By Zhu Yuan
BEIJING, April 5 -- I noticed recently that the big pit I pass every day on my
way to work had finally been filled after several months. Hundreds of meters
away from the pit sit construction sites where skyscrapers are being built.
There is a striking contrast between the craze that
governments have for big construction projects and the neglect one sees
reflected in damaged roads and sidewalks. The disparity reflects an unhealthy
mentality on the part of some officials.
We Chinese have an expression - haoda xigong - to
describe that mentality. Haoda refers to a preference for big projects, and
xigong means trolling for praise or compliments. There is a logical correlation
between the two - the bigger a project is, the more sensational its impact, and
therefore the greater the credit flowing to the person who initiated it. Success
can be good for both the pocket book and the career.
This mentality can open the door to such social ills
as kickbacks and embezzlement. The temptation to engage in such practices can
factor into the motivation for launching ever-bigger projects, particularly
those that involve construction.
Chinese Culture Landmark City, a project that
triggered a heated debate at the plenary session of the Chinese People's
Political Consultative Conference last month, can be called a mega-project. The
money at play is said to be in excess of 30 billion yuan ($4.3 billion).
What is appalling is not only the size and scale of
the project, which will resemble a city rising on the horizon, but also the
grandiose title of Chinese Culture Landmark City.
This is a clue to its lack of substance.
The city, its initiators say, will epitomize the
essence of Chinese culture, particularly since the city of Jining, Shandong
province, which will host the park, is home to the sages Mencius and Confucius.
The two scholars founded Confucianism, the dominant
ideology of almost all dynasties. But regardless of how important Confucianism
has been to traditional Chinese culture, it is only part of it, even in the
realm of metaphysics.
The French novelist Andre Malraux (1901-76) said:
"Culture is the sum of all the forms of art, of love and of thought, which in
the course of centuries, have enable man to be less enslaved."
Even if the two sages and their school of thought had
been great enough to represent the intellectual core of traditional Chinese
culture, it is still too far-fetched to say that a city that is to be built in
their hometowns is capable of symbolizing the essence of Chinese culture.
I have racked my brain, but still cannot imagine what
structures could be built to convince those who set foot in the city that it
represents the epitome of Chinese culture.
A museum of antiques? A memorial hall for the two
sages? Several ancient style buildings with tiled roofs resembling those of the
Forbidden City? I strongly doubt the structures to be built will be able to
surpass, in terms of craftsmanship, the Forbidden City or any of the other
ancient structures scattered across the country. Even if they are the target of
lavish spending, they will still be modern structures. And the remains of
civilization are priceless.
If ancient structures such as the Forbidden City,
which has been around for more than 600 years, cannot be considered a great
enough symbol of Chinese culture, how can a group of modern structures? If we
really need to identify something as a landmark of Chinese culture, why don't we
make a big sign with gilded characters in both Chinese and English and hang it
next to the Palace Museum?
That would elicit much less laughter and derision
from visitors than a brand new cluster of fake ancient structures. As
magnificent and valuable as the Forbidden City is as a piece of cultural
heritage, it would be redundant to label it a cultural landmark city although
this group of ancient buildings does epitomize the great achievements of ancient
Chinese architects and construction workers.
This is because the connotation of culture is too
extensive. Our ancestors' achievements in architecture are just one chapter of
the issue, since culture is both tangible and intangible. Ancient ceramic,
furniture, paintings and calligraphy can be all included under the former
category. A group of structures, no matter how old, cannot represent an entire
culture, to say nothing of a brand new cluster of buildings.
Metaphysics and the different schools of thought that
have developed over the past several thousand years are also an important part
of our culture. It is apparent that the thoughts of sages cannot be represented
by structures, no matter how luxurious and magnificent.
So the absurdity of giving such a grandiose title to
an otherwise ordinary real estate project is only too obvious. Little wonder
that more than 100 members of the CPPCC rose to their objection to the project
at this year's plenary session after a member from Shandong province proposed
that the project be covered by the central government budget.
It would be wrong to believe that people behind the
project could be ignorant enough to have come up with the title by accident.
They did it intentionally to woo support from the central government, and they
even hired a well-known professor to do the feasibility study.
What is both funny and sad is that the professor
suggested the city could be a kind of sub-capital. He proposed that some
State-level ceremonies or big celebrations could be held there to ease the
burden on Beijing.
Is there any country that has two capitals? If not,
how can a professor propose such an absurd idea? Does China need more ceremonies
or celebrations, or is Beijing not big enough to function as a capital?
In an interview, the professor from Fudan University
confessed that he had been paid to do the feasibility study.
It is quite clear that the grandiose title and the
feasibility report from the renowned professor were mobilized to lend glory to
the project, which is nothing but another "image project" that could boost local
tourism or help gild the images of local officials.
Amid the crazy rush for big projects, what we really
need is for governments at various level to pay attention to such trifles as the
damaged roads that need to be mended, rain-water saving facilities, enough space
for trees in urban residential areas and so on. These things have a bearing on
the quality of life and on the country's sustainable development.
(Source: China Daily)
