Only if we abandon the vulgar mentality of jeering can we be capable of attentively listening to the melodies—sometimes gentle and light, sometimes high and stirring—in the rhythmic architectural spaces of this frozen music. Only then can we truly possess a healthy mindset for appreciating 'Good Chinese Architecture'.

In early November, the author participated in 'Vibrant China—Contemporary Chinese Architecture Exhibition' hosted by the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television, Archina and other organizations in Istanbul, Turkey. The organizers selected nineteen architectural works from mainland China to convey Chinese architects' reflections and explorations on the local and contemporary nature of Chinese architecture.

 

Among the exhibited works, the largest is 50,000 square meters, and the smallest is just over 100 square meters. In China's booming construction market, such volumes are obviously small buildings when ranked by size.

 

Although all are from the hands of domestic industry elites, for the mass public media, these small buildings seem far from enough to attract interest. What truly attracts public media attention are the various so-called 'bizarre' buildings—the 'big guys'. 'Big' is not only because of large floor area and size, but also because of high social attention and influence.

 

In previous years, the 'bizarre' buildings that the media focused on appeared on a scale of years. The National Centre for the Performing Arts' 'boiled egg', which once caused a huge uproar, now sits quietly west of the Great Hall of the People with little attention. The famous CCTV 'big underpants' was debated for years, and after a big fire, there was not much noise (of course, on the day before Singles' Day this year, it suddenly won the 2013 Best Tall Building Worldwide award, which was a shock). What is startling is that in the past year or two, 'bizarre' buildings have suddenly surged and appeared frequently, with a stance of 'you finish singing and I come on stage'. The 'big long johns' (Suzhou Gate of the Orient), 'big riding boots' (Shanghai Shangjia Center), 'toilet lid' (Huzhou Sheraton Hotel), 'bikini' (Hangzhou Olympic Sports Center)—this bunch of weird nicknames are ever stranger, and the most exaggerated is the 'phallus' interpretation of the new People's Daily headquarters in Beijing.

 

Actually, the Suzhou Center should be the Suzhou Gate of the Orient, an important axis landmark in the Jinji Lake plan. This design was finalized years ago. Having seen it for so many years, I have never associated its image with long johns. The project was delayed again and again due to funding issues, and finally almost completed, but unexpectedly it was hit hard and turned into 'long johns'. The facade of Shangjia Center adopts on-site cold-bent unitized curtain wall, which is highly technical. Due to height restrictions and the curved form pursued in the original design, the overall effect is indeed not great, but the 'riding boots' joke is still a bit far-fetched. The lakeside ring envisioned by MAD in the design was jokingly called a 'toilet lid', which the designer probably never dreamed of. (Although it does look a bit like one.) Hangzhou Olympic Sports Center is a masterpiece using parametric design, with smooth and vivid shapes, very much in line with the characteristics of sports architecture. Standing at a normal person's height, one would never see the so-called 'bra' appearance of the building. Unfortunately, some 'birdman' flew into the air and read out an extended meaning that made the designer laugh and cry.

 

What's wrong with our public evaluation? Is it that Chinese people's concrete thinking ability is too strong? Or has our public evaluation become vulgarized?

 

When I was a child, media information was scarce and entertainment life had few highlights, so many people liked to watch street fights, fearing that the parties involved would not beat each other bloody. They were not trying to stop the fight, but to watch and jeer. Unfortunately, decades later, the popularization of online information has the power to 'flatten' the earth, but it cannot change the mentality of Chinese people who love to jeer.

 

For example, recently Sun Yang got into trouble. Driving without a license, detained for seven days, temporarily expelled from both the national and provincial teams. This matter itself is perfectly normal; violations of rules and laws should be punished accordingly. But such a simple matter immediately attracted overwhelming criticism, and some media even suggested—please Sun Yang be careful not to become the sports world's Li Tianyi. What kind of mentality is this? It's not enough unless the matter is blown up, not enough unless big-character posters are put up to knock someone down, not enough unless the person is ruined and stinking. This is not correct public evaluation; this is jeering.

 

The aforementioned weird building nicknames obviously cannot escape the old routine of jeering.

 

The designer of the new People's Daily headquarters later came out to refute rumors. The architectural plan we saw is an elegant, steady, and modern good design. But why was it given the most bizarre imagination?

 

A friend of mine posted a passage on WeChat: 'Who ruined such a originally very good design?' This question is very simple, but it hits the nail on the head! Why were everyone so excited after seeing a highly accidental photo taken by some ill-intentioned person of the building with scaffolding during construction? Why were they so impassioned after seeing the unscrupulous ridicule of an American news program anchor, eyes shining as if injected with chicken blood, excitedly talking and foaming at the mouth? How similar this is to the ignorant masses in Lu Xun's writings! Nearly a hundred years have passed since the 'May Fourth' movement, and against the backdrop of the strong rise of a major power's economy, has the mentality of Chinese people truly escaped vulgarity and low taste? This deserves our serious and careful consideration.

 

'The Voice of China' is well done. It promotes a positive value standard: heroes are not asked about their origins, looks are not judged, only voice is heard. Appreciating music through music—this is the key to the program's popularity across the country.

 

'Vibrant China' is well done. It spreads a voice to the outside world, a sober, objective voice with cultural confidence from China—the correct architectural voice that the public needs most.

 

How should we read 'Good Chinese Architecture'?

 

If our public media paid extensive attention to and reported on such positive architectural events instead of focusing on so-called eye-catching bizarre nicknames, then we could have a healthy platform for seriously appreciating 'Good Chinese Architecture'; if we abandon the vulgar mentality of jeering, then we would be capable of attentively listening to the melodies—sometimes gentle and light, sometimes high and stirring—in the rhythmic architectural spaces of this frozen music, and we would truly possess a healthy mindset for appreciating 'Good Chinese Architecture'.