of the professional system; the important works of some design institutes; and the design ideas of architects. Zou has offered valuable work in the empirical study of design institutes with a large quantity of photographs and historical records, although the design institute is not discussed as a specific problem. The chapters of this book are divided and sorted in a chronological order, so relevant issues about the design institutes are dealt with separately in different chapters.
Through reviewing this book, I have found the following problems. Firstly, Zou’s interpretation of the works of design institutes merely stays on the description of formal languages. He illustrated with lots of photographs of buildings in the book and made some short comment upon each one, but didn’t try to link them together and develop an analysis on the features in common. Limited summaries on the forms and styles of these buildings are still far away from a critical observation, as there is rarely any analysis on the underlying mechanism to support an argument. Secondly, Zou neglected the
3 institutional particularity of the design institute and its socio-political significance in the post-Mao era. Without a comparison to the rising private practices after 2000, Zou didn’t regard the design institute as an exceptional form of architectural practice, and seldom analyzed the influence from the government in the operation of design institutes. Placing the problem in the context of the current environment of China, however, the uniqueness of design institutes acquires a closer study as their practice might have important implications in theorizing modern architecture of China. Issues concerning the interactions between governmental operations and the practice of design institutes remain unexplored in Zou’s book.
Thirdly, there is a preconceived notion in Zou’s assessment of the design institute. Despite the absence of an analytical study on the governmental influences, Zou expressed his discontents with the relationship between government and design institutes by showing his opposition to the intervention of the government in architectural practice. According to him, the influences from the political authority should be abolished in the practice of architects.1 Zou’s argument proceeds from the perspective of the architectural profession, which emphasizes the independence of the profession over other issues. Within this perspective, however, socio-political factors in relation to the design practice are easy to be overlooked. Limited by this perspective, Zou’s book fails to look into the contribution of the design institute to the country’s development in specific historical context, and the significance of this practicing mode in the current design market. A broader view in the observation of the design institute should be adopted in any future research on the issue.
Besides the historian’s study like Zou’s works, there is other scholarship focusing on the reform of design institutes. Investigations from this perspective are well developed in a special issue of Time + Architecture (2004), which is an architectural journal published by Tongji University Press in Shanghai. With the participation of managers, architects and scholars, this journal published a series of papers concentrating on the system of design institutes. These papers could be roughly classified into three 4 categories. The first one provides a review of the history of the reform adopted in the large design institutes. The second one concerns the reform of large design institutes in comparison with their foreign counterparts. The last one focuses on the privatization of small and medium-sized state-owned practices, anticipating that the similar mode would also lead the privatization of large design institutes.
These papers indeed offer a rational reflection in terms of business operation. Scholars express strong concerns on the privatization of large design institutes, while the managers of design institutes seem to avoid discussing the ownership issue but focus on the issues of professionalization and technical specification. Their essential approaches, however, share the same outlook, which proceeds from market factors in the operation of design institutes. ‘Design Institute with Chinese Characteristics’, written by Charlie Xue, well represents this standpoint. With a retrospective and analysis on the reform of design institutes, Xue argues that the operation of the old state-owned design institutes will have to be more market-orientated, and suggests large design institutes to follow the mode of foreign large design firms.2
Amongst these studies, I find a principal problem, that none of them tries to analyze the governmental influence in depth, despite the emphasis on market factors. Parallel to the impact of the market, influence of a direction from the government also plays a significant role in the design institutes. There seems to be a socio-political mechanism underlying the reservation of design institutes’ public ownership, which should be studied along with an analysis of marketing issues. Furthermore, in order to critically evaluate governmental influence, the problem needs to be placed in the context of a socio-economic environment, rather than within the perspective of a market-orientated operation. Xue’s position is still open to discussion, since governmental influence must be included for a more comprehensive analysis.
The topic of the design institute also intrigues attentions in English publications. ‘The Emergence of a Profession: Development of the Profession of Architecture in China’ 5 (2008) published in Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, written by Thomas Kvan, is a systemic observation on the trajectory of design institutes’ evolution. The author looks back on the development of the architectural profession since early twentieth century, and predicts the future direction of the professional system based on a study of the current situation. According to Kvan, after the withdrawal of the government’s direct control in architectural practice, the profession of architecture will transform into private practice. He recommends design institutes to take ‘revolution, not evolution’, that is, to disband and reconstitute themselves with different participants in order to reposition themselves.3 The author doesn’t directly evaluate the participation of the government in design institutes, but expresses his implicit disagreement with this mode in his anticipation of the future development of the design institutes.
Observing from the perspective of professional system, Kvan proposes to define the position of design institutes within a western framework of architectural profession. However, this isn’t an easy task as there are certainly lots of differences in reality. Different from the market-orientated and autonomous system of architectural profession in western countries, the participation of the Chinese government in architectural practice reveals complex socio-political considerations beyond the concerns of pure enterprise operation. In Kvan’s approach, the design institute has to be placed in the context of an open market to develop the analysis, but the fact remains that the government still plays a leading role in regulating the design market. To understand reality, it isn’t enough to merely observe from the angle of the profession. A macro scope concerning the objectives of the government should be included. Furthermore, the operative mode of the design institute includes close relationships with China’s distinguished socio-political environment. To discern an underlying mechanism in the operation of the institutes, it is necessary to adopt a cross-cultural perspective, instead of a direct application of western perspectives.
Concentrating on the topic of design institutes, scholars from China and English-speaking countries have offered researches in this field in different perspectives. 6 In summary, following problems exist in the methodologies of the existing literature. Firstly, despite limited descriptions of architectural works, studies on design institutes rarely extend to the interpretative analysis of design institutes’ works. Comparisons of architects’ design agenda between different modes of practice remain a gap. Secondly, the influence of the government and its relevant working mechanism are seldom analyzed in depth, although national government in China plays a crucial role in the real practice of design institutes. It is also advisable to examine the relationship between government-orientated operations and design agendas of architects. Lastly, the perspective used in current observations is restrained to the field of the architectural profession. A larger scope in relation to socio-political factors deserves to be explored in the assessment of design institutes. My research is to address these issues with a case study on a state-owned design institute.
7
1.3 About this research
Research aims
This research is an attempt to examine the practice in large state-owned design institute in the post-Mao era (1976 - present) in China. Based on the existing scholarship, this inquiry aims to develop an analytical study on the working mechanism underlying this distinguished mode of architectural practice. The purpose of this research consists of three aspects with an aim to develop deep analysis and insights.
Firstly, taking a renowned design institute as an example, I will review the works of this design institute for a further interpretation. In response to the lack of analytical penetration in current observations, I would like to deal with issues of forms and agendas of design works with a detailed and differentiated analysis. Secondly, looking beneath the surface, I will examine the relationship between the architectural practice of the design institute and the influence of the government. The design ideas and approaches of architects will be linked to the working mechanism of the design institute. Thirdly, I will explore a new perspective in observing the practice of design institutes, one which comprises a larger scope with concerns about the socio-political context of contemporary China. The third aspect also includes a discussion concerning ‘criticality’.
Today, the study of the design institute acquires a new significance. During the past three decades, China has witnessed an unprecedented upsurge of construction at astonishing speed. Thousands of design institutes have played a leading role in this process. It is worth rethinking the significance of this practicing mode. This might be able to provide inspirations for future practice, especially in the developing countries. This research aims to respond to the issues in this context as well, with a conclusion open to future debate.
9
Research questions
1. Compared to the work developed in other modes of practice, what are the distinguished features in the work of the design institutes in the post-Mao era? 2. What is the relationship between government-orientated operations and design agendas of architects in these design institutes? 3. Observing from a long-term perspective for the country as a whole, what assessment is to be given to the system of the design institutes?
Fieldwork
To acquire first-hand resources, I have conducted a fieldwork in Beijing from May to June in 2009.
During the fieldwork, I visited the China Architecture Design and Research Group (CAG), which is an important example in this research. In the headquarters of CAG, I interviewed Cui Kai, who is the Chief Architect of this institute. We had a conversation on the issues concerning the history, the reform, the working mechanism, and the operation of the institute. I also asked questions about the architect’s considerations in his design practice, and acquired valuable responses. Important books and folios about or from CAG are collected in this trip, with the help of Cui Kai and his assistant.
A photographic survey was conducted during my trip in Beijing. I visited important buildings designed by CAG’s architects, including those finished in the Maoist era (1949 - 1976). Hundreds of photographs are collected from different sites. Relevant information about these buildings is also recorded, including the construction time, the building size, and the architect’s name. In addition, I have collected related information from books, journals and documents, which are published in Chinese.
10 A note on method
In relation to the method adopted in this research, following issues need to be explained in a few words.
This research is to be conducted as an analytical study, which tries to look into the working mechanism of design institutes, rather than describing the history of design institutes or the formal appearance of their works. It is necessary to use analytical method in this specific case, as the practice of state-owned design institutes has close relationship to various socio-political issues, which are often considered as outside the boundaries of the architecture discipline. Without an examination on this relationship, we are unable to penetrate the phenomenon and critically evaluate the significant of this practicing mode. In this sense, a social and interpretative analysis with focuses on socio-political operations is not only important, but also desirable.
A Cross-cultural perspective is to be employed in this research. I have to confess that, the Chinese profession of architecture is closely associated with influences from western countries. Former scholars, from both China and western countries, have made effort in adopting western frameworks in theorizing the practice of design institutes. Yet intentionality of the Chinese architect remains unexplored, and the uniqueness of the socio-political environment in China deserves to be concerned in studies. To acquire a critical argument, this research does not restrict itself to the definitions of the architectural profession in the western framework, but tries to absorb some significant notions in the Chinese philosophy tentatively.
It is also needed to mention that, this research will try to cross the divide of eras in analysis. Current scholarships usually deal with problems in the Maoist era and that in the post-Mao era separately. In the field of the design institute, there are few studies focusing on the Maoist legacy in the post-Mao era. Despite the necessity to divide eras, the interrelations between these two eras are actually the pivot of this study. Comparing 11 to other modes of practice, the state-owned design institutes exhibit a strong persistence, despite the reform in recent decades, from the Maoist to the post-Mao time. In order to comprehend the practice of design institutes in the post-Mao era, this study has to be associated with an analytical retrospective of the Maoist era.
Thesis structure
This study comprises four chapters. Chapter one is an introduction of this research, including a statement of the problem, a literature review, and the methods and approaches adopted in the study. Chapter two includes a brief review on the history of the Chinese architect and a theoretical discussion on the ‘critical’ and ‘post-critical’ discourse. The theoretical discussion aims to discover the important notions studied in existing scholarship, and define a measurement of the ‘critical’ dimensions, which will be borrowed in the analysis in this research.
Chapter three, which covers seven sections, is a case study on a renowned state-owned design institute, China Architecture Design and Research Group (CAG). Section one is a brief introduction of this institute, which is followed by the studies on its history and reform in section two and three respectively. Section four and Section five review the works of CAG, trying to find the common and consistent features. Section six and seven are the key processes, which explore the relationship between the working mechanism of CAG and the phenomenon of its works.
Chapter four is a conclusion of this study. It is composed by three sections. Section one is a summary of the review of CAG’s works. Section two reveals the result of the investigation on the working mechanism of CAG. Based on the abovementioned studies, a theoretical assessment on the system of design institutes is developed in section three. An argument is proposed tentatively at the end of this research, in attempt to raise issues for discussions on ‘criticality’ in future study.
12 CHAPTER 2
HISTORICAL REVIEW AND THEORECTICAL DISCUSSION
2.1 A Brief history of the Chinese architect
‘Architect’ usually refers to a modern profession which was originally formed in Europe. According to The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought, a precisely defined modern profession ought to include formal qualification based on education and examinations, the emergence of regulatory bodies with powers to admit and discipline members, and some degree of monopoly rights.4 According to this definition, before the end of the imperial age in China, those people who worked in the building industry were mason or craftsmen rather than independent professionals. The history of modern Chinese architect has not begun until the beginning of the twentieth century and has only lasted nearly a hundred years until present.
Although the milestones are always controversial, it will not harm to observe the evolution of the architectural profession within the political history, as the crucial transformations in political history usually mark the major mutations of the professional environment. From this perspective, the year of 1949 and 1976 should be identified as significant divides. The establishment of a unified government by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 1949 not only ended the long-term war in mainland, but also formed a state-sponsored system based on the ‘leftist’ ideology, which largely influenced China in the following decades. The time spans before and after 1949 are called ‘Jindai’ (early modern period) and ‘Xiandai’ (modern period) respectively. The death of Mao Zedong in 1976 marked the end of the intensive ideological campaigns, and the beginning of the complicated dialogue between the mainland China and the world capitalist system. The history after 1976 is also called the post-Mao era.
13
Chart 2.1 A brief history of the Chinese architect
Early Modern Era (1911 - 1949)
The emergence of the modern architectural profession is associated with the colonial movement in China in late nineteenth century and the twentieth century. After the Opium War, the prosperity of some coastal cities provided economic and institutional foundations for the architectural profession. Before the Chinese architect stepped into the stage, western architects have already lead pilot practices in these colonial cities. Culturally speaking, these practices at least made the profession known to the Chinese, and encouraged Chinese students to study architecture abroad. According to the archives, those Chinese architects educated in western countries in early twentieth century came back to China as a trend in the 1920s.5 They became a driving force in the formation of the architectural profession in modern China.
From 1927 to 1937, the so-called ‘Nanjing Decade’, a government dominated by the Nationalist Party maintained a relatively peaceful environment in China. Compared to the chaotic war among the warlords after 1911 Revolution, the Anti-Japanese War in
14 World War II after 1937 and the civil war aftermath, this decade was the only peaceful period in the early modern history of China. During this period, a relatively complete and systemic architectural profession quickly formed in some major cities.
Firstly, in these cities with economic or political importance, Chinese architects established their own design firms. Lu Yanzhi, who graduated from Cornell University in the US, established the earliest one - Yanji Design Firm (1921, Shanghai). The other two well-known firms during the same period were, ‘Jitai Gongchengsi’ (1921, Tianjin) by Guan Songsheng, Zhu Bin, Yang Tingbao and Yang Kuanlin, and ‘Huagai Shiwusuo’ (1930, Shanghai) by Zhao Shen, Chen Zhi and Tong Jun.6 Secondly, some Chinese scholars established the earliest schools of architecture. The department of architecture in Suzhou Gongye Zhuanmen Xuexiao (1924, Suzhou) was usually considered as the earliest, founded by Liu Shiying, Liu Dunzhen, Zhu Shigui and Huang Zumiao, who all studied architecture in Japan. The Faculty of Architecture and Construction in Zhongyang University founded by Liu Futai (1927, Nanjing), Northeast University (1928, Shenyang) founded by Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin, and those from other schools of architecture contribute greatly to the education of domestic architects. The pioneers of architectural education generally have oversea educational background: Liu studied in Oregon University, while Liang and Lin graduated from Pennsylvania University.7 Thirdly, Chinese architects organized their own professional societies. The Shanghai Society of Architects established in 1927 was renamed the Society of Chinese Architects in the next year and published documents of regulations and ethics. Previous research considered the self-position and objectives of the society to be similar to the British architectural club in the eighteenth century.8
Nevertheless, during the ‘Nanjing Decade’, a professional system of architecture was quickly built up. The characteristics of this system clearly represented the influences from the West. The system of practices, education programs and societies largely learned from the European prototype. Those architects who studied in the US, Japan and the Europe played significant role in transferring the modern ideas from the West to 15 China. They established an independent, professional-conscious, and self-disciplined architectural system in a short period. However, in terms of the professional environment, such a system was fragile. Long-term wars left limited opportunities for economic development, and building programs were restricted in several scattered cities. The mitigation of firms and schools caused by war also hampered the development of the industry.
Maoist Era (1949 – 1976)
The year of 1949 witnessed the born of the People’s Republic of China. In the following year, the CCP achieved a comprehensive domain of the mainland and ended the three-year civil war. In the early 1950s, the socialist transformation promoted by the CCP significantly mutated the working environment of architects. Former private practices were absorbed and integrated into the state-owned, central planning system. Such transformation was accomplished by 1952. Based on Marxist ideal of public ownership, all the architectural practices were incorporated into the management of a huge public government.
During the ‘Cold War’ period, intensive leftist policies dominated the social production. With the gradual elimination of capital and free market, those clients and projects that Chinese architect used to work for no longer exist. Architects had to serve the new system in order to survive. The CCP theoretically negated the legality of private ownership and build up a new state-owned system with compulsive means.
The new system deconstructed private practices and integrated these dispersive and independent firms into a system of ‘Danwei’ (working unit). They served for different collective objectives, in which the objective of the state was given the highest priority. All architectural practices were called ‘design institute’ and established according to the administrative areas and industrial sectors. The central government, the government of grand administrative area, the provincial government and the municipal government all 16 had their own design institute, to support the corresponding building plan. This kind of design institute was usually named after the geographical areas, such as the Southwest Architectural Design & Research Institute (CSWADI) and Beijing Municipal Institute of Architecture Design (BIAD). Different industrial branches of government, including ministries, committees, bureaus and offices, also had their own design institute, in order to meet special industrial demands, such as the Institute of Project Planning & Research of Ministry of Machine Building Industry and the Metallurgical Industry Design Institute. Since all building programs of the society were directed by the government, it was necessary to establish such a huge and complicated system to meet all the needs.
In the system of design institutes, design tasks were assigned to certain institute according to the administrative area and level. The architects worked anonymously and gained fixed income from the governmental budget, as same as labors in other industries. The design institute was not a financially independent enterprise, but a serving component of the government, responsible for the building programs in the ‘Five-year Plan’ of the state. The association of architects was significantly different from the western counter parts, as it was a governmental sector rather than an independent organization. The objective of the society was not to promote the benefits of the architectural profession, as the state interest was regarded as the highest. The educational system was also government-sponsored, with the writing of textbook and the arrangement of courses aiming to prepare professionals for design institutes. The combination of professional education and practice in universities also contributed to the emergence of university design institutes, such as the Architectural Design and Research Institute of Tsinghua University and the Architectural Design and Research Institute of Tongji University.
Observing from inside outwards, the professional system in the Maoist era largely blurred the characteristics of architectural profession, if measured with western paradigms. The title of ‘architect’ was rarely used in the entire Maoist era, as architects were usually considered as one kind of engineers. In the early age of this system, there 17 was once an intensive contradiction between the collectivistic ideology and individual-based creativity, which reached a peak when Hua Lanhong and Chen Zhanxiang were criticized in 1957. The struggle for the autonomy of this profession was effectively suppressed by the ‘Anti-rightist Campaign’ in 1957. The ‘Design Revolution’ in 1965 strengthened this trend by further lowering the status of intellectuals in design practice. A relatively steady system was built and consolidated, although the ideological struggle remained intensive. Observing from the opposite direction, the fast constitution of this system provided important support to the large-scale building plan in this relatively peaceful age. This collectivism-orientated professional system covered most areas of China, providing cheap and massive design services. This unique system also contributed to the design ideas of the Chinese architects, which deeply influenced the history of modern Chinese architecture.
Post-Mao Era (1976 - present)
The intensive ideological campaigns since 1966 began to retreat as Mao Zedong passed away in 1976. Internally, the CCP gradually reduced the dominance of public ownership. Externally, China began to partly participate in the world capitalist system. This transformation brought complicated shifts in political sense, especially a transition from ideological controversy to developmentalism. Former state-owned design institutes were involved in a reform process, and private practices have emerged since the middle 1990s and appeared as a new participant in design market.
The state-owned system of design institute experienced changes in both economic and managerial aspects. Since the early 1980s, the government stopped providing funding to design institutes, breaking up the economic relationship between the institute and the government. The practitioners of reform began to learn entrepreneurial operation from the western countries. The establishment of branches in Hong Kong could be seen as the earliest attempts of some large design institutes. With the universal adoption of market principle after Deng Xiaoping’s second tour in southern China, 18 capitalization began in state-owned enterprises. In this grand reform, the connection between the government and the design institutes was largely weakened. In economic terms, like the state-owned enterprises in other industries, design institutes support the state finance through different mechanisms of taxation and profit-sharing, while the tax reduction in 1992 released more space for the independent operation of the institutes. In managerial sense, the CCP branch in the administrative board still kept invisible control of the government and maintained a subtle balance between the governmental policies and economic strategies. Around 2003, the government implemented a policy of ‘maintaining the big and releasing the small’, which maintained the public ownership of large design institutes but privatized the small and medium design institutes. Some of the reformed design institutes still kept CCP system and remained the connection to the government.
Outside the state-owned system, private design enterprises have already been approved since the early 1980s. The establishment of registration system of architect around 1995 laid the foundation of private practice. According to the existing literature, the registration system of China mainly followed the model of NCARB in the US, which brought the professional system closer to the market-based liberalism. Since the middle 1990s, the earliest architects, who departed from the state-owned system or came back from abroad, distinguished themselves in private practices, such as Liu Jiakun and Chang Yung Ho. In 2001, China joined in the World Trade Organization, and two corresponding policies further removed the limits of private enterprises and oversea enterprises. There emerged a rise of private enterprises in design industry, associated with the privatization of small and medium design institutes. The practice of oversea architects also played an important role in China’s design market since 2000, as the high level market was usually occupied by oversea design enterprises. Some avant-garde architects attracted attention in the media. Most of these architects were from private practice.
In a dual system with state and private ownership, current study is insufficient from 19 predicting a main tendency. The boundaries between state-owned institutes and private practices are ambiguous, as the state-owned design institutes are partly operated under market principles while some private firms still maintain the managerial characteristics of the state-owned institutes, not to say those reforming enterprises in between. The registration system has formally defined the status of the architectural profession and strengthened its independence, but the society of architects still has governmental characteristics, different from the autonomous mode in the West. The mechanism of the professional practice is neither capitalist nor socialist. Both the public ownership and private ownership coexist in the same market. One is not replacing the other but interact with each other in complex ways. The professional system has strengthened the autonomy of the profession but there is also a participation of the governmental influences.
In the post-Mao era, no matter with what kind of identity, the Chinese architects have contributed to the fastest modernization in the world by providing a great quantity of design services. The brutal and large-scale development fastened a context of modernization different from the western way – the size, quantity and speed of building projects were enormous, especially since the early 1990s. To theorize the abovementioned phenomenon in such a condition, there needs to be a framework which is related to the political and social context of China. A potential ‘Chinese pattern’ in professional practice is open to further research.
20
2.2 Theoretical discussion about the ‘critical’ discourse
Review of the ‘critical’ discourse in North America
The debate between the ‘critical’ and the ‘post-critical’ in North America has been recorded in George Baird’s essay, Criticality and Its Discontents. As he observed, the concept of ‘critical architecture’, which has been insisted by Peter Eisenman and Michael Hays in American academia for past decades, is challenged by some young theorists and critics led by Michael Speaks, Robert Somol and Sarah Whiting. Eisenman and Hays have theorized ‘criticality’ as a design agenda against market-orientated culture in contemporary society. With such an agenda, rigorous and restrictive design approaches were developed to resist the dominance of market in design practice. This agenda is criticized by the ‘post-critical’ camp, for its irrelevancy with practice and the restriction of creative thinking.9
In his essay, Baird carefully divides these theorists and critics into two camps, the ‘critical’ and the ‘post-critical’. According to him, while the ‘critical’ camp claims to set up a political agenda against market and commerce, the ‘post-critical’ camp, especially Speaks, questions the significance of this agenda in the contemporary society and further asks to discard the ideological constraints in architecture theory. ‘Post-critical’ voices oppose the theoretical foundation of the ‘critical architecture’, resisting market, and appeal for a more tolerant agenda in observing commercial practice.
For Speaks, an approach of ‘intelligence’, which sources information from mass culture, has offered inspirations.10 With this approach, architects could acquire more resources for creative thinking than the rigorous and restrictive ‘critical architecture’. For Koolhaas, the political agenda of resisting market was inefficient in his practice in the Asia. According to him, the concept of ‘negation’ or ‘resistance’ is too far away from
21 the imperious demands of society. Additionally, he has found collaboration with the state politics important in his design program, a case which has potentials to challenge the western concepts, if his approach is to be taken seriously.11
The looking glasses of Speaks and Koolhaas are different. Speaks observes the issue within the western environment, while Koolhaas turns his sight to the Asia, where a new-born market is playing an important role in the upsurge of construction. The difference between these two ‘post-critical’ approaches is: Koolhaas tries to connect the ‘critical’ debate with the context of Asia. According to him, China’s design practice is potential to provide a new perspective in architecture theory, including the concept of ‘criticality’. At the end, he emphasizes the study of China and asks for a parallel study in both the West and the East.12
Besides the classification of the ‘critical’ and the ‘post-critical’ camps, Baird has also mentioned the ambiguousness and interactions between these two opposite agendas. He doesn’t think that this divergence of ideas has reached a clear conclusion. However, it is clear that the debate of ‘criticality’ is becoming more focused in a geo-graphical sense, as the practice in developing countries have been included in discussion.
Review of the ‘critical’ discourse in China
The debate in North America is followed in China. In the Chinese architectural journal, Time + Architecture, several architects and theorists raised arguments on the issues concerning ‘criticality’ and ‘critical’ practice. The discourse is raised by Zhu Jianfei’s essay, Criticality in between China and the West, in which he argues for a geographical and cross-cultural perspective in the study of China, the West and other regions. He discusses a two-way communication in between China and the West as evidenced in the work of Rem Koolhaas, Chang Yung Ho, Liu Jiakun, and Ma Qingyun. According to the author, as well as the flow of ‘critical’ ideas from the West to China, there is also a flow of ‘post-critical’ ideas on the opposite. At the end, the author 22 observes the ‘in-between’ space where a third position is found. This non-dualistic philosophy is further explored in Zhu’s following studies.13
The counter-argument is from the essay, The ‘Criticality’ Debate in the West and the Architectural Situation in China: Thoughts on the Essay ‘Criticality in between China and the West’, written by Zhu Tao. Firstly, he thinks that the debate between the ‘critical’ and the ‘post-critical’ has not reached its conclusion. Secondly, he questions the idea that China acts as the largest explorer of the impetus that is effectively ‘post-critical’. Thirdly, he suggests examining the ‘rising criticality’, including the ‘criticality of formal language’ and the ‘criticality of social practice’. Based on a focus on the ‘neo-liberalism’ in China, he calls for a ‘careful reflection’ of Chinese architects.14
In this debate, scholars observe the problem in different perspectives. In Zhu Jianfei’s essay, a new framework of inclusiveness and gradient is established to reinterpret ‘criticality’ in the historical context of China. Illustrating Chang Yung Ho, Liu Jiakun and Ma Qingyun as evidences, Zhu thinks that there has emerged ‘avant-garde’ or ‘critical’ architecture in China’s practice. He has also noticed that there have emerged an ‘in-between’ agenda in the design thinking of Chinese architects, which is alert to market influences but choose to participate in commercial practice. This ‘value free’ is opposed in Zhu Tao’s essay, in which he sharply criticized the ‘neo-liberalism’ in China. According to him, commercial practice has reflected compromising agenda to market and capital. He further questioned the ‘critical’ significance of these practice with a rigorous standard of examination. At the end, an argument is raised with strong political considerations against the ‘neo-liberalism’.
This debate has attracted attentions on the issues of ‘criticality’ in China. In relation to the ‘critical’ topic, scholarships have made attempt to employ this concept in the analysis of China’s practice from different perspectives. This ongoing discourse is still absorbing new ideas and exploring new possibilities, but the definition and criterion of 23 ‘criticality’ remains focused in argument. What is ‘critical’ in China’s architectural practice? In what way shall we use this measurement in the assessment of design works? This appears as an inevitable problem in the studies in this field.
Redefinition of ‘criticality’: a theoretical discussion
Based on the reviews above, I will go further into a theoretical discussion and define necessary concepts in relevance to ‘criticality’, which are to be adopted in the following parts.
In respect of the original meaning, the term of ‘critical’ represents a disobedient attitude against the status quo. This concept has been borrowed in architecture theory since the early 1980s.15 According to Michael Hays, ‘critical architecture’ is resistant to the self-confirming, conciliatory operations of a dominant culture and yet irreducible to a purely formal structure disengaged from the contingencies of place and time.16 In the ‘critical’ debate in North America, this concept combines with political and ideological critique, targeting on market-orientated culture and commercialism in contemporary society.
Regarding China’s architectural practice, it is still controversial whether the concept of ‘criticality’ is appropriate in interpreting the phenomenon. Is it applicable to use the concept of ‘critical’ in analyzing Chinese architecture as well as in western theories? Different standpoints have appeared in discourse. Some scholars observe the problem within the framework of western theories, while others oppose this point of view, as evidenced in the abovementioned debate. However, the approach associated with China’s context, proposed by Zhu Jianfei, is worth a focus.
Zhu argues for a perspective in historical-critical rather than theoretical-critical, that is, to find and observe problems in the historical context of China’s architecture, instead of prioritizing the abstract concepts focused in western theories.17 In this sense, Zhu has 24 made attempt to identify the main trends of design ideas in history, and further explored the definition of ‘critical architecture’ in the background of China. According to Zhu, a Beaux-Arts-based historicism and a socialist modernism have formed a mainstream context before the arrival of the post-Mao era. Several design practices in the 1990s, which tried to challenge and transcend these two traditions with formal, spatial and tectonic considerations, can be regarded as ‘critical’ in historical context.18 Zhu’s research does restrict itself to the constraints of ideological debate but tries to redefine the criterion of ‘critical’ in terms of China’s practice.
Another contribution of Zhu’s research is the dissertation against the dualistic thinking in some western scholarships. According to him, there isn’t an absolute attitude of resistance, as architectural practice always has to participate in social practice and to be influenced by capital and market. Zhu argues for an ‘in-between’ space, which ranges between challenging and participating in the status quo.19 Based on this theory, there is a degree of ‘criticality’ in measuring the resistant agenda of architectural practice. When a context of mainstream and an opposite direction of ‘critical’ are identified, a design approach can be positioned in this spectrum for further inquiry.
The redefinition and explanation of ‘criticality’ in Zhu’s research have provided a detailed and differentiated way of investigation. Firstly, the engagement with China’s practice can help connect the study with context closely. In this approach, the standard of ‘criticality’ is based on place and time of the investigation, avoiding irrelevant concepts and approaches. Secondly, the proposal of ‘in-between’ space enables us to observe the agenda of architect in gradient. In this way, China’s practice won’t be regarded as evenly ‘uncritical’ but will acquire theoretical significance in an internal system of evaluation.
In the following study, I will borrow this framework in examining the practice of design institutes. The ‘critical’ dimension, which concerns the degree of confrontation between the design agenda and the mainstream context, is a major focus in observation. 25 The term of ‘criticality’, in this research, is used to measure the degree of resistant agenda against the dominant culture in China’s architectural practice. I will limit the application of ‘criticality’ in the field of architecture discipline, that is, to explore the ‘critical’ dimension in terms of architectural forms, spaces and languages. I believe that, a theoretical analysis must be based on an observation of architecture. The dimensions of time and place are also to be concerned in this inquiry.
26 CHAPTER 3
CASE STUDY ON A STATE-OWNED DESIGN INSTITUTE
3.1 Introduction
To understand the practice of state-owned design institutes, I will take the China Architecture Design and Research Group (CAG) as an example in this case study. With over 4000 staff members, CAG is possibly one of the largest design enterprises in the world. It is broadly recognized from its numerous design projects and its repute in large national constructions. Its participation in the project of the National Stadium for the 2008 Olympic Games revealed the influence of the institute in huge constructions.
CAG is not only the largest design institutes, but also has the longest history amongst all the state-owned design institutes in China. It was founded in 1949, and has witnessed almost the entire history of modern Chinese architecture. What is not known to outside, however, is intentionality developed within this institute. A systemic and analytical research is deserved to observe the evolution of its institutional system, the formation of its architects’ ideas and its social and philosophical contributions to the modern architecture of China.
This chapter is a case study on CAG, with investigations on the institute’s history, reform and design works. Beyond formal and aesthetic analysis, this chapter will further explore the relationships between political structures and economic realities and the shifts in architectural styles, in order to acquire an insight into the practice of CAG.
27
3.2 A history of CAG
Maoist Era (1949 – 1976)
CAG’s history can be traced back to early 1949, when a design and construction institute was founded in Beijing, in order to meet the need of office buildings for the central authority of the CCP. This institute, which was named ‘Zhongzhi Xiujianchu’, (Building Institute Directly under Central Government) hired the earliest professionals from Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Hong Kong. Dai Nianci was appointed as the head of the design office in the institute. At the same time, some earliest state-owned design and construction companies were founded in cities with economic importance. Private design firms were merged into state-owned institutes. The ‘Three Anti Campaign’ and ‘Five Anti Campaign’ in 1952 highly strengthened this trend. The proportion of private ownership in the building industry decreased from 35% to 1.7% in three years. Until 1952, ten design firms in Beijing have been merged into the institute, named ‘Design Company Directly under Central Management’, which is the precedent of CAG.20
In 1953, this institute was renamed ‘Zhongyang Renmin Zhengfu Jianzhu Gongchenbu Shejiyuan’ (Design Institute of the Ministry of Building Construction under the Central People’s Government). In 1954, two hundred architects and technicians were reassigned from Shanghai and other cities to the institute, which was renamed ‘Jianzhu Gongchengbu Sheji Zongju Gongye Ji Chengshi Jianzhu Shejiyuan’(Industrial and Urban Building Design Institute of Design Bureau of the Ministry of Building Construction). By the end of this year, the number of staff reached to over one thousand. 21 In 1955, the institute changed the name to ‘Jianzhu Gongchengbu Beijing Gongye Jianzhu Shejiyuan’ (Beijing Industrial Building Design Institute of the Ministry of Building Construction).22 In 1958, the institute founded five
29 studios, working on the fields of industrial building, civil building, foreign assistance building, national defense building and building standard respectively.
During the 1950s and 1960s, the institute mainly dedicated itself to industrial projects in cooperation with industrial sectors concerned. It took part in a series of major industrial projects during the First Five-Year Plan. Under the macro policy of the central government, industrial projects were the core content of the institute’s burden during this period.23
Simultaneously, the institute made contributions to a series of national public buildings in Beijing in the 1950s and 1960s, including two buildings in the Ten Grand Monuments for celebrating the ten-year anniversary of the republic in 1959. The most representative projects include West Block of Beijing Hotel (1954), Beijing Capital Theater (1955), Beijing Broadcast Building (1957), Beijing Telegraph Building (1958), Beijing Railway Station (1959), National Agricultural Exhibition Hall (1959), and China Art Gallery (1962).
Since 1956, the CCP government kept providing economic aid to other countries in the ‘socialist camp’. Administrated by the central government, the institute was the earliest one in participation of these foreign assistance projects. Besides industrial projects, the institute also worked on civil projects overseas, such as Choibalsan International Hotel (1960), Guinea People’s Hall (1967), International Conference Building of Sri Lanka (1974), and International Conference Building of Yemen Arab Republic (1979). The foreign assistance programs reached a peak in the 1970s with a systemic program of investigation, design and construction.24
The campaign of ‘Design Revolution’ launched by Mao Zedong brought substantial influences to the design industry in 1968. In August, the central government published an editorial commentary Working Class Must Lead Everything, which ordered the ‘Propaganda Team of Workers’ and the ‘Military Representative’ to take over all the 30 working units, including the design institutes. The institute was turned under military control.25 In 1969, over nine hundred professionals of the institute were sent to take ‘labor reform’ in Xinxiang in Henan province. And the institute was completely dissolved in the following year. The professionals were assigned to other working units in Shanxi, Henan and Hunan.26 According to A History of Modern Chinese Architecture, the institute suffered a great loss, as lots of equipments were lost, tons of drawings and archives were burned, and professionals were forced to leave the profession in this incident.
In 1971, eleven working units were merged into the ‘Guojia Jianwei Jianzhu Kexue Yanjiuyuan’ (Architectural Scientific Research Institute of the State Building Commission), under which institute was reestablished as a branch, named ‘Jianzhu Sheji Yanjiusuo’ (Architecture Design and Research Center) in 1973.27 Until the end of the ‘Cultural Revolution’, the task of the institute was limited due to the economic depression caused by intensive political movements.
Post-Mao Era (1976 – present)
In the 1980s, the institute undertook a series of reform as the government requested. Since the Third Plenum of the Eleventh Central Committee of the CCP in 1977, Chinese government began to carry out the ‘Reform and Opening’ policies. Deng Xiaoping’s speech in May 1980 speeded the reform in the design industry. Since 1979, contract charge system had been adopted in state-own design institutes. In 1983, the Ministry of Construction stopped providing funding to the design institutes, who need to charge design fees from the client.28
In 1983, the institute was renamed ‘Chengxiang Jianshe Huanjing Baohu Bu Jianzhu Shejiyuan’ (Building Design Institute of the Ministry of Urban and Rural Construction Environmental Protection). In June of 1988, it was renamed ‘Jianshebu Jianzhu Sheji Yanjiuyuan’ (Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction).29 According to Liu 31 Xunfan, the chief manager at that time, the institute adopted contracted responsibility system internally in 1992, which highly increased its efficiency and profit in the 1990s. 30 In April 2000, the institute officially departed from the Ministry of Construction and merged with other three institutes including China Building Technology Development Center, Urban Design Institute of Ministry of Construction and North China Municipal Engineering Design and Research Institute. It was named ‘Zhongguo Jianzhu Sheji Yanjiuyuan’ (China Architecture Design and Research Group), which was kept until present.31
With the growth of the market economy after 1976, the institute expanded its scale by merging other institutes and firms, especially in the 1990s. As early as 1980, a subsidiary of the institute, Hussen Architectural and Engineering Designing Consultant Ltd, was established in Hong Kong.32 Today, the institute has fifteen wholly-owned subsidiaries or holding companies, such as the China Urban Construction Design and Research Institute (1985), the Shanghai Zhongsen Building and Construction Design Consultant Ltd (1993), the Beijing Truebond Building Decoration Engineering Co. Ltd (1996), the North China Municipal Engineering Design and Research Institute (2000), the Zhongxu Architecture Design and Urbanism Planning Co. Ltd (2000) and the China Institute of Building Standard Design and Research (2003).33
Since the late 1970s, the institute has participated in all types of civil projects, from residential to office buildings. With the growth of business volume and the expansion of market, the institute acquired tasks from different areas of China. The most outstanding contribution was in the field of national public projects, including National Library of China (1987), Beijing International Hotel (1988), Headquarter of People’s Bank of China (1988), Beijing Media Center (1990), Office Building of Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1997).34 After 2000, the institute began to cooperate with international design firms in significant competitions, such as in Capital Museum (2005) with AREP and National Stadium ‘Bird Nest’ (2008) with Herzog & de Meuron.
32 Since 1980, the Ministry of Foreign Trade had been improving the system of foreign assistance. Contract responsibility system was applied in foreign projects since 1983. The institute began to enter into international market through contracting foreign constructions. Although its competence is limited, the institute is still able to take part in some important projects of the third world countries, such as the Office Building of Sierra Leone Government (1983) and Pakistan Gymnasium (1985).35
33
3.3 CAG’s reform
Since the beginning of the Maoist era, the state government has played dual roles in relation to CAG. The government acts as the owner as well as the client of CAG. The institute, whose income and funding of projects was provided by the government, did not charge any fees from the client. 36 Although the institute provided design services to the client, there wasn’t any business relationship between them. (Chart 3.1a) This is a highly collectivistic and government-orientated system, in which neither the institute nor the client had independent intentions other than the governmental plans. Against this background, reforms in the post-Mao era made a breakthrough and gradually introduced market mechanism into CAG. Marked by the changes of the business relationships among the participants in project, I would suggest that there are three crucial moments, respectively in the 1980s, the 1990s and the 2000s, that witnessed the most fundamental reforms of CAG. Here I will take an observation on each moment to capture the main currents of this process.
The first crucial moment is in the early 1980s, when the earliest reforms were propelled by the state government. According to Architectural Journal, pilot reforms had been carried out as early as 1979, since when CAG and other design institutes have begun to charge fees from the client based on contract. The main objective of this reform is to separate the design institutes from the governmental sectors and let the institutes assume sole responsibility for their profits or losses. The milestone was in 1983, when the National Committee of Planning, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Labor and Human Resource announced together to stop providing funding to the design institutes.37
Here the relationship between CAG and other parties in project was changed: CAG provided design services to the client, who was supposed to pay design fee to CAG; the
35 government stopped providing income to CAG, who was required to pay income tax to the government on the contrary; the funding of project was still provided by the government as there was hardly any private investment in most areas of China at that time. (Chart 3.1b) It is clear that CAG has acquired a financial independence and has been allowed to pursue profit in practice, although the rate of profit was still limited by the government (a high taxation rate of approximate 55%).38 On the operational aspect, with the separation of its ownership and managerial authority, CAG has been closer to an independent-accounting enterprise rather than a government department.
This primary-step reform changed the allocating rules of benefits between the institute and the state government, despite the relationship between the institute and the architect. Theoretically, the institute would gain more profits from the design business, but none of the profit was grant to the architects, whose income was only in relation to his administrative level. The absence of the incentive system showed that CAG was still operated as a socialist collective based on the planned economy, but it has been already a huge breakthrough to weaken the direct dominance from the political authority. The significance of this change will be further discussed in the next chapter.
The second moment is in the early 1990s, or more precisely, around 1992 and 1993. In this moment, both an internal and an external change have contributed to CAG’s transformation. The internal change appeared as the adoption of incentive system in the operation of the institute, which links the quantity of the architect’s work to his income. The external change is the rise of private investment in architectural projects.
The internal change occurred in 1992, when the chief manager Liu Xunfan propelled an important reform in CAG. In order to solve the problem of financial shortage and to increase the efficiency of reproduction, Liu asked each studio to run design assignments on a contractual basis and linked the income of each architect to his productivity. According to his essay ‘The Past Eight Years’, the architects were granted with bonus regarding to the profits he produced for his studio and the institute. The more profits he 36 created, the more bonuses he would be paid. 39 This profit-based incentive system built up a new relocating relationship between the institute and individual architect, in which the architect was allowed to share the profit he created. The promotion of the architects’ benefits represented breakthrough against the collective-based egalitarian principle in the Maoist era. The effect of this reform was magnified in the following year, when the state government reduced the taxation rate of state-owned enterprise from 55% to 33%.40 Since then CAG could retain much more profits, which could be used to enlarge enterprise scale, update equipment and especially to grant the architects.
The external change started in the same year, when Deng Xiaoping addressed a series of speeches during his second tour in the southern provinces of China. This incident evoked a fast growth of private economy in the following years, which further increased the private investment in architectural projects in all areas of China. The role of private client, which had been absent for approximate four decades, began to be filled with a new ‘bourgeois class’, including the real estate developers, businessmen and the leaders of private organizations. These private clients had been largely freed from the government system with more market-based intentions in architectural projects. Driven by the marketing strategies and profit-based considerations, the private clients had higher demands in the application of design ideas with different thinking approaches. It is a momentous mutation for CAG to be involved into a free market and meeting these demands. (Chart 3.1c)
The third moment is in the early 2000s when China joined in the World Trade Organization. In relation to this incident, two main changes were brought to the design industry: the openness for private design enterprises in 2000, and the openness for oversea design enterprises in 2002.
The first one contributed to a fast development of private design firms in China. As early as 1984, the establishment of private practice had already been approved, but the number was limited in the following years because of many regulations and restraints. 37 Two official documents issued by the Ministry of Construction in 2000 removed the former restraints and stimulated a rise of private design firms.41 This trend was also strengthened by the privatization of small and medium design institutes, which was driven by the government in the early 2000s. Those newly-born private design practices challenged the supremacy of CAG and other design institutes through sharing the occupation of market, which mainly happened in the field of medium and small-scaled projects.
The second change attracted architects from all over the world to participate in China’s design practice. Unlike the limited cases in the 1980s and 1990s, the policy in 2002 officially opened the door to oversea design practices, as foreign architects were allowed to found design firms and branches in China. 42 The reputation and competitiveness of some celebrated oversea design firms, especially in the field of large-scale projects, strongly challenged CAG’s status in the market. Since 2000, CAG has lost many significant national projects in international competitions, especially in those Olympics projects. In front of a lot of disadvantages, CAG chose to cooperate with foreign architects in significant projects.
Since this moment, CAG has been involved into a competitive market, against domestic and oversea private design firms. (Chart 3.1d) Some responses to the change could be identified. At 2000, for example, CAG deepened its separation from the government by departing from the Ministry of Construction on managerial level. Since 2003, five individual studios named after the most well-known architects have been founded to raise the reputation of individual architect in the market. The emphasis of the architect’s authorship broke up the collectivistic tradition of CAG and proves that the institute is employing more market-based strategies.
38
Chart 3.1 Relationships among the design institute and other parties in architectural design practice in different periods in the post-Mao era. The arrow line stands for cash flow. Gray circle
stands for the absence of certain character.
Through glimpses on these three moments, we can acquire a global observation of CAG’s reform in the post-Mao era. With these reforms, CAG gradually adopted market principles in its operation as private practices: it is financially independent; it pursues business profits; it has adopted the market-based operating system; it works on both government and private projects; it competes against other design practices in a liberal market. All these facts evidenced that its operations have been much closer to the mode 39 of private practice in the Maoist era. These institutional reforms complied with the socio-political-economic development in contemporary China, and inevitably brought changes to the working environment of CAG’s architects.
In summary, CAG’s reform in the post-Mao era contributed to a duality of its operations aftermath. In the Maoist era, the institute’s operation was basically government-orientated. On the institutional aspect, it was structured on the collectivistic and egalitarian principles, as the institute provided services without self-driven pursuit of profit. On the design aspect, the design thoughts of architects were highly unified and regimented, leaving no space for individual expressions. In the post-Mao era, a series of reforms gradually changed the situation with the introduction of market and the capital, as mentioned above. The emergence of private clients and the financially and administratively separation with the government have largely changed CAG’s working environment and its status in the industry. Since then, according to my observation, two contradictive influences coexist in the same system. One is driven by rising market, while the other is motivated by the government with a long-term leftist tradition. The first influence promotes economic benefit, profit and efficiency of the enterprise, whereas the second one concerns more about social obligation, equality and services for the largest population. There is a subtle balance between these two influences in CAG’s working mechanism in the post-Mao era. In order to understand the performance of CAG and other design institutes during the post-Mao era, the approaches and consequences of these two influences deserve a further inquiry.
40
3.4 Review and analysis of CAG’s works
Before a retrospective of CAG’s works, it is necessary to establish a method for observation. This study tries to focus on the ‘critical’ dimension of CAG’s works. In this way, I need to define a mainstream context, against which a ‘critical’ face could be issued. Regarding the background of Chinese architecture before the arrival of the post-Mao era, two mainstream traditions have been identified in the existing scholarship. According to Zhu Jianfei, a Beaux-Arts-based historicism and a socialist modernism have formed a dominant culture in design practice in the Maoist era.43 The line of the decorative historicism has been well investigated in Zhu’s inquiry, yet another line of socialist modernism remains unexplored. According to my observation, despite the influence of historicism in projects of political significance, the instrumental essentials of socialist modernism have also formed a dominant culture in these less-significant projects. In this sense, design practice with formal, spatial and iconic explorations is ‘critical’ of this instrumentality as well as the ornamentalism of Beaux-Arts tradition, especially in medium and large building projects. Following this approach, I will set up a spectrum of ‘pragmatic - critical’ for a test of design agenda.
Proceeding this way, first of all, I will examine the works of CAG in the post-Mao era. Chronologically, the investigation is conducted in two phases, which are divided by the openness of market economy in 1992. A special review of Shenzhen’s practice is made in between to observe the changes of working mechanism.
The Continuation of the ‘Socialist Modernism’ during the 1980s and the early 1990s
During the entire Maoist era, a decorative ‘national style’ and an instrumental ‘socialist modernism’ dominated the design thinking in large public buildings. The first
41 one usually appears in buildings of political importance, while the second is widely applied in these less-significant ones. The most outstanding contribution of CAG in the Maoist era is in the first field, as the administrative level of the design institute determines the significance of its projects. Some talented architects, like Lin Leyi, Dai Nianci and Chen Deng’ao, created delicate and complex architectural languages of historical eclecticism for these buildings with political importance. This tendency began to change since the early 1980s. When CAG’s architects stopped using the decorative details of traditional Chinese architecture in important project like the National Library, a mutation of design ideas was happening.
Looking through these symbols and decorations, CAG’s works in the 1980s could be seen as a continuation of the socialist modernism in large. Symmetrical composition, heroic monumentality and metaphor of traditional style can be prevalently identified, even in these most ‘modern-look’ buildings. Although it was far away from an ebb-tide of the national style, the restrictions of historicism have been gradually removed. When we observe CAG’s works in the 1980s, we will find that even in some buildings with historical style, there have been much less applications of huge traditional Chinese roof and delicate details of architectural components. Without the support of the enthusiastic nationalism during the ‘Cold War’, there has emerged a functionalist trend, which was developed along the direction of the socialist modernism. Meanwhile, the tendency of the historicism was largely weakened.
Without the dominance of nationalism, the socialist modernism could have been well developed in the Maoist era. The instrumental approach of socialist modernism at least satisfied the requirement of leftist politics, as the idea was capable to provide egalitarian and inexpensive building areas, and to eliminate individual expressions as well. Merely under the strong impact of the nationalism in the ‘Cold War’, the ‘national style’ was able to occupy a dominant position in design practice. When the relatively peaceful and loose political environment after 1976 provided more opportunities for non-ideological attempt, they instinctively followed the former direction of the socialist modernism. 42
The works of CAG in the 1980s and the 1990s succeeded and developed the ideas of socialist modernism. Pragmatic issues became the main consideration in design practice, although the heroic composition and symbolic volume distinguished it from a creative modernism. The architectural languages appeared interesting characteristics, as different ‘post-modern’ symbols were applied on the façade of buildings. Here, we must observe the core idea and formal languages separately, because only in this way we would not be interrupted by the appearance of the building and are able to find the underlying agenda of the architect. Proceeding this way, I will observe the phenomenon on different classes of works.
The design of the National Library (Beijing, 1981) occupied a significant position in CAG’s works in the 1980s. (Figure 3.1) This building is usually considered as in the category of historical eclecticism, but I think the issues reflected from this building should not be simply categorized by ‘isms’. In this large-scale building, the attitude of the architects in dealing with the controversial ‘big roof’ is interesting: they separated the huge structure of traditional Chinese roof into small-scaled and decorative eaves, and simplified the curve-shaped roof and delicate ornamentation into linear shape. Furthermore, if we look through the remaining decorations, we will find that the volume and the functional arrangement of this building basically followed the rational principle of functionalism. The concerns on practicality and monumentality made the building more like a work of socialist modernism. And the meaning of this building is spectacular under its significance, as in the Maoist era the buildings of state class would always follow the classic traditional approach. The abstraction and simplification of architectural languages had already reflected the impact of pragmatism.
43
Figure 3.1 National Library, Beijing, 1981.
Compared to the National Library, the Beijing International Hotel (Beijing, 1980) represented stronger impressions of modern style. (Figure 3.2) There have been few decorations on the façade of the building, although the interior design applied a lot of ornaments. By the end of his career, the architect Lin Leyi finally had the opportunity to express his modern ideals, which have been implied in his early works in the 1950s. (Lin passed away in 1988) The rationality reflected in the Beijing Telegraph Building was adequately developed in this white high-rise building. Decorative details around the eaves and windows have disappeared, while Lin’s exploration in proportion and volume were presented in a purer way.
Figure 3.2 Beijing International Hotel, Beijing, 1980.
44 Both the National Library and the Beijing International Hotel represented the design trend in the significant projects, which followed the way of socialist modernism. However, as I have said, this approach was mainly applied in those less-significant projects. Despite the limited record in history books, architects of CAG put the instrumental thought into those ‘normal’ buildings.
The headquarters of P.L.A (Beijing, 1987) has the most representative characteristics of CAG’s style in office buildings in the 1980s, including the simple and rational arrangement of plans, regular geometrical volume and the international-styled façade without unique symbols. (Figure 3.3 a) Except for the metaphor of historicism in the eave and the wainscot, the major thinking the architect was to create a practical, rational and collective-symbolic appearance for the authoritative organization. The Media Center (Beijig, 1988) had a concise appearance, which is similar to the Beijing International Hotel. (Figure 3.3 b) Pure facades and regular geometrical volumes reflected the principle of functionalism, while the relatively symmetrical composition represented the collective narrative. Influenced by the historical post-modernism in the 1980s, limited ornaments were applied to the parapet wall and the canopy of the entrance. The office building of Ministry of Forestry (Beijing, 1995) had a similar approach, with abstracted historical symbols on the facades, although the application was rather an imitation than an intentional critique of modernism. (Figure 3.3 c) In the design thinking of this building, the main work was still on the rational arrangement of functions and symmetrical axis of symbolization. The office building of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Beijing, 1993) realized the combination of functionalism and limited symbols on a large scale. (Figure 3.3 d) In perspective of the composition, a pragmatic way of construction was placed as the first thing, while the abstracted traditional eave and small-scaled decorative roof were applied more like extra additions.
45 a b
c d
Figure 3.3 a: The Headquarters of P.L.A , Beijing, 1987. b: The Media Center , Beijing, 1988. c: The office
building of Ministry of Forestry, Beijing, 1995. d: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs , Beijing, 1993.
The Exhibition Hall No.1 of the International Exhibition Center of China (Beijing, 1988) reflected the pragmatic thinking on the scale of exhibition building. (Figure 3.4 a) The linear windows and the hang-out lattices seem like a raw imitation of the languages of Le Corbusier. Besides the random application of formal symbols, the symmetrical and regularly distributed column network formed a highly instrumental space. Although the building is not on any axis of the urban texture, the building still has a symmetrical and centralized composition. The Medical Treatment Building of P.L.A General Hospital (Beijing, 1990) also maintained a relatively symmetrical arrangement even in an awkward way. Except for some innovations on the axis of the plan, the design is still following an instrumental approach, which could not be hidden by the collage of patterns on the façades (Figure 3.4 b).
46 a
b
Figure 3.4 a: The Exhibition Hall No.1 of the International Exhibition Center of China, Beijing, 1988. b: The
Medical Treatment Building of P.L.A General Hospital, Beijing, 1990.
In these government-sponsored projects, both the symbolization of the authoritativeness and the absence of individual narrative contribute to a common design approach, which is lack of distinctive formal characteristics. There is hardly any close connection between the formal symbols on the façade and interior space, and the application of symbols usually appears as random and imitative. So even with limited post-modern patterns and decorations, there is not a clear critical attitude of modernism as in the western countries. According to me, the major idea still appeared as a continuation and development of the socialist modernism.
Based on the above evidences, I think the design approach of modernism has never stopped developing in China, even during the stringent time in the Maoist era. However, its appearance was still different from the way in the West, and that’s why we need to use the term of socialist modernism for description. According to my observation, the socialist modernism absorbed the rationality of functionalism but eliminated the
47 individual-based creative explorations, as the formal innovations and expressions were suppressed. When the issues of ‘building’ and ‘construction’ was more emphasized than aesthetics, the study and research on formal possibilities became unimportant. The intensive political movement in the Maoist era contributed to a particular strategy in the design institute, which appeared as an intentional avoid of distinctive architectural languages. The working mechanism impacted the architects through two approaches: the first is the political suppression of the architects with critical thoughts; the second is the education in both colleges and design institutes, which emphasized the engineering issues rather than formal issues. In this environment, the architects gradually found an adaptive design method, which applied the rational and instrumental strategy as a core principle and employed the similar and eclectic languages when necessary formal design was needed. This working method was continued in the 1980s without any foundational changes happened to the mechanism of design institutes, and further contributed to some common characteristics in the design of public buildings as I analyzed. Before the initiation of the market economy in 1992, CAG’s works in inner China universally had the pragmatic characters.
Practice in Shenzhen
The works of CAG in the 1980s and the 1990s can be geographically classified into two categories: the first one is located in inner mainland, especially in Beijing; the second is in Shenzhen in Guangdong province, where the earliest economic reform of China was undertaken. When the design thinking in inner mainland was still dominated by the socialist modernism, CAG’s subsidiary company has already made transcendent attempt in formal exploration. In CAG’s folio published in the end of 1990s, almost a half of the selected works are located in Shenzhen, which revealed CAG’s focus of Shenzhen’s practice.
The economic reform in Shenzhen influenced the design industry from two aspects. 48 Firstly, the capitalist-orientated social reproduction released the rigor restrictions of the collectivist principle in the 1980s, and encouraged the expressions of individual thought. Secondly, the economic reform converted the slowness of development in the period of economic shortage, and stimulated a building upsurge of speed and quantity through encouraging consumerism. Compared to the works in the inner land at the same time, symbolic expressions of macro narratives have been weakened in the works in Shenzhen, while multiple formal explorations appeared more active. The architects have tried to adopt new ideas from the West, however, a working mode with high quantity and high speed had been started, and CAG’s architects did not achieve a peaceful working environment as in the western world but were soon involved into a brutal development.
On a relatively small scale, CAG’s architects in Hong Kong have carried out the earliest experiments in formal explorations in design practice. A series of works have reflected flexible and innovative ideas, which are different from the tendency in inner land at the same time, such as the South Sea Hotel (Shenzhen, 1983), the Minghua Center (Shenzhen, 1989), the Hospital of Shenzhen Overseas Chinese Town (Shenzhen, 1992) and the Primary School of Shenzhen Overseas Chinese Town (Shenzhen, 1989). Despite the imitation of existing ideas and approaches as found in western journals and folios, the architects’ considerations about material, space, tectonic, and formal issues had already exhibited transcendence over the intensive pragmatism. With a high speed of development, the scale and quantity of design practice in Shenzhen are tremendous. Under the pressure of speed and quantity, the architects of CAG still attempted to absorb new ideas and adopt innovative approaches in the design practice.
49
Figure 3.5 Shenzhen People’s Congress, Shenzhen, 1986.
A case worth mentioned here is the office building of Shenzhen People’s Congress (Shenzhen, 1986), which had surpassed the spatial and compositional traditions in governmental buildings in inner land. (Figure 3.5) The irregular arrangement of the courtyard challenged the symmetrical axis appeared on the façade, while some micro space deign based on empirical experience transcended the symbolization of the collective narrative. The delicate application of corridors, columns and courtyards ‘infected’ the heroic image of former government buildings, although the attitude is still not that critical in this building. In respect of architectural languages, there is a clear rational strategy, which also appeared in other projects of CAG. It seems that the architect had already been conscious to explore unique forms, although a pragmatic agenda was insisted. These aspects seemed to be adjusted in a reciprocal balance. What interesting is, Cui Kai was one of the architects of this building, and some signs of his works in the 1990s could be identified in this project.
50
Figure 3.6 High-rise buildings designed by CAG, Shenzhen.
In the design of large-scaled and especially high-rise buildings, CAG’s architects worked with the stringent pressure of building area and speed. (Figure 3.6) In Shenzhen’s brutal development in the 1980s and the 1990s, innumerous high-rise buildings were created, and CAG’s architects did not have enough time to develop any deep considerations on formal languages. Except for the changes of patterns on façade, the design of high-rise buildings was basically following the instrumental principles. The eclectic strategy appeared more obvious in high-rise buildings, as under the cover of post-modern theory, the collage of patterns and decorations is more adaptive to the fast design mode. Besides the differences caused by different programs, the designs of high-rise buildings in this period actually shared the same characters, which emphasized the issue of practicality over the spatial and formal creations. Even the changes of patterns on façade rarely had any critical attitude against the status quo. The regimentation of collectivism against individual-based expressions had been ended up, but a new condition provided the new motivation of pragmatism, that is, high quantity, high speed and large scale. The practice in Shenzhen had delicate effect upon the future value system of CAG. On one hand, the practice brought the market-based critical spirit to the young architects of CAG. On another hand, the working condition reflected the signs of a new pragmatic impact. With all the conflicts in design thinking, some young architects went back to Beijing and brought their readings and experiences of Shenzhen
51 to a similar development in inner land of China since 1992.
‘Made in China’, after the openness of free market
If the socialist modernism could be seen as driven by the political force, the motivation has been gradually replaced by a new force since 1992, that is, a pressure of development with the participation of both the government and the capitalist market. The approaches of influence are different, as the first is rather an ideological campaign while the second is one kind of capital operation. However, the participation of the government is a common character. No matter how the approach varies the aim of this participation is the same, that is, to provide the maximum products and services for the development of the state with lowest cost and shortest time. The massiveness and inexpensiveness made this mode of reproduction become the ‘made in China’ in the field of design industry. When the tour of Deng Xiaoping in southern China brought the economic reform from the district of Shenzhen to the entire China, the working condition of CAG in Shenzhen in the 1980s was also brought to the practice in inner land.
As I have analyzed in previous sections, after the emergence of private clients and design market, with the disparity of the aesthetic tastes from different social groups, there also emerged a spectrum of ‘formally critical – functionally practical’ in the design agenda. This differentiation is not dualistic, while most practices locate in between the two opposite poles. According to the study of Zhu Jianfei, some works of Cui Kai and other architects in the middle 1990s reflected ‘critical’ ideas against the absence of individual expressions in the works of ‘socialist modernism’. I think such a ‘critical’ attitude was indeed contained in the design thinking at that moment, and since then there emerged more architects with the ‘critical’ spirit in CAG. However, if we observe the ideology of the entire institute in large, I think CAG’s architects had a strong preference to the pragmatic pole. We can find this tendency in both the ‘noted’ and ‘ignore’ practices. 52
Firstly, let’s look into the architectural practices which were focused by the media and discourses. In the planned economy, CAG was always able to participate in these significant projects sponsored by the central government because of its administrative level, for example the projects of Ten Grand Buildings in the 1950s. During the 1980s and 1990s, CAG was still able to occupy the higher market in a relatively enclosed market, like in the project of the National Library. Since the late 1990s, with the participation of oversea and domestic private architects, CAG’s status in the industry was strongly challenged. The failure in the international competition of the National Theatre could be seen as a monumental event, which symbolized the disadvantages of design institutes in the higher market in the entire 2000s. The failure in these significant public projects stimulated the changes of the ideas of Chinese architects, and indicated the differences in design agenda between the overseas architects and the local architects.
The National Theatre competition (Beijing, 1998) attracted the world’s attentions to the super structure designed by Paul Andreu, while CAG’s proposal has been forgotten. (Figure 3.7) However, CAG’s proposal could well represent the common design thinking of the Chinese architects, that is, a combination of metaphorical symbols and pragmatic volume. If we look into CAG’s design, the order of focused issues in the design process could be identified, as the plan reflected an efficient arrangement of area and circulation, while the decorations on the façade seemed more like extra additions aftermath. In CAG’s work, a pure, tectonic and formally distinctive concept was not the most important issue, but the practicality of the construction was indeed considered as the first thing. The application of modern building elements, which were in symbolization of the historical image, existed in almost all the proposals of Chinese architects, as there seemed to be a common agenda, that did not considered a pure and complete formal concept over the pragmatic issues. Of course, the contest of formal concept was not the only determinative aspect of the result, but we could still identify an influence through this contrast, as such a difference between the works of design institutes and overseas design firms would also appear in the following competitions. 53
a b
Figure 3.7 a: National Theatre designed by Paul Andreu (winner), Beijing, 1998. b: National Theatre
designed by CAG, Beijing, 1998.
In the competition of the new headquarters of CCTV (Beijing, 2002), a design group leaded by CAG’s architect Li Xinggang finished a design proposal. Compared to the cantilever structure designed by the OMA, CAG’s design is basically pragmatic, as the main functional volume is placed in a group of low-rise buildings, while a high-rise tower is constructed with a regular structure. Although the architect applied some irregular shapes and patterns on the façade to create a distinctive visual effect, the attempts were still based on a rational and instrumental volume, and could not further develop a more integrated formal concept. Amongst all the architects of CAG, Li had shown much more aspirations to create new forms, but the framework of pragmatism still had strong impact in his thinking. In this design proposal, we can read the preference of pragmatism from the architect’s approach in dealing with the contradiction between the formal distinctiveness and the practicality, as the formal concept seemed to be treated as a secondary issue after the rational arrangement of functional divisions and circulations. This ranking of considerations in the design thinking is as same as in the design of the National Theatre.
54 a b
Figure 3.8 a: CCTV new site designed by the OMA (winner), Beijing, 2002. b: CCTV new site designed by
CAG, Beijing, 2002.
In the competition of the National Museum (Beijing, 2003), Cui Kai proposed a design on behalf of CAG. (Figure 3.9) Different from the huge red canopy structure designed by the GMP, the design of CAG placed all the additional functions into the back of the old building. The new part has a concise and rigor appearance as Cui’s other works in the same period. The architect focused on the contrast between the solid walls and transparent glaze windows. Cui had a more initiative agenda to express his functional preference and investigate on the possibilities with rational languages. Compared to the concealing and decorative shapes, Cui’s method appeared more tectonic in the employment of forms and more confident in the selection of instrumental agenda. He insisted such an agenda even in these significant competitions, which revealed a resistant gesture against these ‘avant-garde’ forms. As the pragmatic works are hard to be selected regarding to the lack of symbolic capital, Cui’s insistence of the instrumental strategy represents an attitude against these ‘critical’ forms.
a b
Figure 3.9 a: National Museum designed by GMP(winner), Beijing, 2003. b: National Museum designed by
CAG, Beijing, 2003.
55
The competition of the National Library new building (Beijing, 2003) had special meanings to CAG, as the old building was designed by CAG’s architects in the 1980s. (Figure 3.10) Cui insistently adopted the strategy in the design of the National Museum, and designed a concise and rigor cubic-shaped building. Between the solid volumes, there is a public space surrounded by glass curtain wall. Except for the irregular-shaped bridge in the public space, the configuration of the functional divisions and the formal appearance all followed the functionalist principle. Compared to the proposal of the winner firm KSP, a building with a long-span ceiling structure, CAG’s architect did not tend to achieve the distinctiveness through any super structures. Once again, the pragmatic agenda caused the failure on some degree, but Cui and his design group expressed a steadier attitude of instrumentalism than ever before. If the design approach of the National Theatre was still trying to conceal the pragmatic nature of the design thinking, then the following two works designed by Cui indeed showed more confidence and insistence of the pragmatic agenda.
a b
Figure 3.10 a: National Library designed by KSP (winner), Beijing, 2003. b: National Library designed by
CAG, Beijing, 2003.
In these ‘noted’ competitions, CAG’s strategy was obviously more pragmatic than these overseas architects, no matter it was passive or intentional. That every winner proposal in these competitions was in a strong formal concept evidenced the disadvantages of the functionalism in the higher market. In the 2000s, large-scale public projects stimulated by both politics and market have become a stage for the
56 ‘avant-garde’ forms, and created the best opportunities to realize the formal concept. When the media and public focused on these ‘avant-garde’ concepts, CAG’s approach was soon ignored amongst those unelected proposals. However, if we look into these unrealized works closely, we could find a resistant attitude against the absolute and ivory-towered formal ‘criticality’, no matter whether such an attitude formed a systemic framework.
Next let’s focus on these less-significant works of CAG, which were ignored by media. After the initiation of the market economy in the middle 1990s, the working condition of CAG also experienced a huge transformation, as the quantity, capacity and speed of design work were steeply increased. The failure in the higher market did not influence CAG’s practice in other large-scaled and medium-scaled projects, but in contradiction, CAG finished more projects in the 1990s and 2000s than ever before. In different kinds of office buildings, residential buildings and exhibiting buildings, CAG’s architects applied various architectural languages, from the vernacular to the international style. The specific concept in these projects are complicated, as on the one hand, we can find the accommodations of the macro narratives, including the symbolizations of political, national and capital themes; on the other, we can also see these considerations of the micro narratives, including these creative designs based on the individual, empirical and phenomenal experiences. However, above the specific cases, we need to find a prevalent and persistent theoretical character based on a macro observation. When CAG works in the 1990s and 2000s appeared as several folio books in front of us, I think, a systemic and intentional instrumental strategy had emerged, which was much stronger than in these focused projects.
The strategy was well reflected in a series of office and commercial buildings designed by CAG. On the scale of high-rise building, CAG’s architects tended to develop a neutral and rational modern approach. In most projects, the design did not contain a spectacular concept, while the pragmatic building and construction were seen as the top issue. Although in every program the architect attempted to explore some 57 ‘small ideas’, as in the field of material and composition, but the configuration of the plans and volumes always indicated a strong functional consideration. The Innovation Center of Tsinghua Science Park (Beijing, 2000) designed by Cui Kai is a representative case. (Figure 3.11 a) The regular column network, the perpendicular cubic volumes and the rational arrangement of divisions were applied to facilitate the economic demands of commercial operations, and to comply the tastes of the commercial clients. The architect used the contrast between the cream-colored stone wall and the transparent glass windows to create an integrated atmosphere, and put some thoughts into the creative composition of different volumes, which marked different divisions within the principle of ‘form follows function’. The similar ‘small ideas’ appeared in a series of projects. The design of Focus Palace (Beijing, 2000) strengthened the design of atrium and interior landscape with commercial character. The design of the office building of CAUPD (Beijing, 2002) explored the contrast effect between different textures of materials. In the project of Anhui Press Group (Hefei, 2002), the architect made some attempts to create an interlock effect between different volumes. (Figure 3.11 b) In the design of No.5 Research Building of CAS Software Park (Beijing, 2004) some creative thinking was put into the connections between different divisions. (Figure 3.11 c) In the office building of Monetary Authority of Chifeng (Chifeng, 2005), an experiment of the organization of the interior courtyard was carried out. In these similar-scaled projects, the architects tended to apply some relatively neutral and rational concepts without challenging the practicality in large. On the one hand, the languages are various in different directions, which had appeared the architects’ intentions to explore the distinctive or ‘critical’ forms. On the other, there is still a boundary of the application, which limited the design thinking in a pragmatic category.
58
Figure 3.11 a: The Innovation Center of Tsinghua Science Park, Beijing, 2000. b: Anhui Press Group,
Anhui, 2002. c: No.5 Research Building of CAS Software Park, Beijing, 2004.
In such a strategy, what is the degree in resisting the prevalent pragmatism? I would like to explain through the following two cases. As I have mentioned, in the design group of CAG, Li Xinggang is amongst the architects with strongest critical intentions. This was strengthened by his cooperation with the German architects in later years. In the project of Beijing Daxing Cultural Center (Beijing, 2002), Li realized his approach that was not accepted in the competition of CCTV, as building was completely built by 2006. (Figure 3.12) Except for the metaphor of ‘book box’ declared in the design’s brief introduction, I think the real objective of the architect is to express the discontent of the functionalist perpendicular network through the irregular arrangement of axis and volumes. The architect was more or less influenced by the ideas of deconstructivism, and put a similar thinking into the design of public spaces. However, with a deeper reading of this building, we will find that, the application of the philosophical thinking is incomplete, as the regular organization of the main volume appeared a totally different attitude compared to the irregular composition of the main facades. We could even trace the idea of the architect, as he had already released a formally critical intention in these possible parts of the building, but was still unable to give up the pragmatic consideration. The formal exploration appeared as an ‘infection’ rather than an ‘occupation’. The contradiction between a formally critical idea and the practical issue could also be seen in other works of CAG, and the solution is always to apply the
59 innovative experiment to the applicable façade or public space and keep an instrumental way in the design of main volumes.
Figure 3.12 Beijing Daxing Cultural Center, Beijing, 2002.
Another example is from a collection of ‘un-built’ works of CAG, which was published in 2003. The Huaersen Digital Center (designed in 2000), which was designed by the architect Cao Xiaoxin, appeared as a design concept with struggling critical intentions, although not in a high quality. (Figure 3.13) The design idea at least mixed the decorative elements of post-modern approach and the unsteady forms of deconstructivism, and tried to achieve a complexity in the formal effect. However,
60 compared to the application of irregular shapes on the non-structural elements, the main body of the building was still a pragmatic and functionalist volume. No matter how much ‘discontent’ the architect had expressed on the façades, the core idea of the building was still put into a regular linear functional space. The design agenda of CAG’s architect is always closer to the pragmatic pole, even with a strong pursuit of formal distinctiveness.
Figure 3.13 Huaersen Digital Center, Beijing, 2000.
On the one hand, we have to admit that, in the works after the middle 1990s, CAG’s architects had shown more creative thinking than in the 1980s, including the critical ideas against the historicism and the socialist modernism. According to Zhu Jianfei’s study, Cui Kai’s works are amongst the ‘experimental architecture’ which emerged in the middle 1990s. Cui is a representation of CAG’s architects in Shenzhen’s practice, who brought the critical ideas from the western world into the practice in inner land. In respect of the appearance of works, the political-based heroic narratives in the eclectic historicism and the socialist modernism had retreated since the middle 1990s. CAG’s practice in the second half of the 1990s and 2000s had transcended the former restriction of singular ideology. The capital-sponsored projects had already been different from the operation in the planned economy, and far away from a dogmatic limitation of architectural languages. So CAG’s works in this period had experienced significant changes compared to the Maoist era. Although not every architect and every 61 project could be noticed by the theoretical study, there are indeed formal explorations in every project in magnitude, which had surpassed the collective and egalitarian ideology in the Maoist era. The influences of liberalism and individualism followed the development of capital market and private economy. The pursuit of distinction was input into every project with the influence of commercialism and provided the motivation of critical spirit for the architects.
On the other hand, the pragmatic thinking appeared as a prevalent phenomenon in CAG’s works. Compared to the oversea architects and the private architects, CAG’s approaches are generally instrumental, strongly concerning about the functional and practical issues, even with the ‘small ideas’ as I have defined previously. The pragmatic motivation, which derived from both the working mechanism of the institute and the long-term ideology in the tradition, formed an opposite influence against the pure pursuit of distinctiveness in formal and spatial creations. This character even generally existed in the works of the Chinese architects, but it appears most consistently and systemically in the works of state-owned design institutes. The common feature of the institute’s works indicated a potential relationship between the working mechanism of design institutes and the design agenda. In two different periods, different approaches were used to transmit a similar political objective into the practice of the industry. The significance of such a transmission will be discussed in the following sections.
62
3.5 Review and analysis of Cui Kai’s works
Cui Kai (1964- ) has been a renowned architect since the middle 1990s. Different from other ‘avant-garde’ architects in the same period, Cui is rather a native architect with his entire career spent in state-owned design institute. Cui went to college in 1978, right after the ‘Culture Revolution’. He graduated with a master degree from Tianjin University in 1984 and joined in CAG in the following year. After four years’ working experience in the Shenzhen branch of CAG, he came back to the headquarters in Beijing in 1989, working as an architect until present. Cui is known for several works designed in the 1990s, including the Fengzeyuan Hotel and the office building of Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press in Beijing. By the end of the 1990s he has been appointed as the chief architect of CAG. The reputation in the professional circle brought him more opportunities of practice, which enabled a boom of his works in the 2000s. Since 2000, he has designed over forty buildings.44
Cui’s design works are inevitably related to his professional experience, the working mechanism of CAG, and even the political-economic environment of China’s society. In the social-political-economic transition in past two decades, especially in the institutional reform of design institute since 1980, Cui’s design thinking was also evolving in a trajectory of exploration and the design approaches employed in his works appeared inconsistent. However, from my observation, three patterns of formal approaches could be identified in Cui’s work, which are divided by two major alternations around 1996 and 2004. Each pattern reflected his relatively consistent focus in respective period. Here I will give a critical observation on each pattern.
The first pattern emerged in Cui Kai’s earlier works in the first half of the 1990s, which reflected influences from both eclectic historicism and post-modernism. The clue could even be traced back to the first two projects that he participated in the 1980s,
63 including Hyatt Hotel E’fang Palace (Xi’an, 1987) and Shenzhen Minghua Center (Shenzhen, 1989). Whereas the first one applied rhombic windows on the facade to reflect the culture of ancient Xi’an city with metaphor, the second one used curve-shaped walls with round patterns to symbolize ships and sea wave. 45 This approach of symbolization was retained in his following works in the early 1990s when he began to lead design programs. In the design of Fengzeyuan Hotel (Beijing, 1991), Cui used abstracted shapes and details instead of traditional roof to represent the image of traditional Chinese architecture. This building is a synthesis of post-modern symbols with rhombic windows, decorative eaves and pitched glass roofs. It is symmetrical in composition and the proportion façade follows the standard of traditional Chinese architecture. (Figure 3.14) Influenced by I. M. Pei’s Fragrant Hill Hotel, Cui tended to develop a system of iconic symbols, which appeared in a series of his works during this period. Similar icons also appeared in the design of Huairou Training Center of Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Beijing, 1990).46
Figure 3.14 Fengzeyuan Hotel, Beijing, 1991.
If Fengzeyuan Hotel could be seen as an attempt to challenge the arbitrary application of traditional elements, the office building for Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press (Beijing, 1995) is even much more progressive in formal composition. (Figure 3.15) Suspended bridges, stacking and falling balconies, non-orthogonal axis, complex mass cut released this building from the regulation of the formal framework of 64 historicism, whereas the adoption of red bricks, decorative icons on façade and in interior still connected this building to his previous works.47 As Cui tempted to express the combination of Chinese and western culture, metaphorical sculpture and decorations were widely used in interior design, which is no different from the approach of Fengzeyuan Hotel.
Figure 3.15 Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press, Beijing, 1995.
Until 1996, although Cui employed different approaches in projects during this period, there still emerged a common pattern of design method, that is, to symbolize national or vernacular themes with historical icons on modern structure. Compared to other architects during the same period, especially those architects educated before 1977, Cui was more progressive and transcendent in application of vernacular material and in the organization of traditional architectural forms, but his works still showed impacts from historicism and symbolic post-modernism, which were developed in the Maoist era and the 1980s. All his works before 1996, according to my observation, could be categorized into this pattern.
The second pattern emerged after a breakthrough occurred in the second half of the 1990s, when Cui designed Modern Town Apartment Tower (Beijing, 1996) and Phase II
65 of Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press (Beijing, 1998). The first one is a residential program developed by private investor. In the design of tower apartment, Cui used much purer modern languages without decorations and symbols that appeared in his previous works. The design of entrance hall and roof garden showed the architect’s focus on the conciseness of architectural elements and pureness of space. Separated columns and walls also reflected an emerging tectonic approach. (Figure 3.16 a) The second building is a renovation project of the Publishing House next to the office building of FLTRP. Compared to the office building, Cui focused much more on the organization of tectonic elements and empirical space than symbolization of macro narratives. Dark red bricks and white panels marked different architectural components of the building. Spatial and facade design have been released from the burden of historicism and organized in a much flexible order. (Figure 3.16 b) These two projects, which were designed in a same period, showed an important alternation of Cui’s design thinking from decorative historicism into rational and tectonic modernism.
a b
Figure 3.16 a: Modern Town Apartment Tower, Beijing, 1996. b: Phase II of Foreign Language Teaching &
Research Press, Beijing, 1998.
Since 1996, this pattern of modern language frequently appeared in Cui’s works, accompany with a highly rise of the quantity of his projects after 2000. Based on
66 functional rationality and formal conciseness, this approach was well accepted in different types of projects, including office building, commercial building, educational building, residential, hotel and convention center. Until 2005, Cui participated in over twenty projects, in which he was able to materialize his design method from different orientations.
Amongst all these works, Tsinghua Innovation Center (Beijing, 2000), Office Building of China Academy of Urban Planning & Design (Beijing, 2001) and Anhui Publishing Building (Hefei, 2002) witnessed the application of modern forms on high-rise office building. (Figure 3.17) Despite the restraints of height and masses, asymmetrical composition of function-units and diverse employment of materials gave the architect enough space to create distinctions. The simplicity of architectural components, both inside and outside the building, exhibited rational characteristics of public building. Contrast between opaque granite and transparent glass, grey and white face tiles, rough clay bricks and glossy aluminum panels revealed the architect’s independent explorations on formal possibilities.
a b c Figure 3.17 a: Tsinghua Innovation Center, Beijing, 2000. b: Office Building of China Academy of Urban
Planning & Design, Beijing, 2001. c: Anhui Publishing Building, Hefei, 2002.
Yifu Building in Beijing Foreign Studies University (Beijing, 2000) and College of Life Science in Zhejiang University (Hangzhou, 2002) reflected rational and creative
67 strategies in the design of low-budget educational buildings. (Figure 3.18) The design of Yifu Building in Beijing is a best demonstration. Under a serious restraint of investment, the architect decided not to do any interior fitment, suspended ceilings or facade decorations but to expose concrete structure and use same material of wall in both interior and exterior. That formal separation of wall and structure revealed tectonic thinking, while consistent application of materials showed integrated thought, indicated the architect’s creative thinking beyond practical issues, even under strict economic limitations.
a b Figure 3.18 a: Yifu Building in Beijing Foreign Studies University, Beijing, 2000. b: College of Life Science in
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 2002.
International Conference Center of FLTRP (Beijing, 2001), Artron Color Printing Center (Beijing, 2002), Ziwei Resort Village (Xi’an, 2002) and Software Engineer Apartment of Dalian Software Park (Dalian, 2003) represented multiple and flexible organization of tectonic elements in medium-scaled buildings. (Figure 3.19) In the case of engineer apartment, the architect performed a more skillful composition of modern languages. Flexible mass cut and texture change balanced the relationship between rationality and complexity. Without the strict limitations from scale and budget, the architect has reached a higher level in the creation of the modern languages.
Throughout all these works, a rational function-based approach was further
68 developed. On one hand, this approach is no longer restrained by the framework of historicism. The narrative languages of Beaux-Arts tradition were completely purified. On another hand, it is also different from the socialist modernism developed in the Maoist era. Against the heroic and pragmatic method of socialist modernism, Cui spent much more diverse thinking in the employment of languages and formation of architectural spaces, and expressed more meditation in people’s empirical experiences rather than representation of collectivistic ideologies. Both aspects illustrated the transcendence of Cui’s design works during this period.
a b
c d
Figure 3.19 a: International Conference Center of FLTRP, Beijing, 2001. b: Artron Color Printing Center,
Beijing, 2002. c: Ziwei Resort Village, Xi’an, 2002. d: Sofware Engineer Apartment of Dalian Software Park,
Dlian, 2003.
The third pattern emerged around 2004. If Cui’s works in second half of the 1990s and the first half of the 2000s were seen as a disconnection with historicism and an embrace with the fruit of rational modernism, some of his works around 2004 and aftermath revealed a clue of new transformations with emergence of expressionism. However, this alternation is much more complex than the one in the middle 1990s, as there seems to be different directions of exploration. First, there is a continuation of
69 rational modern approach. Second, a new pattern of expressionism emerged in some medium and large-scaled projects. Third, he also focused on the employment of purer geometrical languages in small-scaled projects, especially in those museum projects.
In the first direction, the quantity of projects is much more limited than before. BOBO International Office Building (Ningbo, 2004), Shandong Broadcasting & Television Center (Jinan, 2004) and Library of Shandong University of Technology (Zibo, 2004) could be seen as a continuation of his previous modern approach. Compared to the plentiful works in before, Cui had apparently turned his sight into other directions.
a b
c d Figure 3.20 a: Beijing Digital Press Information Center, Beijing, 2003. b: Chinese Embassy in South Africa,
Pretoria, 2004. c: Liangshan Nationality Cultural Art Museum, Xichang, 2005. d: Suzhou Railway Station,
Suzhou, 2008.
In the second direction, Cui adopted more and more expressive languages in designs, through which he attempted to represent certain cultural images. There emerged a more abstracted application of symbolic patterns, which nerveless were more flexibly incorporated and organized than his early works. Beijing Digital Press Information Center (Beijing, 2003), Chinese Embassy in South Africa (Pretoria, 2004), Lhasa
70 Railway Station (Lhasa, 2004), Liangshan Nationality Cultural Art Museum (Xichang, 2005) and Suzhou Railway Station (Suzhou, 2008) could best reflect this approach. The zigzag forms of sunshades and curved shape of roof in the press building, the rhombic forms of canopies in the embassy building and Suzhou Railway Station, the abstracted Chinese corbel bracket in Lhasa Railway Station, and the symbolic color of vernacular clothes in the cultural museum in Liangshan, all demonstrated the architect’s focus on representation of certain cultural context, which is different from his previous neutral interpretation of rationality and tectonic. (Figure 3.20)
a b
c
Figure 3.21 a: Wunvshan Ruins Museum, Liaoning, 2003. b: Yin Ruins Museum, Anyang, 2003. c:
Dunhuang Museum, Dunhuang, 2003.
Based on purified architectural language and strong focus on native culture in the two directions above, the third direction is much noticeable. In a series of small and medium-scaled museum design, Cui developed a highly simplified formation of architectural components and spaces. The representative works include: Wunvshan Ruins Museum (Liaoning, 2003), Yin Ruins Museum (Anyang, 2003), Dunhuang Museum (Dunhuang, 2003), Qinan Dadiwan Ruins Museum (Qinan, 2003), Dagukou Fortress Museum (Tianjin, 2005) and Han Meilin Art Gallery (Beijing, 2005). (Figure 3.21) Each project has an independent orientation, but it is in common that all these 71 projects used spatial strategies to express the theme of museum other than representational images. The material used in each project is highly accordant, like the dark bronze in Yinxu, clay bricks in Wunvshan, bare concrete in Han Meilin Gallery. Without any explicit decorations or symbols, the architect exerted a deep and poetic emotion through the organization of tectonic components. Here the aesthetic expression is more profound than in the second pattern, partly because of the scale of project and partly of the building theme, however, a deeper exploration of formal possibilities in the direction of tectonic modernism could still be seen as a development, which is a gap in the China’s history of modern architecture.
In summary, according to my observation, the trajectory of Cui Kai’s design works could be divided into three patterns in different periods. From a historicism, to a tectonic modernism, and further to a multiple and complex modernism, each alternation witnessed a change of the architect’s design agenda. Undoubtedly each change is a result of multiple influences including personal experiences, the development of the industry and the transformation of the entire society in large. However, the change of the institutional system of the design institute should not be ignored. Following I will examine the changes of architectural languages and approaches in respect of the transformation of CAG’s institutional system, as I believe that, the unique environment of state-owned design institute has significant contributions in the formation of the architects’ thinking approach.
72 3.6 A formal and ‘critical’ agenda: Analysis
If there is indeed a degree of ‘criticality’ in measuring the resisting agenda against the mainstream, let’s focus on the ‘critical’ way first. In the definition of this research, the ‘critical’ represents a design agenda against intense instrumentalism, which seeks to explore formal, spatial and iconic possibilities in design practice. Placing in the history of Chinese architecture, the awareness of formal explorations remains a matter of concern, in contrast to the long-term tradition of pragmatism since the early 1950s. In this sense, it is reasonable to distinguish these explorations and regard them as ‘critical’ in degree. In respect of CAG, its works have revealed this kind of explorations in the post-Mao era, especially in the works of Cui Kai and other young architects. What is the working mechanism underlying this progress? This will be investigated in this part.
In the study of CAG’s reform, I have identified two main influences in the working mechanism of CAG: the first one derives from the rising capitalist market since 1976; the second origins from by government-orientated operation, which has existed since the beginning of the Maoist era. This way of classification might lead to debate, as the intention of the government may not be contradictive to market principles in some cases. However, in large, there is indeed a confrontation between the essentials of a free market and the ‘leftist’ tradition of the CCP government. If it could help observing the practice of CAG, we shouldn’t hesitate to use critical terms tentatively. Proceeding this way, first of all, I have noticed the influence of free market in the design practice of CAG. The system of design institute has experienced significant changes since 1976. While the government still maintains a strong influence, CAG has also applied market mechanism in operation. With the service to commercial businesses, the pursuit of profit and the expansion of market, CAG has gradually been approach the mode of private design firm in the post-Mao era. Next I will examine this process and its influence.
The reform from 1979 to 1983 ended the supply of ‘operating expense’ from the
73 government, financially separating CAG from governmental sectors. Direct intervention of the government was weakened in design practice as well. With the information blockade gradually removed, essays about western architecture and theories were allowed to be published in architectural journals. Despite these opening policies, building investment was still directed under the government. There was rarely any private investment in building projects, and the role of investor was still played by public sectors. Design institutes have basically continued the former working system until the 1990s. Before 1992, According to my investigation, CAG was still operated as a working unit of planned economy, without necessary incentive system of a modern enterprise. In terms of formal issues, the governmental client was too conservative to support a fast metabolism of design thoughts, as the collectivistic thought produces strong opposite force against individual expressions. The ‘lack of variety in architecture’ has been a hot topic in both the academic and professional circle in the 1980s. However, without the support of market and the stimulation of a ‘bourgeoisie class’, the tendency hasn’t been alternated until the early 1990s.
Without sufficient changes in the working mechanism, two design traditions developed in the Maoist era were continued in CAG’s works. The first one was the Beaux-Arts-based historicism, which was strengthened by the trend of post-modernism in the 1980s, contributing to another climax of historicism. National Library (Beijing, 1981), designed by Wu Liangyong and other architects, represented the influence of this trend. The second one was a continuation of the socialist modernism, which promotes instrumentalism in design agenda. Beijing International Hotel (Beijing, 1980), designed by Lin Leyi, was a typical example. Both traditions could be seen as a continuation of previous design thoughts without fundamental innovation, although the language appeared more flexible and diverse. When we observe the design works during this period, it could be found that the collective-based design thought was still dominating design practice.
An evolutionary progress occurred in the middle 1990s. The earliest avant-garde 74 practice, or ‘critical’ experiments, appeared around 1996. 48 A new generation of architects, including Chang Yung Ho, Wang Shu, Liu Jiakun and Cui Kai, finished a series of design works based on individual study and exploration. If we admit that the two traditions based on collective principle indeed formed a mainstream, then these design approaches with more individual and phenomenological characteristics could be seen as a challenge against the background, and they are indeed ‘critical’ or ‘avant-garde’. Furthermore, we must carry out a more detailed review on this phenomenon. What was the motivation underlying the ‘critical architecture’? As Chang, Wang and Liu were inspired in private practice, what was the motivation for Cui?
First of all, we must focus on the change of the architect’s working mechanism. The second transformation of the professional system, which I defined previously, is inevitably one of the most important reasons, as the emergence of private client has strong impact upon the working mechanism of architects. With the rise of private economy, a new disparity of social groups began to emerge. A new ‘bourgeoisie class’ was able to accumulate wealth in social production and invest on non-governmental building projects. These ‘earliest rich people’, including businessman, real estate agent and leaders of non-governmental organizations, had differentiated investing intentions, compared with governmental clients. They were more efficient in configuring resources and paid more attentions on the quality of building. Some clients with adequate budget had higher requirement for the cultural value of architecture. According to Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of cultural production, the level of cultural consumption is determined by the socio-economic level of consumer. The higher the level is the more attentions are paid on formal issues (compared to pragmatic aspects), and the higher desire to ask for distinctions against mainstream.49 Amongst these capital authorities, some successful ones would seek to cooperate with stronger power in other field, transferring economic capital into symbolic capital.
Therefore, although each of Chang, Wang, Liu and Cui had a distinctive trajectory of career, they appeared on the stage of ‘experimental architecture’ at almost a same time, 75 because the transformation of the entire social environment occurred then. Cui’s background is most spectacular as his entire career was spent in large state-owned design institute. The situation at least demonstrated that, the design agenda of the institute had been similar to the private practice, with the services to the private clients.
Here we need to take a closer observation on the mechanism of design institute during this period. Firstly, within a gradually opened design market, internal changes also happened to the system of design institute, as previous model of ‘planned economy’ would harm the benefit of the institute. No matter on the motivation of the staff or the financial operation, the collective model of reproduction would always lead to a low efficiency and further reduce the income of the institute. In the case of CAG where Cui worked in, its internal reform happened in 1992. The institute had already been defined as an independent enterprise as early as the beginning of the 1980s, however, before 1992, most of CAG’s profit was submitted to the state government, as there wasn’t a system which could bring the profit to the income of architect. In 1992, the manager of the time, Liu Xunfan promoted the contracted responsibility system in CAG. At the beginning of reform, the brutal contract system highly increased the enthusiasm of its staff and fast ameliorated the financial affairs. That architect could achieve profit-sharing besides salary in contracted project, founded the incentive of market in the work of architect.
Secondly, as early as the emergence of private client, state-owned design institute had been working for private project, although it also worked for governmental project at the same time. Based on the primary incentive of profit, the disparity of the client’s economic positions contributed to a higher incentive. Those clients who possessed more capital would seek to collaborate with stronger power of the architectural profession. The egalitarian mechanism of collective design was broken up, while a hierarchy of power in professional knowledge began to emerge. Compared to the state-sponsored model, the alternation of the hierarchy sponsored by the market is more radical and fast. These architects who have more progressive and avant-garde design thoughts could be 76 recognized and supported by these private clients with higher cultural requirement, and then lift their reputation in the professional circle of architecture. Such a support from private client strongly incented the architect to challenge the mainstream design approaches, as the ‘critical’ works would help to magnify the distinctiveness of the architect, and further lift the status of the architect in the industry. With design institute involved in the market, both the primary and higher incentives began to have effect upon the working environment of architect in design institute.
In order to observe this phenomenon in examples, let’s focus on a series of important works of Cui Kai in the 1990s. According to my observaton, a crucial shift of Cui’s design agenda occurred in the second half of the 1990s, when the office building of FLTRP, Modern Town Apartment Tower and Phase II of FLTRP were designed and built. Cui’s earlier works, for example Er Pang Gong Hyatt Hotel and FengZeYuan Hotel, reflected obvious influences from historicism and post-modernism with symbolization of national and traditional cultural themes. The design of the Office Building of FLTRP was on of the earliest works that challenged the heroic and dogmatic approach in architecture, although the interior decorations still indicated some remaining influences of symbolism. Modern Town Apartment Tower applied more abstracted and precise languages, in which the collectivistic trend was replaced by a rather individual-concerning standpoint. Furthermore, in the design of Phase II of FLTRP, previous ‘macro narrative’ did not exist any longer, while a purist, empirical and tectonic space had emerged, symbolizing the shift of Cui Kai’s design agenda. The influences underlying this shift are complicated. The education, working experiences and personal observations of the architect would all be possible to influence the agenda. However, we should not ignore that, the attempt of challenging the mainstream is also related to the support from private client.
Cui’s book Projects Report recorded the details of his corporations with clients in three projects. The office building of FLTRP is a half-governmental project, but the client is a fast commercialized organization in economic reform. The organization had a 77 strong economic background, and its leader had an intellectual background. The client offered enough comprehension and support to the architect’s work. Cui himself also acknowledged the significance of the support of client in the realization of design thought. The client of Modern Town Apartment Tower is a developer of real estate with even stronger economic background. The project was developed for high-income residents. Since the beginning of the project, the client did not only focus on pragmatic and functional issues, but rather on the style. In this project, the application of precise modern languages was not based on pragmatic purpose but pursuit of distinctive style. Here, there is a corporation between the intellectual authority in architectural profession and the capital authority in commercial market.
Such an incentive from private client became a significant motivation of the ‘experimental architecture’. It also could be seen as a crucial influence behind the change of Cui’s design languages in the middle 1990s, which was recorded by Zhu Jianfei’s paper, Human Space, China, 1990s.50 Here, the design agenda of the Chinese architect appeared a transition: amongst the mainstream of collectivistic historicism and socialist modernism, there emerged some individual-based and phenomenological design approach, which had been suppressed since the middle 1950s. Since this change, Cui developed a modern approach based on empirical experience, which had effect upon the institute’s works in the late 1990s and the early 2000s. Previous macro narratives of the nation and the country began to retreat, while a rather individual-based ‘critical’ modernism was developed. Although the design institute was still restricted by egalitarian ideology and related policies in large, we could never ignore its commercial operations in a liberal market. Furthermore, the demands of clients with higher social positions stimulated some architects to achieve a higher status in the profession with innovative design thoughts, such as Cui Kai and his practice in the 1990s.
Right in this way, today we could find more diverse approaches in the works of design institute, compared to the Maoist era. The pragmatic culture has been broken up, while multiple attempts have been encouraged by design market. Corporation with the 78 demands of elite population has motivated the architect to explore innovative ideas in professional knowledge, nevertheless the duplication of western theories and ideas also exist. Restrained by the scale and depth of market, the formation of a critical mechanism still needs more time, not to say there is also a contradictive influence from the state – these pressures of quantity and speed of development. Whereas, the new-born ‘experimental’ design ideas and languages has broken up the restraint of singular idea, especially a intense instrumentalism.
Summary
In summary, the ideas of the early bourgeoisie group produced strong effect on the design agenda of architects. With the support of market, a few architects in institute are able to acquire a higher status in the professional circle. Although they could not represent the trend of the institute, this ‘avant-garde’ or ‘critical’ agenda shouldn’t be ignored in theoretical analysis. The duality of design institute’s operations contributed to a dual agenda of the architect. The trend of pragmatism could not replace the ‘avant-garde’ exploration in professional knowledge. In terms of the architecture discipline, this ‘critical’ spirit at least guaranteed that the works of CAG aren’t restricted by a singular idea and are able to develop along new directions. The recognition of this character will help understanding the implications of the design institutes.
79
3.7 A pragmatic strategy: Analysis
Based on the observation above, I will examine the pragmatic strategy in the practice of CAG. The term of ‘pragmatism’ is used to describe a design agenda rather than an architectural style, which appears as utilizing the most economical and practical approaches to construct buildings, in order to meet people’s basic demands of building area. The functional principle of this agenda is close to the spirit of early modernism, and its iconic appearance might have similar characteristics as the functionalism in the Europe in the 1930s. If we overlook these iconic buildings of Beaux-Arts tradition in the Maoist era (1949-1976) and all the ‘avant-garde’ post-modern architecture in the post-Mao era (after 1976), we will find that this instrumental strategy influenced so many design works that it has formed an indispensable part in the landscape of Chinese modern architecture throughout these six decades. In another word, this approach has formed a ‘silent majority’ in these less-significant buildings, which existed as a crucial component of the Chinese architecture, despite the ignorance of former studies. Although the consequences brought by this strategy in architectural languages appeared different in these two eras, the generating mechanism and the agent of this strategy were consistently the same – the state-owned design institutes.
In order to understand the landscape of contemporary Chinese architecture, we have to understand the thinking approach of the architects and the mechanism underlying. Proceeding this way, we need to link the study of the post-Mao era with the Maoist era, as I believe that, the working mechanism of design institutes in the post-Mao era has some inevitable connections to the Maoist legacy. This part will separately discuss the relationship between the working system of architects and the intentions of the state authority in these two different eras.
81 Maoist era
The functionalist principle of modernism was once an avant-garde design thought at the beginning of modern movement in the West. Walter Gropius brought the ideas of modernism from the Bauhaus to North America in the 1930s and initiated a movement in worldwide.51 With strong challenge against Beaux-Arts-based eclectic historicism, modern design approach became a mainstream in following years, although these ideas, which claimed to serve for the working class in Towards a New Architecture, were earliest applied by those rich clients on their villas. Since the end of the 1960s, the prevalent ‘international style’ had been opposed by some architects and theorists. One after another, the functionalist principle was criticized by post-modernism (represented by Robert Venturi and Charles Jencks) and deconstructivism (represented by Peter Eisenman and Frank Gehry).52 The tendency has become more various and complicated since then. There also emerged a lot of new trends, but none of these ‘isms’ could represent a mainstream in large.
The development of modern movement went through a different trajectory in China. Beaux-Arts-based historicism was brought to China in early 20th century, combining with the traditional style of Chinese architecture. During the ‘Nanjing Decade’ (1927-1937), the Nationalist government pushed this stylistic trend to a state-sponsored climax. The CCP government continued this tendency after 1950, applying the historical eclectic style on modern structures.53 At the same time, the modern ‘cubic’ style was strongly criticized as ‘capitalist culture’. Previous historical studies focused much on the Beaux-Arts tradition before 1976 but always ignored the ‘silent majority’, that is, ‘socialist modernism’, which was widely employed in those less-significant buildings.
According to my observation, modernism has continuously developed in the Maoist era, even in the special period when it was criticized as ‘capitalist culture’. However, its development in China was different from the way in the West, especially after some crucial amendments in approach. Although the modernism greeted by Mies van der 82 Rohe and Le Corbusier is based on functional principle, it is comprehensive in the creative thinking of space, material and composition at the beginning of modern movement. This diversity formed a crucial foundation of the development of modernism in the West. The Children’s Hospital (Beijing, 1952) by Hua Lanhong, as I observed, represented an organic absorption of this diversity. (Figure 3.22) However, when Hua and his work were criticized in the late 1950s, the individual-based formal exploration was regimented. This is a crucial moment when the modernism was mutated in China. Formal explorations based on individual thinking were regimented, while a collectivistic path was chosen.
3.22 Children’s Hospital by Hua Lanhong, Beijing, 1952.
On the second path, the Telegraph Building (Beijing, 1955), designed by Lin Leyi, is a representative example. (Figure 3.23) Heroic and symmetrical composition, limited eclectic decorations, practical arrangement of function, and collective-symbolic volume formed a rigorous pattern of style, which became a prototype of ‘socialist modernism’. During the Maoist era, despite the promotion of national style in theory, the number of built ‘big roofs’ is actually limited. The historical style is only applied in some most significant public buildings in big cities, and most of the cases are located in Beijing. Those medium and large buildings that haven’t appeared in history book, including office buildings, teaching buildings and residential buildings, all belong to the category of socialist modernism, which best represented the main trend of design ideas at that 83 time.
3.23 Telegraph Building by Lin Leyi, Beijing, 1955.
This collective-based modernism is derived from the tradition of deign institutes, that is, duplicating the approaches and languages of previous works. Exploration of formal possibilities was extremely limited, as in the intensive political movement during the Maoist era any innovative expression in architectural language could possibly bring trouble to the architect. Corresponding educational system in universities provided assistance to the formation of this tradition. From the textbook in college to the reference book in institute, thousands of example cases and standards formed an existing mode of design, through which works with similar formal characteristics could be reproduced. Formal exploration based on individual study was regimented, while those non-aesthetic pragmatic skills for building and construction were praised.
There are many causes underlying the prevalence of this pragmatic design idea in the Maoist era, but previous studies concerned few about the mechanism behind. A typical standpoint is represented by Zou Denong’s book A History of Modern Chinese Architecture, in which he attributed the fault to the political suppression, while the socio-economic indication behind the phenomenon was completely ignored.54 As I
84 observed, the emergence and formation of this instrumental approach was inevitably connected to the model of Chinese society at that time. On economic aspect, long-term economic shortage forced most architects to accept functional principle, utilizing the least resource to fulfill the demands for building area; on political aspect, the egalitarian principle largely influenced the working system of architects, as in a society without a clear disparity of ‘classes’ and liberal market, there is no space for a ‘critical’ or ‘avant-garde’ taste from the elite population. Avoiding individual formal taste is actually a response to the leftist collectivistic principles.
This phenomenon is perfectly an opposite appearance of the capital-orientated cultural production, which was described by Pierre Bourdieu in his book Distinction. In Bourdieu’s theory, differences in cultural capital mark the differences between the classes.55 The Maoist China can be seen a laboratory, in which the disparity of social classes was reduced to the lowest degree, bringing a highly uniform stream in cultural reproduction. Actually the landscape of architecture in the Maoist era is even closer to the commitment of serving working population, which was proposed in Towards a New Architecture. The building technology developed in the past centaury made the instrumental modernism become a physical representation of the leftist ideology as it could provide services to larger population. In the Maoist era, those uncreative, rigid and pragmatic designs, were supposed to serve all social groups. The regimentation of individual-based formal exploration complies with the atmosphere of political campaigns at that time.
This phenomenon demonstrated the tight connection between the ‘distinction’ in cultural reproduction and the liberal market economy. It is the pursuit of ‘distinction’ that provided motivation for the ‘criticality’ in architecture. In China, the emergence of ‘avant-garde’ or ‘experimental’ architecture occurred as late as the 1990s, because a genuine market economy was only established after 1992. That the rise of the ‘experimental architects’ emerged around the middle of the 1990s is a concrete proof of this connection.56 And with the acknowledgement of the history and formation of the 85 ‘socialist modernism’, it will be easy for us to link the iconic characteristics of architecture to the ‘leftist’ politics. In this relationship, different design institutes have played an important role as the contact. And this relationship would be further brought to the post-Mao era, as both the government and design institutes continued their positions in the industry, whereas the way of operation would be largely changed.
Post-Mao era
Previously, I have investigated on an instrumental approach of ‘socialist modernism’ in the Maoist era. This instrumental strategy significantly influenced the formal languages of architecture during the three decades. This strategy, according to my observation, was also sustained in the post-Mao era, although it exists in a different form. And the internal relations between these two eras deserve to be concerned. The contact is surely still those state-owned and half-state-owned design institutes, although they also experienced significant reforms. Underlying this tradition, according to my observation, there is an influence from the government, which contributed the most to the succession of the socialist legacy.
In the West, architect is an independent profession. The autonomy of the profession is represented by its nongovernmental characteristics, which appeared as that, the professional ethics and equities are supervised and guaranteed by civil organizations, for example the society of architect. Compared to the West, most Chinese architects are more or less connected to government, as both the ASC (Architecture Society of China) and the design institutes are partly government-orientated. All previous reforms of design institute after the late 1970s aimed to reduce its financial and managerial connection with government, however, the influence from government still exist in large, even though the influences are more invisible.
Today, on the operational aspect, CAG is similar to private practices. The institute also pursues economic profits, expands capital market, and serves commercial bodies. 86 From professional aspect, the government has already stopped direct intervention in design practice. No guidelines and policies about design ideas exist any longer, although they were once common before 1976. The role of government is actually an owner of state-owned assets, whose function is to control the budget and cash flow of the enterprise. The control from the government has been transferred into an operation of investment, which is a ‘mathematical’ control in most time.
Previous studies about the design institute are usually based on the standpoint of the architect. From this point of view, the relationship between the profession and the government is usually criticized, as the critics tend to protect the independence of the profession from exterior influences. The most representative standpoint is from Charlie Xue, who argued that, in order to increase its efficiency, design quality and profit, Chinese design institute should follow the mode of large design enterprise in the West and disengage with the government.57 This argument has indeed focused on the benefits of the institute or the architect but ignored the multiple functions of the institute system beyond market. The relationship between design institute and government hasn’t been properly assessed. Here we must firstly acknowledge this government-orientated system of design institute, and explore an underlying political-economic mechanism in the post-Mao era, and then we are just able to further discuss the implication of this system in the industry. This is the orientation of this chapter.
Proceeding this way, I would suggest clarifying a concept firstly. The ‘government’ mentioned here is supposed to refer to its identity as the owner of the institute. I will only focus on its activity and policies as an investor but overlook its actions in other fields because the government is always with complex agendas, as its performances appear inconstant and mutable in different situations. Even in the field of architecture, the intentions of government in different projects are also variable. It is important for this study to separate its character as the owner and investor of the design institute from its other identities, only in which way we could acquire a constant understanding of its agenda in architectural industry. 87
According to my observation, the government, as a leading power in the practice of state-owned institute, is still playing a ‘leftist’ role in the post-Mao era. Its insistence on the equality of social groups and on services to the majority of population hasn’t been fundamentally changed. However, the approach to realize this political objective had experienced a significant shift after 1976. The way of abolishing individualism with political movement didn’t exist any longer in the post-Mao era. In the system of market, it was transferred into a capital operation. Two manners in this operation are worth a focus.
The first one is the limitation of design fee, which best represented the ‘anti-market’ operation in the system of design institute. So far the standard of design fee in Chinese design institute follows two regulations issued in 2002, Gongcheng Kancha Sheji Shoufei Guanli Guiding (Managerial Regulations of Construction Design Fee) and Gongcheng Sheji Shoufei Biaozhun (Standard of Construction Design Fee).58 These two regulations are with complicated clauses, but we are still able to identify the pattern behind: the ‘basic price’ of a construction is divided into eighteen levels according to its building cost, for example, for a construction of two million yuan the institute is supposed to charge 90 thousand yuan as design fee; for one of five million yuan it is supposed to charge 209 thousand yuan … the rest may be deduced by analogy. The higher the building cost is, the lower rate the design fee takes in the cost. In order to fine-tuning the fee, this ‘basic price’ is then supposed to be multiplied by some coefficients in relation to the complexity and specialty of the project. Finally the fee calculated in this way will be distributed into three sections of the design process according to a certain percentage.
From this standard we could read two levels of meanings: firstly, the rate of the architect’s income in project in China is the lowest amongst other countries;59 secondly, according to this system, the design fee is only related to the building cost of a project, giving no space for the aesthetic value of the architectural design. This limitation 88 generated a significant principle in the working mechanism of the architects, that the increase of design quality could barely bring more economic profits, while the increase of the quantity of projects would significantly raise the income. This is only the system after 2000, as in the brutal development in the 1990s the rate was even lower, not to say the discount in real competition. In the book of Great Leap Forward, the working condition of Chinese architect in Shenzhen in the 1990s was portrayed as: one tenth of the quantity of architect as in the US, designed 5 times volume, in one fifth time, earning one tenth of the design fee as in the US. This is an efficiency of 2500 times.60 (Chart 3.2) Although this description is over-exaggerate, it indeed revealed the ‘anti-market’ influence from the limitation of design fee – that in a country lack of professional architect, the rate of design fee is even much lower than other countries.
Chart 3.2 Design fee as percent of total construction.
The second manner is the capital operation of preserving and increasing the value of state-owned property. Although the rate of design fee is limited, the design institute has to face serious pressures of pursuing profit. On the one hand, both the institute and its subsidiary studios have independent demands of profit. On the other hand, the 89 managerial agent of government, for instance the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council (SASAC), is even stricter in the requirement of increasing profit as the owner of the design institute.61 Profit-sharing based on tax takes more proportion in the income of state-owned enterprise than in private enterprises. Even after a considerable drop of the rate in 1992, the proportion was still maintained as 33% of the income. 62 On the level of supervision and management, the agent also exerted strong pressure on the profit increase, which makes the operations of the institute with even more market characteristics. On May 2009, in my interview with Cui Kai, who is the chief architect of CAG, he specially emphasized the pressure from government on financial operations. According to his description, the SASAC has a serious system of valuation for judging an enterprise’s financial operation each year, which represented a strict supervision on the cash flow and brought intensive demands on preserving and increasing the value of property.63 Both motivations from the owner and the enterprise contributed to a strong willing for the institute to pursue increase of income.
With the acknowledgment of the two manners above, it will be easy for us to understand the conditions of CAG after 1976. Although the regimentation on professional knowledge has been released, and the institute also served private commercial bodies, it had to produce large quantity of projects in a short time to achieve higher incomes. This quantitative and fast working condition made it impossible for the architects to deeply explore the formal possibilities. The situation pushed all choices towards a strategy of instrumental modernism, which is the only way to meet the needs of fast reproduction.
On the political-economic aspect, those rough, fast-constructed, and massive works, which served for low-budget projects appeared as a consequence of the governmental influence. Here the limitation from government accomplished a continuation of its earlier political ideals, although compared to a complete liberal market, the benefits of design institute and its architects were harmed in magnitude. In this process, the 90 principles of political ideals before 1976 and its agents, the design institutes weren’t changed, but the approach of realization was significantly mutated from a complete political control into a capitalist control. And an instrumental and pragmatic tradition was sustained in CAG as well.
The consequence of this phenomenon is obvious: although more and more ‘avant-garde’ architects emerged in CAG and other design institutes, an instrumental and practical agenda still has significant influence in most of their works. Even in the works of these avant-garde architects in institute, a ‘conservative’ tendency could be obviously identified, especially when compared to some private architects and overseas architects. For those architects who worked in design institute, there is a complicated agenda derived from the institutional system. On the one hand, the instinct of the profession and the incentives of market make them willing to appreciate and explore new professional knowledge. On the other hand, they could never abandon the deep-rooted pragmatic agenda in real projects, as driven by both the lack of innovative skills and the fast reproducing mode.
As an opposition against the rising trend of ‘critical’ architectural forms, the instrumental strategy of design institute was much magnified after 2000, when local and overseas private architects largely entered into the market. In a market-sponsored environment of cultural production, these design institutes, who created numerous medium and large-scale projects since the early 1950s, lost a significant proportion of higher market. In the most significant competitions, such as National Theatre, CCTV new site and National Stadium, the realistic and practical works designed by design institutes encountered a debacle. As in the circle of critique conducted by western theories, the practical and pragmatic works could only stand at the bottom in the structure of professional knowledge. However, in the endless landscape of cities, in the vast sea of buildings that medium-income and low-income group work and live in, design institutes contributed the most. Here the policies of government might be passive, the agenda of design institute might be passive, the approach of architects might be 91 passive, but for larger population in a process of modernization in a developing country, this strategy is possibly a positive response.
Summary
In summary, the instrumental and pragmatic tradition was sustained by CAG and other design institutes. In the commercialization, there also emerged some avant-garde architects with ‘critical’ approaches in exploration of new knowledge, and the design institute also acquired certain autonomy. However, in large, the instrumentalism with long-term tradition is still a leading influence. Invisible influence from the government continued this tradition with control of design fee and the institutional system. Pressures of quantity, speed and capacity contribute to a prevalent pragmatic trend in Chinese architecture today. Although the architects of a new generation have showed strong discontent about this mode, the social-political foundation of this pragmatic agenda has not been changed, as it is able to facilitate the demands of a fast building development.
By the end of this chapter, there raised an issue concerning the assessment of this instrumental strategy. In what way shall we observe the agenda of this strategy? Firstly, this study is criticizing neither any ‘taste’ of upper social class nor the market economy, not to say these related ‘avant-garde’ or ‘experimental’ theories and architecture. However, for a Third World nation with huge population and serious pressure of modernization such as China, this instrumental modernism might be an efficient and non-alternative choice. Unlike the trajectory as found in the developed countries, it is a tremendous mutation for a developing country with 1.4 billion populations to step into modernization. And those fast-constructed, massive and pragmatic buildings are applicable and necessary for such a process. In order to achieve a broader view, the future theoretical critique should incorporate an understanding of the conditions of a developing country such as China.
Furthermore, according to my observation, this instrumental strategy developed by 92 Chinese design institute formed a significant opposition in balancing the tendency of liberal market in contemporary China. Such a balance might be unnecessary for developed countries, but for the developing countries, the influence may have a positive effect. The ‘conservative’ trend in architectural languages might have implicated a complex ‘Chinese mode’. A professional system with the participation of the government might have created a landscape of modern architecture, which is different from that in Europe and America at specific historical settings. The interpretation of this phenomenon could possibly provide a non-western framework for theoretical critique in the future.
93
CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSION
4.1 Pragmatism
To identify any ‘criticality’ of a work, it is important to understand the context in which this work is produced and a specific historical backdrop against which its critical face is issued. According to my observation, despite a predominance of decorative historicism in large projects of political significance, the instrumentalist spirit of a socialist modernism have also formed a dominant culture in these less-significant projects in the Maoist era. In this sense, design practice with formal and spatial explorations is ‘critical’ of this instrumentality, especially in these less-significant building projects. Following this approach, a spectrum of ‘pragmatic - critical’ can be circumscribed for a test of design agenda.
Within this measurement of ‘criticality’, I have made attempt to find the common and consistent features of CAG’s works in the post-Mao era. The problem is studied in a two-way examination. On the one hand, in relation with the changes of working mechanism, the architects of CAG indeed become more liberal in employing innovative forms and languages. On the other hand, however, there is still a main trend of pragmatism in their design agenda, especially compared to other modes of practice in the post-Mao era. Generally speaking, according to my observation, the design agenda of CAG’s architects appears closer to the pragmatic end in the overall ‘pragmatic - critical’ spectrum in the post-Mao era.
Chronologically, this pervasiveness of pragmatism comprises two phases. The first one appears as a continuation of socialist modernism during the 1980s and the early 1990s. The representative characteristics of this stream include: intense instrumentalist 95 focus, the use of heroic volumes and proportions, and sometimes the employment of symmetrical compositions. The Beijing International Hotel (Beijing, 1980) and the office building of P.L.A (Beijing, 1987) are examples in different scales. The second one has begun since with the opening of market economy in China. A functionalist-based approach, with loose cares for formal issues, has become a mainstream in the design approaches of CAG. Compared to other modes of practice, including overseas design firms and domestic private firms, the work of CAG reveals a more pragmatic concern in design practice, as evidenced in a series of design competitions in the 2000s. Although the design practice in these two phases appears different in approach and consequence, both of them have demonstrated the same influence from the government. The internal relations in between are explored in a following investigation.
As a response to the first question posed at the beginning of this study (compared to the work developed in other modes of practice, what are the distinguished features in the work of the design institutes in the post-Mao era?), I suggest that, this pragmatic tendency has emerged as a distinguished characteristic in the practice of design institutes in the post-Mao era, even though it hasn’t received sufficient attention in current existing scholarship. This may lead to debate, as pragmatic approaches may appear in other modes of practice as well. However, this approach appears rather distinctive in the case of design institutes, as there seems to be a consistent and systemic mechanism underlying the surface of design practice providing pragmatic motivations for the architects in their work. This demands a specific inquiry on the working mechanisms of design institutes.
96
4.2 Working mechanism underlying practice
Measured in the ‘critical - pragmatic’ spectrum, according to the observation above, the design practice of CAG has revealed a main trend of pragmatism in the post-Mao era, in which ‘critical’ explorations of formal possibilities have also emerged to a limited extent. The working mechanisms underlying this phenomenon of design agenda deserve to be further explored.
To do this, I have identified two contradictive influences in the practice of CAG. One is from market principles; the other is from governmental policies. Both of them have potential relationships with the design agenda of the architects, nevertheless the second one appears stronger, as design institutes are institutionally associated with the government. A two-way examination has been conducted to interpret the approaches and consequences of these two influences.
On the first direction, as demonstrated in section six of chapter three, the introduction of market mechanism has an effect upon the formation of a formally ‘critical’ agenda. Evidences have been illustrated to support this argument. In the process of reform, the emergence of private clients and the adoption of the incentive system provided new motivations to the architects of CAG. With the need of a ‘bourgeoisie class’ and the demand for accumulating ‘symbolic capital’, architects are encouraged to explore formal possibilities and to provide newness and richness in formal expressivity, as evidenced in the practice of several young architects.
On the opposite direction, as revealed in section seven of chapter three, the government-orientated operation projects strong impact to the working of CAG, producing a consistent pragmatic motivation. In this examination, I have analyzed the currents in both the Maoist era and the post-Mao era. The approach of influence appears
97 different in these two eras, but the essential objective remains the same, that is, fast and inexpensive services to the majority of the population. Different from the political regimentation in the Maoist era, capital operations have been adopted to facilitate the above objective in the post-Mao era. The limitation of design fee and the requirement of profit, which are the main manners of this operation, have generated a working mode of high speed and quantity. The architects of CAG have to adopt practical design ideas and approaches to meet the urgent needs of construction. This motivation produces a balancing influence against the slow and rigorous practice in formal explorations for a ‘high-quality’ design.
In response to the second question posed at the beginning of this study (what is the relationship between government-orientated operations and design agendas of architects in these design institutes?), I think, both governmental polices and market demands have effects upon the work at CAG and other design institutes, although the first one appears stronger. Through different approaches, the political objective of the government is projected into the practice at design institutes. With this unique assignment, architects work in design institutes with a differentiated motivation. Both the objective of the government and the motivation in the practice at design institutes deserve a focus in the assessment.
98
4.3 Theoretical assessment on the practice of design institutes
Based on the previous studies, let us move on to a theoretical discussion. The main questions include: given the interpretation of design works and the analysis of working mechanisms, in what way should we evaluate the practice in the design institutes in contemporary China? What is the significance of the pragmatic practice of design institutes if any? What is the implication of the state-owned design institute if any in theorizing architectural practice in contemporary China?
A collectivist perspective
In accordance with the first question, the perspective of observation is a key issue. When former scholars take strong concerns on the independence of the architectural profession, they have overlooked the significance of the architectural practice in a broader and long-term perspective taking into account of the country as a whole. The perspective of architectural profession, which itself is a ‘bourgeois’ agenda, may limit the scope in the observation of design institutes. Therefore, I would suggest removing this restriction and taking a broader view in this inquiry.
In a cross-cultural sense, a collectivist perspective, which is an important notion in the Chinese culture, is possible to lend support to this discussion. In this perspective, the welfare of different social groups is inclusively considered, other than that of certain sectors or individuals. In respect of architectural design practice, the focal point is the imperious demands of buildings from the majority of the population, other than the tastes of ‘bourgeoisie’ groups. This collectivist perspective is associated with Marxian discourses whose exploration is beyond the scope of this research. However, within the context of contemporary neo-liberal practice, it is important to borrow alternative views such as collectivist positions.
99
The purpose and significance of design institutes
If there is indeed a relationship between the participation of the government and the pragmatic approach in design practice, the intentions of the government should be considered in the assessment of design institutes as well. In the context of China, this consideration must be further linked to the theory of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party), which itself is collectivist, as only in this way can we acquire an insight into these governmental policies. Following this approach, I will review relevant principles of the CCP, in order to interpret the objectives of the government-orientated operation in depth. Then I will examine the practice of design institutes by measuring its fulfillment of these objectives in historical context.
In the theory of socialism, the means of production are supposed to be public-owned. The purpose of public ownership is to allow an equal access to resource for all individuals and accomplish a distribution of wealth with a compensation based on the work expended in production.64 A key approach of this system is to reduce the ‘surplus value’, which usually appears as controlling the rate of profit of state-owned enterprises, in order to provide inexpensive and necessary services to the entire society.65 The principal ideas of socialist theory were projected into architectural design practice as well as other industries in the Maoist China. Within the framework of socialist theory, the CCP government tried to build up a system of design practice, aiming to serve the demands of the majority of the population and the long-term plans of the country. In terms of architectural design practice, the main considerations of the CCP government have been revealed in a manifesto published in 1957. In this essay, Zhou Rongxin, the council chairman of the Architectural Society of China, stressed the purpose and significance of state-owned design institutes on behalf of the CCP authority. According to Zhou, the aim of design institutes is to meet the needs of large-scale construction, which can be hardly facilitated by small private design firms. He enlisted the advantages of design institutes as follows: a complete range of specialists, an efficient division of 100 labor and a close cooperation between different disciplines. In reference to design practice, Zhou thinks, the creativity of individual architects must be contained in a framework that privileges the people’s interest, which is reflected in plans, indicators, guidelines and policies. Only in this way, as Zhou argued, can the large-scale building plans of the country be accomplished in a short time, and the fruits of development be equally shared by all the people.66
In this assumption, an essential focus is on the quantity and speed of building projects. Determined by the imperious demands of building a largest possible amount of floor area, the CCP government had to explore an effective system, which is capable of delivering the task. Despite the consistent critique in terms of aesthetics, the design institutes have been conceived to produce design works with quantity, speed and capacity since the beginning. This is also evidenced in a well-known governmental policy, which asks architectural design to be ‘practical, economical, and aesthetic only under permissive conditions’.67 In such a context, how well did design institutes fulfill these objectives in history? To answer this question, two historical moments deserve to be concerned.
The first moment was in the 1950s, when the first ‘Five-year Plan’ of the CCP government was carried out. In planned economy, the integration of resources and the unified reproduction of industries facilitated a fast recovery of economy, which was crucial for the post-war rebuilding of the country. In design industry, state-owned design institutes integrated all intellectual resources in the architectural disciplines, and dedicated themselves to the country’s building plans. Design works were produced at an astonishing speed. For example, Beijing Municipal Institute of Architecture Design (BIAD) designed buildings of 1.68 million square meters during 1956 alone.68 Despite the formalistic controversies on the buildings with political importance, instrumentalist practice was adopted for the normal projects, including school buildings, residential buildings and office buildings. Combining with the rationality of resource allocation in the socialist approach in governance, architects of design institutes had avoided the 101 critique of modernism, and utilized the most economical and practical approaches in architectural design. The Beijing Telegraph Building, designed by Lin Leyi, reflected this approach in large public buildings. On a smaller scale, these ‘Workers’ New Villages’ are representative. Besides the symbolic expression of political ideology for some few buildings, architects of design institutes have met the demands of society with architectural works of speed, quantity and capacity, which are crucial for the intended efficient development of the country.
The second moment was in the 1990s, when China began to adopt market economy. An upsurge of construction is stimulated by a capitalist market and commerce introduced into China. The picture of Pearl River Delta in the 1990s, which has been portrayed in Great Leap Forward, is a microcosm of this development. The authors of the book demonstrated that ‘the Chinese architect’ designed the largest building area in the shortest time for the lowest payment, therefore achieved the highest efficiency in the world.69 Once again, in the system of design institutes, a working mechanism of speed and quantity was launched. In a few years, the appearance of most cities in China has been changed by numerous new buildings. Formal and stylistic trends blossomed yet they were loose and transient, whereas an instrumentalist tendency remained prevalent. Behind the post-modern patterns and iconic expressions on the facade, the design of volumes and spaces was rational and practical, which seemed to be the only way to meet the needs of building development. With the limitation of design fee and the incentive of profit, architects of design institutes have contributed to a brutal pragmatism in design practice in the 1990s, which is reflected in CAG’s works. Under the influence of the government, low-cost design services have successfully promoted the speed of the country’s modernization.
At these two historical moments, to my understanding, design institutes have accomplished the assumed tasks. In formal language, the first trend is usually accompanied with a symbolic expression of collectivism and central authority in the use of volumes and compositions, while the second one often adopts post-modern patterns 102 and decorations on facade. Despite the differences in context and appearance, a pragmatic thought is shared as a common characteristic in most buildings, which has indeed met the demands of speed and quantity as required. In a socio-economic sense, both moments have witnessed the desire and confidence of the nation in facing difficult conditions. In front of imperious needs of buildings after the war or economic depression, the government considered speed and quantity of building projects ahead of aesthetic concerns. Through governmental policies, a differentiated working mechanism was established in design institutes to meet the basic needs of building largest areas with shortest time and minimal cost. In formal aspect, this system has indeed developed a trend that opposes or restricts the explorations of distinctive forms and of ‘critical’ forms. However, the social functions fulfilled by these fast-constructed buildings with practical capacities have performed a crucial role for the development of the country at certain stages of its progress.
A theoretical assessment
On the institutional aspect, I would suggest, the system of design institutes is indispensable for China’s development in the post-Mao era. Without a collectivist objective and the corresponding institutional system, architectural practice might advance in aesthetic exploration but hinder the speed of the country’s development with higher cost in large. Given the economic conditions of a developing country and the needs of a huge population, a relatively equal allocation of resource is important for the long-term welfare of the nation. In respect of architectural practice, the key point is to let the largest population share the fruits of building development. In this sense, under the limitation of resource, the use of pragmatism in designing buildings is most adequate for the maximum provision of built areas for the people.
In a collectivist perspective, I would argue that, the participation of the government has created an efficient and necessary mode of architectural practice, which focuses on speed, quantity and capacity of buildings. This mode has not only combined the ‘leftist’ 103 ideas of socialist theory, but also inclusively considered the economic conditions of a developing country. According to my observation, the system of state-owned design institutes isn’t fading out as some scholars have predicted.70 Under the pressure of urbanization and of the large population, government-orientated operation is still needed to support the fast development with a pragmatic philosophy. The form of such an influence might change in the future, but the collectivist outlook and practice may be maintained. This mode of practice could also provide positive implications for other developing countries as well.
On the aesthetic aspect, I think the practice of design institutes is indicating a noticeable tendency, which might be able to lend support to the discussion of ‘criticality’. Since the early 1990s, formally ‘critical’ practices have arisen as a trend in China. Both domestic and oversea architects have contributed to this trend with formally innovative works. These Olympics buildings are examples on a large scale. In design practice, the development of a ‘critical architecture’ seems to be a representative of the rising market-orientated liberalism, as I have analyzed in chapter three. This is not unrelated to the new ‘bourgeoisie class’, the accumulation of wealth, and the rising force of a capitalist market in China.
On the other hand, the pragmatic trend, which I have investigated, has formed a balancing force in these less-significant buildings. Despite our increasing knowledge about these eye-catching landmarks, the landscape of Chinese architecture is also formed by numerous ‘uncritical’ buildings, which are even more predominant in quantity. Egalitarian principles of socialist theory are projected into practice through state-owned design institutes. The needs of the ‘working classes’ and the limitation of resource have been considered in the operation of the institutes and further reflected in the design approach.
If we assume that there are indeed relationships as abovementioned, the second trend of pragmatism is worth a reflection, as the underlying driving force is much stronger in 104 China than that in the developed countries. Today, China has become one of the largest economies in the world, whereas the average income is still on a low level. Determined by the huge population, it is impractical to expect a wealthy and strong ‘bourgeoisie class’ as a majority in China for some long time to come as in the developed countries. The ‘low-income’ social groups will occupy the biggest proportion in the population for a long time. Limited by resource, China is also unable to accomplish prosperity of capital and wealth at the level as found in the developed countries. All these conditions reveal that, there isn’t a fertile ground for the growth of ‘critical architecture’, or at least formally highly innovative and intellectually ‘critical’ designs as found in the most developed countries. In this sense, we should reconsider the aesthetic framework of architecture critique in China.
In the capitalist-orientated order of the world, due to the relationship between knowledge and power, theoretical discourses usually reflect strong influence from the developed countries, as evidenced in the dissemination of the ‘critical’ discourse in architecture as well. The requirements on the distinctiveness and philosophical depth of design ideas have become a dominant criterion worldwide, although its socio-economic foundation is always neglected. In China, I think this ‘critical’ standard has to be altered in adoption, as it might be irrelevant to the socio-economic conditions of China. There has to be a pragmatic-based measurement, which is capable of observing and assessing architectural practice in the developing countries. In the perspective of this measurement, the ‘critical’ and the pragmatic trends must be seen as a double-movement, in which the second one is also regarded as valuable and significant. The key issue here is to include the socio-economic conditions and the intentionality of the crucial agents in the developing countries in consideration, which could help establishing a cross-cultural framework in theorizing architectural practice in the future.
105
Notes
1 See Zou’s critique of the intervention of politics in, Zou, Denong, Zhongguo Xiandai Jianzhushi (A history of modern Chinese architecture), Tianjin: Tianjin Kexue Jishu Chubanshe, 2001, p. 354.
2 Charlie Q. L. Xue, ‘Design Institute with China’s Characteristics’, Time + Architecture, vol. 1, 2004, pp. 27-31.
3 Thomas Kvan, Liu Bingkun, Jia Yunyan, ‘The Emergence of a Profession: Development of the Profession of Architecture in China’, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 25:3 Autumn, 2008, pp. 203-217.
4 Alan Bullock & Stephen Trombley, The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought, London: Harper-Collins, 1999, p.689.
5 Lai Delin, Zhongguo jindai jianzhushi yanjiu (Studies in modern Chinese architectural history), Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2007, pp. 151-162.
6 Lai, Zhongguo, pp. 181-237.
7 Lai, Zhongguo, pp. 151-162.
8 Kvan, ‘The Emergence of a Profession’, pp. 203-217.
9 George Baird, ‘“Criticality” and its discontents’, Harvard design magazine, no. 21, Fall 2004/Winter 2005. Available at
10 Michael Speaks, ‘After Theory’, Architectural Record, vol. 193, 2005, pp. 72-75.
11 George Baird quoted Rem Koolhaas in ‘“Criticality” and its discontents’, no. 21, Fall
107
2004/Winter 2005.
12 Rem Koolhaas, ‘Pearl River Delta’, Mutations, Barcelona: ACTAR, 2001, p. 309.
13 This non-dualistic philosophy is discussed in ‘A Global Site and a Different Criticality’, in Jianfei Zhu, Architecture of modern China: a historical critique. London: Routledge, c2009, pp. 270-300.
14 Zhu Tao, ‘The “Criticality” Debate in the West and the Architectural Situation in China: Thoughts on the Essay “Criticality in between China and the West” ’, Time + Architecture, No.5, 2006, pp. 71-78.
15 According to George Baird, the term of ‘critical architecture’ was defined by Michael Hays as early as 1984, see Baird, ‘“Criticality” and its discontents’.
16 Michael Hays, ‘Critical Architecutre: Between Culture and Form’, Perspecta, Vol. 21, 1984, pp.15-29.
17 Zhu Jianfei, ‘Human Space, China, 1990s: Cui Kai, a new generation, and a critique of a 20th-century master narrative’, in Cui Kai, Gongcheng Baogao (Projects Report), Beijing: Zhongguo Jianzhu Gongye Chubanshe, 2002, pp.174-184.
18 Jianfei Zhu, ‘Criticality in between China and the West’, The Journal of Architecture, vol. 10, no. 5, 2005, 479-498.
19 Ibid.
20 Zou Denong, Zhongguo, pp. 93-96.
21 See ‘The History of CAG’, on the official website of CAG. Available at
108
22 See the names of the institute since 1953 to 1955 in Zou, Zhongguo, pp. 95-96.
23 Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Selected Works of Chinese Famous Architectural Design Institutes in Series: Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Harbin: Heilongjiang Science and Technology Press, 1998, pp. 8-9.
24 Zou, Zhongguo, pp. 333-336.
25 Zou, Zhongguo, pp. 300-302.
26 ‘The History of CAG’. Available at
27 Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Selected, p. 8.
28 Zou, Zhongguo, p.366.
29 Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Selected, p. 8.
30 Liu Xunfan, ‘Ba Nian Wang Shi’ (The past eight years), Design + Research, no. 11, March, 2007, pp. 6-9.
31 Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Selected, pp. 232-239.
32 Zou, Zhongguo, p.573.
33 See ‘The Organization of CAG’, on the official website of CAG. Available at
34 These works of CAG are included in, Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Selected.
109
35 Zou, Zhongguo, p.578, 584.
36 Xue, ‘Design Institute with China’s Characteristics’, pp. 27-31.
37 Zou, Zhongguo, pp. 365-366.
38 John Hassard, Jackie Sheehan, Meixiang Zhou, Jane Terpstra-Tong and Jonathan Morris, China's state enterprise reform: from Marx to the market. London ; New York: Routledge, 2007, p. 74.
39 Liu, ‘Ba Nian Wang Shi’, pp. 6-9.
40 Hassard, China's state enterprise reform, p. 75.
41 These two documents are Managerial Regulations of Architecture Construction Design Firm and Standard of Qualification of Architecture Construction Design Firm, see Xu Jie, Zhi Wenjun, Building China: Top Forty Contemporary Architects Firms in China, Liaoning: Liaoning Kexue Jishu Chubanshe, 2006, p. 20.
42 Ministry of Construction of the People’s Republic of China, Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation, Ministerial Decree No. 113: Managerial Regulations of Foreign Investment in Architectural Enterprise. Online. Available at
43 Zhu Jianfei, Architecture of modern China: a historical critique, London : Routledge, c2009, p.273.
44 See all the personal information about Cui Kai in the chronology chart in, Cui Kai, ‘Native Design’, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2009, p. 278.
45 Photos and design descriptions of these two projects are included in Building Design
110
Institute of Ministry of Construction, Selected, pp. 127-129, 148-151.
46 See Fengzeyuan Hotel and Huairou Training Center in, Building, Selected, pp.114-118, 140-143.
47 See the Office Building of Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press in, Cui, ‘Gongcheng’, pp. 24-42.
48 This point of view is proposed in Zhu, ‘Criticality’, 479-498.
49 According to Pierre Bourdieu, differences in cultural capital mark the differences between the classes. See the interpretation in Bourdieu, Pierre, Distinction : a social critique of the judgement of taste, Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1984, p.69.
50 Zhu, ‘Human Space, China, 1990s’, pp.174-184.
51 Spiro Kostof, The Architect, New York: Oxford University Press, 1977, pp. 320-325.
52 Kenneth Frampton, Modern Architecture: A Critical History, London: Thames & Hudson, 1980, pp. 280-313.
53 See the analysis of the development of Beaux-Arts tradition in modern China in Zhu, ‘Human Space’, in Cui, Gongcheng, pp. 173-185.
54 Zou Denong, Zhongguo, pp. 300-302.
55 Bourdieu, Distinction, p.69.
56 See the definition of Chinese ‘avant-garde’ architects in Zhu, Architecture of Modern China, pp. 173-194.
111
57 Xue, ‘Design Institute with China’s Characteristics’, pp. 27-31,.
58 Xu Jie, Zhi Wenjun, Building China: Top Forty Contemporary Architects Firms in China, Liaoning: Liaoning Kexue Jishu Chubanshe, 2006, p. 20.
59 See relevant study in ‘Jianzhu Sheji Shoufei Yu Sheji Neirong He Shuiping De Guanxi Tantao’ (Explorations on the relationships between the design fee and the quality of works). Available at < http://info.tgnet.cn/Detail/200701081161203453> (accessed June 2009).
60 See the description of Chinese architect in Chuihua Judy Chung, Jeffrey Inaba, Rem Koolhaas, Sze Tsung Leong (eds), Great Leap Forward, Cologne: Taschen, 2001, p. 704.
61 Since 2000, CAG has been turned under the management of the SASAC, which is in charge of all central government-owned enterprises, instead of the Ministry of Construction.
62 Hassard, China's state enterprise reform, p. 74.
63 In May 2009, I visited the headquarters of CAG in Beijing and had an interview with Cui Kai.
64 Frederick Engels, ‘Chapter III: Historical Materialism’, in Engels, Frederick, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Chicago: C.H. Kerr, 1910, pp. 92-111.
65 Surplus value refers roughly to that part of the new value created by production which is claimed by enterprises as ‘generic gross profit’. I borrowed this term from Karl Marx’s critique of political economy.
66 Zhou Rongxin, ‘Hanwei Dang Dui Jianzhujie De Lingdao, Jianjue Zou Shehuizhuyi Luxian’(Safeguard the leadership of the CCP in design practice, and follow the basic line of socialism), Architectural Journal, No. 11, 1957, pp. 1-7.
112
67 This slogan was originally proposed by the CCP government in 1956. See Zou Denong, Zhongguo Jianzhushi Tushuo: Xiandai Juan (Pictorical history of Chinese architecture: the modern part), Beijing: Zhongguo Jianzhu Gongye Chubanshe, 2001, pp. 120-121.
68 Zhou, ‘Hanwei’, Architectural Journal.
69 Chung, Great leap forward, p. 704.
70 See the predictions of state-owned design institutes in, Xue, ‘Design Institute’, pp. 27-31; and Kvan, ‘The Emergence of a Profession’, pp. 203-217.
113
114 Bibliography
Baird, George, ‘“Criticality” and its discontents’, Harvard design magazine, no. 21, Fall 2004/Winter 2005. Available at
Bourdieu, Pierre, Distinction : a social critique of the judgement of taste, Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1984.
Bullock, Alan & Stephen Trombley, The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought, London: Harper-Collins, 1999.
Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Selected Works of Chinese Famous Architectural Design Institutes in Series: Building Design Institute of Ministry of Construction, Harbin: Heilongjiang Science and Technology Press, 1998.
Chung, Chuihua Judy, Jeffrey Inaba, Rem Koolhaas, Sze Tsung Leong (eds), Great Leap Forward, Cologne: Taschen, 2001.
Cui Kai, Gongcheng Baogao (Projects Report), Beijing: Zhongguo Jianzhu Gongye Chubanshe, 2002.
Cui Kai, Native Design, Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2009.
Engels, Frederick, ‘Chapter III: Historical Materialism’, in Engels, Frederick, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Chicago: C.H. Kerr, 1910, pp. 92-111.
Engels, Frederick, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Chicago: C.H. Kerr, 1910.
115
Frampton, Kenneth, Modern Architecture: A Critical History, London: Thames & Hudson, 1980.
Hassard, John, Jackie Sheehan, Meixiang Zhou, Jane Terpstra-Tong and Jonathan Morris, China's state enterprise reform : from Marx to the market. London ; New York: Routledge, 2007.
Hays, Michael, ‘Critical Architecutre: Between Culture and Form’, Perspecta, Vol. 21, 1984, pp.15-29.
Koolhaas, Rem, ‘Pearl River Delta’, Mutations, Barcelona: ACTAR, 2001.
Kostof, Spiro, The Architect, New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.
Kvan, Thomas, Liu Bingkun, Jia Yunyan, ‘The Emergence of a Profession: Development of the Profession of Architecture in China’, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 25:3 Autumn, 2008, pp. 203-217.
Lai, Delin, Zhongguo jindai jianzhushi yanjiu (Studies in modern Chinese architectural history), Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2007.
Liu Xunfan, ‘Ba Nian Wang Shi’ (The past eight years), Design + Research, no. 11, March, 2007, pp. 6-9.
Ministry of Construction of the People’s Republic of China, Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation, Ministerial Decree No. 113: Managerial Regulations of Foreign Investment in Architectural Enterprise. Online. Available at
116
Speaks, Michael, ‘After Theory’, Architectural Record, vol. 193, 2005, pp. 72-75.
Xu, Jie, Zhi Wenjun, Building China: Top Forty Contemporary Architects Firms in China, Liaoning: Liaoning Kexue Jishu Chubanshe, 2006.
Xue, Charlie, Q. L., ‘Design Institute with China’s Characteristics’, Time + Architecture, vol. 1, 2004, pp. 27-31.
Zhou, Rongxin, ‘Hanwei Dang Dui Jianzhujie De Lingdao, Jianjue Zou Shehuizhuyi Luxian’(Safeguard the leadership of the CCP in design practice, and follow the basic line of socialism), Architectural Journal, No. 11, 1957, pp. 1-7.
Zhu, Jianfei, Architecture of modern China: a historical critique, London : Routledge, c2009.
Zhu, Jianfei, ‘Criticality in between China and the West’, The Journal of Architecture, vol. 10, no. 5, 2005, 479-498.
Zhu, Jianfei, ‘A Global Site and a Different Criticality’, in Architecture of modern China: a historical critique. London: Routledge, c2009, pp. 270-300.
Zhu, Jianfei, ‘Human Space, China, 1990s: Cui Kai, a new generation, and a critique of a 20th-century master narrative’, in Cui Kai, Gongcheng Baogao (Projects Report), Beijing: Zhongguo Jianzhu Gongye Chubanshe, 2002, pp.174-184.
Zhu, Tao, ‘The “Criticality” Debate in the West and the Architectural Situation in China: Thoughts on the Essay “Criticality in between China and the West” ’, Time + Architecture, No. 5, 2006, pp. 71-78.
117 Zou, Denong, Zhongguo Xiandai Jianzhushi (A history of modern Chinese architecture), Tianjin: Tianjin Kexue Jishu Chubanshe, 2001.
118 Glossary
ENGLISH CHINESE PINYIN CHINESE
Names of Institutes and Associations
Architectural Design and Tongji Daxue Jianzhu Sheji Research Institute of Tongji 同济大学建筑设计研究院 Yanjiuyuan University
Architectural Design and Qinghua Daxue Jianzhu Research Institute of Tsinghua 清华大学建筑设计研究院 Sheji Yanjiuyuan University
Architectural Scientific Guojia Jianwei Jianzhu Research Institute of the State 国家建委建筑科学研究院 Kexue Yanjiuyuan Building Commission
Architectural Society of China Zhongguo Jianzhu Xuehui 中国建筑学会 (ASC)
Architecture Design and Jianzhu Sheji Yanjiusuo 建筑设计研究所 Research Center
Beijing Industrial Building Jianzhu Gongchengbu 建筑工程部北京工业建筑设计 Design Institute of the Ministry Beijing Gongye Jianzhu 院 of Building Construction Shejiyuan
Beijing Municipal Institute of Beijing Jianzhu Sheji 北京建筑设计研究院 Architecture Design (BIAD) Yanjiuyuan
Beijing Zhubang Jianzhu Beijing Truebond Building 北京筑邦建筑装饰工程有限公 Zhuangshi Gongcheng Decoration Engineering Co. Ltd 司 Youxian Gongsi
Building Institute Directly under Zhongzhi Xiujianchu 中直修建处 Central Government
Building Design Institute of Jianshebu Jianzhu Sheji 建设部建筑设计研究院 Ministry of Construction Yanjiuyuan
119 Building Design Institute of Chengxiang Jianshe Ministry of Urban and Rural 城乡建设环境保护部建筑设计 Huanjing Baohu Bu Jianzhu Construction Environmental 院 Shejiyuan Protection
China Architecture Design and Zhongguo Jianzhu Sheji 中国建筑设计研究院 Research Group (CAG) Yanjiuyuan
China Institute of Building Zhongguo Jianzhu 中国建筑标准设计研究院 Standard Design and Research Biaozhun Sheji Yanjiuyuan
China Urban Construction Zhongguo Chengshi Jianshe 中国城市建设研究院 Design and Research Institute Yanjiuyuan
Design Institute of the Ministry Zhongyang Renmin of Building Construction under 中央人民政府建筑工程部设计 Zhengfu Jianzhu the Central People’s 院 Gongchenbu Shejiyuan Government
Hussen Architectural and Huasen Jianzhu Sheji Engineering Designing 华森建筑设计有限公司 Youxian Gongsi Consultant Ltd
Industrial and Urban Building Jianzhu Gongchengbu Sheji Design Institute of Design 建筑工程部设计总局工业及城 Zongju Gongye Ji Chengshi Bureau of the Ministry of 市建筑设计院 Jianzhu Shejiyuan Building Construction
Institute of Project Planning & Jixie Gongyebu Sheji Research of Ministry of 机械工业部设计研究总院 Yanjiu Zongyuan Machine Building Industry
Metallurgical Industry Design Yejin Gongye Shejiyuan 冶金工业设计院 Institute
Ministry of Construction Jianshebu 建设部
Ministry of Finance Caizhengbu 财政部
120 Ministry of Labor and Human Laodong Renshibu 劳动人事部 Resource
North China Municipal Zhongguo Shizheng Gongcheng Engineering Design and 中国市政工程华北设计研究院 Huabei Sheji Yanjiuyuan Research Institute
Shanghai Society of Architects Shanghai Jianzhushi Xiehui 上海建筑师协会
Shanghai Zhongsen Building Shanghai Zhongsen Sheji and Construction Design 上海中森设计顾问有限公司 Guwen Youxian Gongsi Consultant Ltd
Southwest Architectural Design Xinan Jianzhu Sheji Yanjiyuan 西南建筑设计研究院 & Research Institute (CSWADI)
State-owned Assets Supervision Guowuyuan Guoyou Zichan 国务院国有资产监督管理委员 and Administration Commission Jiandu Guanli Weiyuanhui 会 of the State Council (SASAC)
Zhongxu Architecture Design Zhongxu Jianzhu Sheji 中旭建筑设计有限责任公司 and Urbanism Planning Co. Ltd Youxian Zeren Gongsi
Names of People
Cao Xiaoxin 曹晓昕
Chen Deng’ao 陈登鳌
Chen Zhanxiang 陈占祥
Chen Zhi 陈植
Cui Kai 崔恺
Dai Nianci 戴念慈
Deng Xiaoping 邓小平
Guan Songsheng 关颂声
Hua Lanhong 华揽洪
Huang Zumiao 黄祖淼
Li Xinggang 李兴刚
Liang Sicheng 梁思成
121 Lin Huiyin 林徽因
Lin Leyi 林乐义
Liu Dunzhen 刘敦桢
Liu Futai 刘福泰
Liu Jiakun 刘家琨
Liu Shiying 柳士英
Liu Xunfan 刘洵藩
Lu Yanzhi 吕彦直
Ma Qingyun 马清运
Mao Zedong 毛泽东
Tong Jun 童寯
Wang Shu 王澍
Wu Liangyong 吴良镛
Xue Qiuli 薛求理 (Charlie Q.L. Xue)
Yang Kuanlin 杨宽麟
Yang Tingbao 杨廷宝
Zhao Shen 赵深
Zhang Yonghe 张永和 (Yung Ho Chang)
Zhou Rongxin 周荣鑫
Zhu Bin 朱彬
Zhu Jianfei 朱剑飞
Zhu Shigui 朱士圭
Zhu Tao 朱涛
Zou Denong 邹德侬
Other Matters
1911 Revolution Xinhai Geming 辛亥革命
Anti-rightist Campaign Fanyou Yundong 反右运动
122 Chinese Communist Party Zhongguo Gongchandang 中国共产党 (CCP)
Cultural Revolution Wenhua Da Geming 文化大革命
Design Revolution Sheji Geming 设计革命
Early Modern Period Jindai 近代
Five-year Plan Wunian Jihua 五年计划
Reform and Opening Gaige Kaifang 改革开放
Maintaining the big and Zhuada Fangxiao 抓大放小 releasing the small
Managerial Regulations of Gongcheng Kancha Sheji 工程勘察设计收费管理规定 Construction Design Fee Shoufei Guanli Guiding
Modern Period Xiandai 现代
Nanjing Decade Nanjing Shinian 南京十年
National Style Minzu Xingshi 民族形式
Nationalist Party Guomindang 国民党
Opium War Yapian Zhanzheng 鸦片战争
Pearl River Delta Zhujiang Sanjiaozhou 珠江三角洲
Practical, economical, and Shiyong, Jingji, Zai Keneng De 适用，经济，在可能的条件下 aesthetic only under permissive Tiaojian Xia Zhuyi Meiguan 注意美观 conditions
Socialist Modernism Shehui Zhuyi Xiandai Zhuyi 社会主义现代主义
Standard of Construction Design Gongcheng Sheji Shoufei 工程设计收费标准 Fee Biaozhun
Working Unit Danwei 单位
123
Minerva Access is the Institutional Repository of The University of Melbourne
Author/s: LI, FENG
Title: ‘Critical’ practice in state-owned design institutes in post-Mao China (1976-2000s): a case study of CAG (China Architecture Design and Research Group)
Date: 2010
Citation: Li, F. (2010). ‘Critical’ practice in state-owned design institutes in post-Mao China (1976- 2000s): a case study of CAG (China Architecture Design and Research Group). Masters Research thesis, Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne.
Persistent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/11343/35453
File Description: ‘Critical’ practice in state-owned design institutes in post-Mao China (1976-2000s): a case study of CAG (China Architecture Design and Research Group)
Terms and Conditions: Terms and Conditions: Copyright in works deposited in Minerva Access is retained by the copyright owner. The work may not be altered without permission from the copyright owner. Readers may only download, print and save electronic copies of whole works for their own personal non-commercial use. Any use that exceeds these limits requires permission from the copyright owner. Attribution is essential when quoting or paraphrasing from these works.