China heritage chief says building boom is destroying country's heritage

[muppet]

FFS

AMERICA DOES NOT OWN THE INTERNATIONAL STYLE


Please please please do some research.

[plinko]

Of course. But the mass urbanization of Chinese cities has NOTHING to do with individual buildings, what they look like, how tall they are, or if their particular style is intrinsically Chinese, Western or otherwise. Cities urbanize at a MACRO level, and Chinese cities are urbanizing at a pace never seen before.

This article attempts to point out one of the pitfalls of that urbanization. It's a short article that doesn't have alot of meat, but the point stands. The net result of the continued mass bull-dozing of older districts in Chinese central cities could come at great cost when viewed historically. It's not unlike what went on in many US cities in the 1960s with urban renewal, but the scale is completely unprecedented.

If anything, the recognition of such ills is how movements are born. Here's hoping that somebody in the Chinese government can see that saving some of these districts might be a good thing.

Otherwise the end result will be just a few of these historic areas left and they'll end up like Disneyland.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by muppet

FFS

AMERICA DOES NOT OWN THE INTERNATIONAL STYLE


Please please please do some research.

im talking skyscraper wise here...and when it comes to an all glass skyscraper Lever House was the first.

[muppet]

SONY, how old are you?

[plinko]

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork

im talking skyscraper wise here...and when it comes to an all glass skyscraper Lever House was the first.

[muppet]

SONY check out who Ludwig Van der Rohe was, where he came from what he designed (and where, and when).

Like how you allude neo-Gothic as a foreign style, you could do the same to International style you know:


"The design principles first expressed 1921 in the Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper competition in Berlin and build thirty years later in 860-880 Lake Shore Drive were copied extensively and are now considered characteristic of the modern International Style as well as essential for the development of modern High-tech architecture."


Lets say the first wavy/ rounded towers were built in China by European architects, does that now mean China now can claim all wave-liked (read: non right angled) skyscrapers as hers? From Chicago Aqua to London's Gherkin?

Does Turning Torso mean all twisted or spiralled towers belong to Sweden?

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by plinko

Of course. But the mass urbanization of Chinese cities has NOTHING to do with individual buildings, what they look like, how tall they are, or if their particular style is intrinsically Chinese, Western or otherwise. Cities urbanize at a MACRO level, and Chinese cities are urbanizing at a pace never seen before.

This article attempts to point out one of the pitfalls of that urbanization. It's a short article that doesn't have alot of meat, but the point stands. The net result of the continued mass bull-dozing of older districts in Chinese central cities could come at great cost when viewed historically. It's not unlike what went on in many US cities in the 1960s with urban renewal, but the scale is completely unprecedented.

If anything, the recognition of such ills is how movements are born. Here's hoping that somebody in the Chinese government can see that saving some of these districts might be a good thing.

Otherwise the end result will be just a few of these historic areas left and they'll end up like Disneyland.

though the way your building look absolutely change your culture,like i said if there was Asian temples popping up all around NYC and skyscraper sized watch tower of the eastern Han Dynasty it would change us. Culturally NYC would be very Asian looking. just as Asian cities who tear down all these historic districts are loosing pieces of their history that they will never be able to get back and are replacing them with westernized architecture.

[muppet]

You do realise Asian temple designs, watch towers, slanted roofs etc are at least 200 years old. Grrrr...

Its like demanding the French build in Empire or chateau style for their office blocks.

On your theory for us to be Americanising we'd really be building giant teepees or log cabins. Stuff that was native to the country, and not imported or not international. (Jesus, its even called' International' as a style)

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by muppet

SONY check out who Ludwig Van der Rohe was, where he came from what he designed (and where, and when).

Like how you allude neo-Gothic as a foreign style, you could do the same to International style you know:


"The design principles first expressed 1921 in the Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper competition in Berlin and build thirty years later in 860-880 Lake Shore Drive were copied extensively and are now considered characteristic of the modern International Style as well as essential for the development of modern High-tech architecture."


Lets say the first wavy/ rounded towers were built in China by European architects, does that now mean China now can claim all wave-liked (read: non right angled) skyscrapers as hers? From Chicago Aqua to London's Gherkin?

Does Turning Torso mean all twisted or spiralled towers belong to Sweden?

influenced and yes a country who birthed a style can claim that style not the building itself....those building...there American...built in Chicago. and im 22 if you must know.

[muppet]

ok for arguments sake lets say International style is German because the guy who sourced the style from Morocco and Japan was German (and never mind about all the other contributing architects from around the world who developed that movement also).

By your account this German style, transmogrified onto a highrise in America (and lets forget Van Der Rohes multistoried 'glass houses' blocks), makes this style American. Because the first one completed was in America makes all other buildings after it American, even though Tokyo, London, Sao Paulo etc were building them also.

By those stipulations you'd also need to thus pinpoint the first pomo style , post pomo highrise, the first organic one, the first needle/ tv tower one etc. (and where they were).


What I think you have assumed is that modern=American, not just Moderne.

Also:

Everything that follows modernism (post modernism, post pomo, organic etc) is automatically subsumed as American too.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by muppet

ok for arguments say lets say International style is German because the guy who sourced the style from Morocco and Japan was German (and never mind about all the other contributing architects from around the world who developed that movement also).

By your account this German style, transmogrified onto a highrise in America (and lets forget Van Der Rohes multistoried 'glass houses' blocks), makes this style American. Because the first one completed was in America makes all other buildings after it American, even though Tokyo, London, Sao Paulo etc were building them also.

By those stipulations you'd also need to thus pinpoint the first pomo style , post pomo highrise, the first organic one, the first needle/ tv tower one etc. (and where they were).


What I think you have assumed is that modern=American, not just Moderne.

Also:

Everything that follows modernism (post modernism, post pomo, organic etc) is automatically subsumed as American too.

*sighs* no not what im saying at all....SWFC is not American....2 IFC is not American...and so on and so forth though what i am saying is that they were influenced as skyscrapers by American skyscrapers..thats all.i was in no way implying that they are american,simply influenced by it. just as building a pyramid today is influenced by the ones that were the first to be built in the world. all glass,steel framed skyscrapers or rather all skyscrapers were influenced by the first that were ever built,without the first there would be none.China is embracing skyscrapers not temples and Asian castles anymore and through destroying their past to build a foreign type of Architecture they are loosing their heritage thats all i was stating.

[muppet]

You dont get it - modernism (post, pomo, organic etc) is not a foreign style. Its international - a new alien style to every country it occured in. Those glass boxes stood out like sore thumbs from the brick and stone of the cities around them, whether it was NYC, London, Tokyo, Berlin or Hong Kong.

Also let me remind you for China to be embracing indigenous temples and pagodas, and curved roofs (and it still does believe it or not), it would need to be the 18th century. There have been numerous influential architectural styles since, built by Chinese traders (read: travellers), and colonists - from 17th century Chinese Baroque to SE Asian shophouses, to the hybrid Shikumen housing of 19th century Shanghai that merged Victorian terrace with Qing courtyard styles. We're not talking simply an indigenous style supplanted by the new (in your eyes read: foreign) here, its been a good 200 years of outside influences.

The same period of US history I may add, that you stake a claim all modernism to.

And as for outside 'influence' on those lines youre on you could say:


International Style is from Morocco and Japan

Art Deco from Egypt and Mexico and Byzantium

Roman is Greek

Russian Kievan is Indian

Mughal Indian is Iranian

Persian is Mongolian

Byzantine is from Turkey

Gothic is from Saudi Arabia

also

Impressionism is from Japan

18th and 19th Century European fashions were from Turkey

Cubism is from Mali and Benin

Democracy is Indian (and not Greek)

Sexual equality is Chinese

Postmodernism is art deco

Skyscrapers are Yemeni

Farming, cities, all cats, dogs, wheat, sheep, horses, and cattle are Iraqi, oh and pyramids

chickens are Burmese

planes are French

TV is British

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by muppet

You dont get it - modernism (post, pomo, organic etc) is not a foreign style. Its international - a new alien style to every country it occured in. Those glass boxes stood out like sore thumbs from the brick and stone of the cities around them, whether it was NYC, London, Tokyo, Berlin or Hong Kong.

Also let me remind you for China to be embracing indigenous temples and pagodas, and curved roofs (and it still does believe it or not), it would need to be the 18th century. There have been numerous influential architectural styles since, built by Chinese traders (read: travellers), and colonists - from 17th century Chinese Baroque to SE Asian shophouses, to the hybrid Shikumen housing of 19th century Shanghai that merged Victorian terrace with Qing courtyard styles. We're not talking simply an indigenous style supplanted by the new (in your eyes read: foreign) here, its been a good 200 years of influential style.

The same period of US history I may add, that you stake a claim all modernism to.


For that intervention to be a 'foreign' style you'd have to rewind to the 18th Century (sloping rooves, pagodas etc).

though the first were built in the US....and i never said that China built temples and pagodas in the 19th or 20th century im not that stupid,i was using it as an example because those styles are predominately Asian.

[muppet]

once again at the end of the day International style is an international style, not American, (and even though it sourced it's styles from indigenous architecture in Morocco and Japan). Just because the first highrise one completed was in America, despite the cities round the world already building in that style, and with a whole plethora of international architects in the movement (hence why they call it International).


Look at the organic curves and flowing shapes in architecture round the world now - an equally 'international' style, and far removed from pomo before it. Would you be calling out Chicago's Aqua as being a foreign import now because it was conceived with Gaudi in Spain? Or would that be the Turning Torso in Sweden?



www.jetsongreen.com, www.azuremagazine.com

www.instablogsimages.com, http://plusmood.com

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by muppet

once again at the end of the day International style is international style, (even though it sourced it's styles from indigenous architecture in Morocco and Japan).


Look at the organic curves and flowing shapes in architecture round the world now - an equally 'international' style, and far removed from pomo before it. Would you be calling out Chicago's Aqua as being a foreign import now because it was conceived with Gaudi in Spain? Or would that be the Turning Torso in Sweden?

nope i never said anything was foreign just influenced by a foreign source.

[muppet]

ok so in 50 years from now Chicago is full of weird and wonderful organic shapes, would you be saying they were all influenced by Spaniards /Swedes?

No. Because that kind of architecture was going on simultaneously round the world, with every architect borrowing off and influencing each other in one collective movement, and also in multinational firms. Just because the first highrise one completed was in Sweden doesnt make them all Swedish influenced. Just because a Spanish architect's styles predate them doesnt make them all Spanish influenced.

If lets say Spain and only Spain was filled with crazy organic buildings, indigenously conceived, and for years before anyone else, then yes, you would have a point. That no other country built like that, and no foreign architects were even part of that movement. But that isnt the case. Not with organic, and not with International.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by muppet

ok so in 50 years from now Chicago is full of weird and wonderful organic shapes, would you be saying they were all influenced by Spaniards /Swedes?

No. Because that kind of architecture was going on simultaneously round the world, with every architect borrowing off and influencing each other in one collective movement, and also in multinational firms. Just because the first highrise one completed was in Sweden doesnt make them all Swedish influenced. Just because a Spanish architect's styles predate them doesnt make them all Spanish influenced.

If lets say Spain and only Spain was filled with crazy organic buildings, indigenously conceived, and for years before anyone else, then yes, you would have a point. That no other country built like that, and no foreign architects were even part of that movement. But that isnt the case. Not with organic, and not with International.

i see your point though when it comes down to who can be attributed with its creation when trying to find its origin,i would still give it to America....it caught on quickly though we still had it first.

[muppet]

erm tell me youre not talking about organic now?

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by muppet

erm tell me youre not talking about organic now?

o no no no,im talking about international,as for organic i will credit Spain for it being that they had it first.

[muppet]

ok ^ and actually they didnt. It came from art nouveau, which was pan-European.

ANYWAY, I think we have to agree to disagree

Mies Van Der Rohe 1921 Berlin - International style


www.poster.net/mies-van-der-rohe-ludwig