Printer Friendly

Shanghai surprise.

SIR: I was disappointed with Robert Turnbull's View From Shanghai (AR December 2004, p30), not only with its blatant factual errors but more so with the basis of judgement. In my 2003 article on the same city (AR February 2003, p30), I was at pains to correct the trend in popular mainstream architectural press to turn reportage on China into grotesque us-and-them cliches.

Mr Turnbull's view of Shanghai through the singular lens of aesthetics belies the more potent reality of Shanghai as an urban phenomenon fraught with ironies and messy endings. The propensity to single out individual buildings for subjective analysis only perpetuates the object-fascination which is a misrepresentation of architecture's place in the world.

The preservation debate makes such issues readily accessible, for it is here where Shanghai can be seen to be managing its balance of cultural values and modernization. The patchiness of the results reflects the complexity of the situation which cannot be accounted for with such glib references to tourist dollars or 'historic charm'.

That said, Xintiandi was not the 'brainchild' of a single man, but a negotiated process involving, most notably, SOM, an open-minded Hong Kong developer, and architect Ben Woods who is actually based in the States. The shikumen it reconstructed is a dying breed in a city which is destroying all but some high quality stock in central areas. And the Chinese City reported as being 'virtually intact' was last year already being replanned, subdivided and schemed with thirty-storey housing complexes.

Shanghai really deserves better treatment than this.

Yours etc

DARRYL CHEN

London, UK
COPYRIGHT 2005 EMAP Architecture
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2005, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:letters
Author:Chen, Darryl
Publication:The Architectural Review
Article Type:Letter to the Editor
Date:Feb 1, 2005
Words:261
Previous Article:Initial uncertainty.
Next Article:Krater landscape.


Related Articles
'Letters to the editor' page.
Three books: Kennedy on sales letters, Green and Lipton on design. (Summer Reading).
Hank, the man, was a far different person than Hank, the ballplayer. (Here Below).
Letters in the Editor's Mailbag.
Presidential praise--but for what?
Apprentice printer.
God has surprises.
Turf or astroturf? A look at the scope of the "canned letter" phenomenon.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters