Rome; painting by Rudolf
Wiegmann [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
Steven Leuck is one
of the owners of Contractors Electric LLC here in Eugene. He’s also a past-president of the Willamette
Valley Chapter - Construction Specifications Institute, and like me a member of
the Emerald Executive Association. He’s also one of the nicest guys you could
ever meet, with a tirelessly curious mind.
Steven
recently passed along a link to a CNN article about young architects from Europe who chose to pursue
their careers in China immediately upon graduating from architecture school. What
the article said did not surprise me. What was most startling (and telling
perhaps) is how much misplaced trust was laid at the feet of mere babies
(architecturally speaking). Designers right out of school do not know what they
don’t know. The Chinese boom-era predilection toward “xenocentric” buildings,
as President Xi Jinping called them, exacerbated problems. Those projects
betray a certain insecurity toward more traditional or conservative design
approaches in favor of shiny new objects as if to proclaim how “modern and
progressive” China’s contemporary culture is. As the article says, that trend
is now being tempered. I’m no expert, but my sense is China has been through a
period of excess, over-speculation, and profligacy that had to end at some
point. China is maturing and will increasingly focus on making its new cities more attractive and coherent: cleaner, people-friendly, with vibrant
streets and neighborhoods, as opposed to assembling collections of anti-urban,
Jetsons-like trophy buildings that clamor for attention.
As the
article goes on to say, the end of the Chinese “gold rush” has been accompanied
by a lessening reverence toward Westerners and an exodus of the young European
architects drawn to China by the promise of creative freedom and the projects
to lavish it upon. The legacy of this period includes eerily empty and vast,
instant “ghost cities” such as Ordos New City (Kangbashi) devoid of not only people but also of any sense of
place or history.
Changfeng footbridge on Fen river and Shanxi theater, Taiyuan, Shanxi,
China. Photo
by Emdx (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
What
lessons, if any, should we here in Oregon take from the Chinese experience?
Certainly, the scale of development there dwarfs anything that might ever occur
here, so perhaps we needn’t be so concerned. On the other hand, it does not
take especially large projects to have an outsized impact in a community like
Eugene. The recent wave of large student housing developments is a case in
point. For better or worse, projects like The Hub
and the Capstone apartments (13th & Olive) have irretrievably transformed
downtown Eugene. Even much larger American cities, such as the would-be Amazon suitors, should be wary of the potentially destabilizing impact of massive
projects drawn from whole cloth.
Rome
wasn’t built in a day. No city aspiring to greatness or simply mere pleasantness
can be. I’m not exactly sure what the best mechanisms are to ensure future
development occurs in easily digested increments; however, we can avoid repeating
the mistakes of others. Wisdom is a byproduct of experience, something most
twenty-something architects lack. The Chinese undervalued prudence as well as
its own history and culture, paying a heavy price for doing so. Growth may be
inevitable but Eugene can achieve the grace and style we hope for, even as it grows.
What’s important is to value experience, whether it is our own or comes from
others far away.
Thank
you Steven for sharing a thought-provoking article!
No comments:
Post a Comment