During the last lecture, Moshe Safdie talked about the core of Safdie design: humanizing the megascale, inspired by nature, shaping the public realm. These concepts are all visible in his very first project, Habitat 67, which is still a constant reference 50 years later.
Safdie's Chinese projects seems to belong to a very different category, a more “real” reality. Take one of the residential projects he mentioned as an example: the Golden Dream Bay in Qinhuangdao.
It is still recognizable as his own work because of the megascale and the focus on community building within the project. However, the design value collides with the real estate’s goal for attracting buyers, even the renderings with happy families became what I usually see in Chinese real estate development ads. Bright sunny weathers and overly simplified site barely shown in the background. The city is treated as a ground for megastructure experiment with dense population. In fact, many of the cities that he had residential projects built in recent years all merge into this pool of over populated Asian cities that need better housing solutions, despite the cultural differences among these areas.
The context is generalized and simplified, which make the project seems to me exist within the site on it’s own, within a perfect state of ignorance as bliss. He mentioned previously in an interview that he was suspicious of the developer sponsored competition but he did it because they seem to be open about radical designs. I think the suspicion was qualified and the developers are probably open about any designs that could bring more money. In what way such megastructure made a positive impact on the urban condition?
Moshe Safdie half jokingly mentioned that you don’t get a chance to work with Chinese clients if you don’t have a story behind your project. The impression I get is that the “story” seems to be forced upon his projects in China and also his general philosophy is not enough for Chinese clients.
When I visited in Dalian this summer, I found out they demolished the famous monument in the central square because the change of political leaders. A new bridge on the sea was commissioned by the new leader, which symbolizes a lock for the city.
The demolished monumental column was the key and once it's demolished the city is locked forever. The change of political power in china really affected Dalian, young people are leaving the city to seek better opportunities because the economy had been static since the change. The metaphor is real, the city is locked. Before, if you stand in the center of the square the monument is in the center of a open port to the sea, now your view would be dominated by the curved bridge. The bridge brings little benefit to the local traffic in comparison to it’s high budget, because this hidden narrative is what shaped the structure.
I wonder to what extend the “story” should affect the design of the project in China.
没有评论:
发表评论