Beijing Record: A Physical and Political History of Planning Modern Beijing

Jeffrey Soule Fellow of the American Institute of Certified Planners (FAICP) Director, Outreach and International Progra...

Author: Jun Wang

16 downloads 821 Views 20MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Jeffrey Soule Fellow of the American Institute of Certified Planners (FAICP) Director, Outreach and International Programs, American Planning Association Wang Jun is a rare breed among contemporary Chinese journalists. When he seizes upon a subject which he cares about profoundly, he delves tirelessly into it until he gathers all the facts and lets them speak incisively for themselves. As someone who lives in a courtyard house behind the Forbidden City for the past ten years, I am a witness to the state of this preservation of old Beijing which Wang Jun writes about with a powerful sense of urgency. He writes passionately without letting the research and facts overcome his sense of personal committment. This is a must-read for anyone who is interested in Chinese culture, history and environment. Liu Heung Shing Pulitzer prize-winning photographer, Author of China After Mao; China, Portrait of a Country.

•

Shortly after its original Chinese bestseller edition was published by SDX joint Publishing Company House in October 2003, it ignited a firestorm of debate and discussion in a country where public interaction over such a sensitive subject rarely surfaces. The Chinese edition is in its 11th print run and was translated into Japanese in 2008. This newly-translated English version has the latest update on the author’s findings in the area. As the only edition printed in full color with nearly 300 illustrations, the English version powerfully showcases the stunning architecture, culture, and history of China’s Dynamic Capital, Beijing. Home to more than 15 million people, this ancient capital city — not surprisingly — has a controversial, complicated history of planning and politics, development and demolition.The publication raises a number of unsettling questions: Why have valuable historical architectural heritage, such as city ramparts, gateways, old temples, memorial archways and the urban fabric of hutongs (traditional alleyways) and siheyuan (courtyard houses), been visibly disappearing for decades? Why are so many houses being demolished at a time of economic growth? Is no one prepared to stand up for the preservation of the city? For his research, Wang went through innumerable archives, read diaries and collected an unprecedented quantity of data, accessing firsthand materials and unearthing photographs that clearly document the city’s relentless, unprecedented physical makeover. In addition, he conducted more than 50 in-person interviews with officials, planners, scholars and other experts. Many illustrations are published here for the first time, compiled in the 1990s when archival public access was reformulated.

World Scientific www.worldscientific.com 7648 hc

7648hc(Final).indd 1

ISBN-13 978-981-4295-72-7 ISBN-10 981-4295-72-8

,!7IJ8B4-cjfhch!

Beijing Record A Physical and Political History of Planning Modern Beijing

WANG Jun

A Physical and Political History of Planning Modern Beijing

Beijing Record, the result of ten years of research on the urban transformation of Beijing in the last fifty years, brings to an extended Western audience the inside story on the key decisions that led to Beijing’s present urban fragmentation and its loss of memory and history in the form of bulldozing its architectural heritage. Wang’s publication presents a survey of the main developments and government-level (both central and municipal) decisions, devoting a lot of attention to the 1950s and 1960s, when Beijing experienced a critical wave of transformative events.

Beijing Record

One decade into the urban century, with over half of the world’s population living in cities, Wang Jun’s masterful account of the modern history of planning in Beijing has given us a wise and cautionary tale for planners, policy makers and anyone interested in place-making. Unlike any other account, Wang combines his knowledge of the facts of past efforts to guide Beijing with the little-known political landscape behind the decisions. Wang Jun’s Beijing Record sharply defines the choices 21st century cities all face — balancing culture, history and development — in an engaging and sobering account of this ancient city’s ultimate failure in striking that balance.

WANG

World Scientific

11/25/10 1:33 PM

This page is intentionally left blank


7648 tp.indd 1

11/25/10 1:33 PM


WANG Jun Xinhua News Agency, China

World Scientific NEW JERSEY

7648 tp.indd 2

•

LONDON

•

SINGAPORE

•

BEIJING

•

SHANGHAI

•

HONG KONG

•

TA I P E I

•

CHENNAI

11/25/10 1:33 PM

Published by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. 5 Toh Tuck Link, Singapore 596224 USA office: 27 Warren Street, Suite 401-402, Hackensack, NJ 07601 UK office: 57 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

BEIJING RECORD A Physical and Political History of Planning Modern Beijing Copyright © 2011 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the Publisher.

For photocopying of material in this volume, please pay a copying fee through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. In this case permission to photocopy is not required from the publisher.

ISBN-13 978-981-4295-72-7 ISBN-10 981-4295-72-8

Printed in Singapore.

Lixi - Beijing Record.pmd

1

9/28/2010, 9:16 AM

For You, My Dear Son Kuankuan

FrontMatter.indb 5

10/19/2010 8:36:20 AM

Wang Jun, was born in 1969 in a mountainous, poverty-stricken area in Guizhou, one of China’s least developed provinces. He majored in journalism at Beijing’s Renmin University and upon graduation in 1991, he began working at Xinhua News Agency, China’s state news agency. Currently, he works with Outlook, a weekly news magazine affiliated with the Xinhua. Wang Jun’s time as a journalist coincided with an unprecedented construction boom in the Beijing. He questioned the need to do away with the ancient structures — city walls, lanes and alleys known as hutong — in the Chinese capital city in the midst of modernization. With that in mind, he investigated and dug deep into the labyrinth of Beijing old and new. He did research for nearly ten years and his efforts were culminated in the publication of Beijing Record in 2003. The Beijing Record became a bestseller in China and has been reprinted for eleven times. In 2008, Shukousha published a Japanese version. This newly-translated English version has the latest update on the author’s findings in the area. As the only edition printed in full color with nearly 300 illustrations, the English version powerfully showcases the stunning architecture, culture, and history of China’s Dynamic Capital, Beijing. Wang Jun’s second book, Cities as Recorded by a Journalist, published in 2008, reveals the secret of urbanization in China’s reform era — the most massive of its kind in human history. “For communication, humans rely on journalists who are faithful to facts,” wrote Wang Jun. “Barriers inherent in the human race can be overcome only in societies where journalists can work as journalists, where communication is truly possible.”

FrontMatter.indb 6

10/19/2010 8:36:26 AM

FA Reading

Contents

vi

About the Author

xi

Foreword

xvii xviii

Preface The City of Beijing: in the Twinkling of an Eye

xxiii

Acknowledgement

1

Chapter 1 Preservation vs. Demolition 2 “Transformation” of Old Beijing 15 Demolition vs. Preservation 26 “Will our Capital City be Moved to another Place?”

2

39 40

FrontMatter.indb 7

Chapter 2 Antagonizing Views on Beijing’s City Planning 40 Differences Surface 46 Beijing, the Greatest 62 Debate between Friends 71 Map of Monumental Structures in Besieged Beiping 84 “Transforming Consumption Cities into Production Cities”

10/19/2010 8:36:26 AM

viii

91 92

125 126

173 174

229 230

265 266

FrontMatter.indb 8

BEIJING RECORD

Chapter 3 The “Liang-Chen Proposal” â•‡ 92 “Charlie Chen” â•‡ 99 Planning for New Urban Center 104 Debate with Soviet Advisors 111 Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District Chapter 4 Controversy on “Liang-Chen Proposal” 126 Opponents to “Liang-Chen Proposal” 133 City Walls: Preservation vs. Demolition 142 In Defense of Old Beijing 148 “Death” of Liang-Chen Proposal 164 “Where Have Those New Buildings Actually Been Built?” Chapter 5 Controversy on Dawuding 174 Zhang Kaiji’s “Self-Criticisms” 180 Tradition vs. Modernism 197 “For the Second Best” 211 “Waste” under Attack Chapter 6 Perplexities of the Wise 230 Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate 238 Wu Han Launches Attacks 256 Big Compounds Developed Into Enclaves Chapter 7 Pedantism 266 Self-defense in the Campaign of Airing Views 279 Political Storm 292 A Pair of Famous Opponents 300 “Chen-Hua Alliance” 306 A Pair of “Sworn Enemies”

10/19/2010 8:36:26 AM

FA Reading

Contents

317 318

391 392

457 458

479

FrontMatter.indb 9

ix

Chapter 8 Blueprint Revealed 318 Master Plan Drawn 332 City Wall Dismantling Spree 352 Forbidden City Rebuilding Plan Unimplemented 364 Administrative Center in the Old City 383 Urban People’s Commune Chapter 9 Clean Break between the Old and the New 392 Disputes over “Wide Roads” 398 Final Demolition of the City Walls 431 Paris Tour — A Day like A Year 434 “Making a Clean Break with Old Material Culture” 449 No Answer to be Found Chapter 10 Lingering Sound, Hard to Die 458 Sigh at this Man 463 Too Much Entanglement to Clear Index

10/19/2010 8:36:26 AM


FA Reading

Foreword

FrontMatter.indb 11

10/19/2010 8:36:27 AM

Foreword

Over the course of its long and eventful history, Beijing has been called many things: The City of Splendor; Beijing the Magnificent; Beijing the Sacred City; the city of grand and harmonious design, the frontier city, or the ultimate capital city of China, to name but a few. Recently, however, labels and attributes related to Beijing have dramatically changed in tone and nature. One particular attribute deserves, alas, to be mentioned here, for it is a ubiquitous sentiment: Beijing, a city being lost before our very eyes. From Rehabilitating the Old City of Beijing (Wu Liangyong, 1999), “Remaking Beijing” (Wu Hung, 2005), to The Last Days of Old Beijing (Michael Meyer, 2008) and The Concrete Dragon (Thomas Campanella, 2009), historians, urban planners and journalists both in China and abroad have written, lamented, lectured and blogged about the transformative (internal and external) powers that triggered the development of the old city of Beijing into a modern, global city consisting of different, and oftentimes, conflicting aspirations and temporalities. Wang Jun’s book Beijing Record, at long last, brings to an extended western audience the inside story of the key decisions that led to Beijing’s present urban fragmentation and its loss of memory and history in the form of the bulldozing of its architectural heritage. Beijing Record is a remarkable achievement. It was researched and compiled mainly in the 1990s, when many archives reformulated and loosened their access policies; it, therefore, incorporates a huge amount of previously unpublished (or “classified”) data; it draws some of its most vivid perspectives and insights from eyewitness accounts, in the form of interviews, with a great variety of actors on the stage of Beijing’s economic and urban development; finally, numerous illustrations, many of them published here for the first time, supplement the narrative of a city exposed to highly volatile ideological and market forces. First and foremost, Beijing Record is about the engaged curiosity and determination of a Xinhua News Agency’s journalist to get to the bottom of things. Wang Jun engages the authorities in debate; he makes Beijing residents aware of current and historical events; he follows decision-making

FrontMatter.indb 12

10/19/2010 8:36:27 AM

FA Reading

Foreword

xiii

processes devised by the Beijing Municipal Government or by real estate developers, and evaluates their respective consequences; he publishes opinion pieces in major journals and newspapers, and his blog at blog.sina. com.cn/wangjun constitutes a treasure trove of materials on heritage sites and preservation planning (or, rather, the lack thereof) in China as a whole. His reports and factual accounts both galvanize and offend. They galvanize public opinion, and offend developers and authorities. Over the course of our acquaintance, I have witnessed Wang Jun coming under strong attack by colleagues using language derived straight from the rhetoric of the days of the Cultural Revolution; I have similarly (and in short order) witnessed him succeed, with the support he managed to solicit from the public and government departments, in stopping the demolition of countless structures of historical significance. One such victory over the authorities, if the word may be permitted, came when, in July 2009, Wang Jun published an article denouncing the pending demolition of Liang Sicheng’s courtyard house. Liang Sicheng, it should be pointed out, was modern China’s founding father of the discipline of architectural history and preservation. Beijing Record is largely about Liang Sicheng’s ultimately futile attempt to save traditional Beijing from the wrecking balls of Mao’s socialist revolutionary projections. While Wang Jun’s 2009 article was hotly debated in Beijing, I had the privilege to travel with him and his family in Hebei province. We had undertaken several trips together in the past, but July 28, 2009 turned out to be a significant day: the head of Beijing’s Cultural Preservation Bureau personally intervened in the demolition of Liang Sicheng’s old courtyard house, and, over the course of the next week, a moratorium was called on the destruction of traditional structures in Beijing, especially those known to be associated with famous personae both past and present. Liang Sicheng’s old home, which, curiously, had not been placed under the protective envelope of the Cultural Relics Bureau, was spared. It was a victory of symbolic impact, albeit it must be placed to the far right of an envisioned temporal axis of such events; the far left of that same axis is occupied by what Wang Jun and Wu Hung (quoting Chen Gan, a senior engineer instrumental in formulating Beijing’s post-Liberation construction plan) describes as the shift of “point zero”, namely, the consequential shift of the seat of power from the throne hall in the imperial palace onto the open, public stage of the newly constructed Tiananmen Square in 1950. By then, Mao’s decision to anchor his authority within the realm of the old city had already been made. The changes Beijing underwent in the 1950s were not subtle. It lost its magnificent archways along Chang’an Avenue. They

FrontMatter.indb 13

10/19/2010 8:36:27 AM

xiv

BEIJING RECORD

were taken down overnight, in clandestine fashion, “because it was realized that their destruction would be unpopular and it was thought preferable that there should be as short a time possible during which people could see them actually being demolished.” By 1952, one of the few remaining foreigners pointedly observed that “the People’s Government seems to have a lack of taste and a narrow-minded suburbanism more often associated with a government of the lower middle class than a government of workers.” (Peter Lum, aka Lady Crowe, Peking 1950–1953, London 1958) Yet, during these same years, urban planners and architects at Qinghua University and state planning bureaus, most of them familiar with western (and Russian) planning principles and fully aware of Beijing’s traditional urban fabric, imaginatively designed community spaces, administrative compounds and individual residential buildings which, if executed, would have stood any capital city in the world in good stead. However, as far as I am aware, these very creative and adaptive designs (that left the cell structure and overall grid of Beijing intact), were never implemented, reputedly due to lack of funding. Beijing’s architectural heritage trajectory of the 1950s continues downwards, and, with much anxiety, Pearl S. Buck, noting in general how Beijing’s monuments were falling into decay, remembers a visit to the old Summer Palace on the outskirts of Beijing: “It was under guard, for the new government, as we still called it, was conscious of its national treasures and the great imperial buildings of the past were all under military guard. On this day I had lingered long in the Forbidden City, the idle soldiers staring at me curiously, and at last one of them beckoned me to follow him around the corner of a palace. Thinking that he wanted to show me something I had not yet seen, I followed. But when I reached the place where he stood, he put up his hand and pulled down a magnificent porcelain tile from the edge of a low roof, a tile of the old imperial yellow, stamped with a dragon. ‘One silver dollar’, he said.” (Pearl S. Buck, My Several Worlds, 1954) The story of the 1950s ends with a number of significant events: the smelting of iron for a projected but ill-advised and devastating Great Leap Forward campaign, resulting in the loss of massive quantities of building timber pulled from historic temples and traditional residential housing; the first phase of the sustained and irreversible tearing down of Beijing’s city walls and gates (as illustrated by the cover photo); and the construction of the Ten Great Buildings to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the People’s Republic in 1959. The latter were decidedly not of a structural style,

FrontMatter.indb 14

10/19/2010 8:36:27 AM

FA Reading

Foreword

xv

“regulated by a harmony so subtle, that after having looked at it, you bend your head as if to listen to it.” (Abel Bonnard, commenting on the dignity and harmonious coherence of traditional Chinese architecture in 1926.) Wang Jun’s Beijing Record, first published in 2003, has won a number of awards not long after its release. It was recently voted book of the year by the China Readers’ Journal Zhonghua dushu bao, an influential trade publication, and thus occupies an illustrious position within the pantheon of the most influential books published since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949. It is still in print, now in its 9th print run, fully seven years after first being published. It was translated into Japanese in 2008, and there is a Taiwanese edition. This English translation is a result of conversations dating back to 2006. With the Olympic Games sitting squarely in the middle of the project as a distracting event, it took over two years to complete. Looking from afar, one could have the impression that with Rem Koolhaas’ CCTV tower entering the skyline in that same time span, Beijing’s transformation from a coherently conceived imperial capital city to an international stage for disaggregated and locally, stylistically disconnected architectural forms, urban functions and community designs, is complete. However, by way of juxtaposition, Beijing’s recent efforts regarding preservation policies can be benchmarked by pointing to the regulatory framework of defining Beijing’s Historic Preservation Districts (2002), and by making historic preservation one of the priorities in the latest version of the Beijing masterplan (2004– 2020). Among all the chatter about urban renewal, among this cacophony of construction noises permeating modern Beijing day and night (regrettably, or perhaps fortunately, Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin remained largely silent on the matter of urban regeneration!), Wang Jun’s voice is all the more important for our understanding of a city which may well become the capital of the world’s largest economy in the not too distant future. The undeniably precious place of the past in this future is being negotiated and re-negotiated for all of us, by citizens like Wang Jun, on the ground level of Beijing’s streets, on a daily basis. Thomas H. Hahn Cornell University College of Architecture, Art and Planning

FrontMatter.indb 15

10/19/2010 8:36:27 AM


FA Reading

Preface

FrontMatter.indb 17

10/19/2010 8:36:27 AM

Preface The City of Beijing: in the Twinkling of an Eye

I really don’t know what prompted me to write this book, impetuosity or God’s will. In March 2001, I received a letter from Qinghua (Tsinghua) University School of Architecture, asking me to submit a paper to a forthcoming academic symposium to mark the centenary of the birth of Liang Sicheng (1901–1972), a most prominent architect of contemporary China. Shortly afterwards, Ms. Lin Zhu, Liang’s widow, called me, urging me to be quick. “Hurry up,” she said. “Otherwise you’ll be late!” So I began writing, resolved to accomplish the assignment. To my own surprise, barely one week had passed before I put down somewhere between 40,000 and 50,000 words, and I still couldn’t stop wielding my pen. That period of history I was writing about was indeed too heavy, with myriad changes in society, with the rise and fall of so many individuals, which made it a real challenge to record it. Digging into old archives while trying to offer a sort of new interpretation of that period, I felt as if I was brought back to those bygone years, unable to shun this question those involved seemed to keep asking me: What would you have done had you yourself been involved? The job was so painful, as time and again I was compelled to “communicate” with those tragic heroes of history. The 20th century that ended not too long ago witnessed sweeping changes in Beijing. For this historical, culturally rich city, those bygone 100 years seemed so short, just like the twinkling of an eye. Yet the force resulting from the changes that took place in this short period was so great that the city still maintains a kind of inertia powerful enough to shape it now and in the future, to affect, in a tangible way, the life of every person living in it. Though short, this period, I believe, will be an eternal subject of discussion by members of China’s intellectual community of all generations to come. To know what the future will look like, we, prompted by human nature, invariably look back. I hope that my pygmy effort would end up with a rough sketch of what happened to Beijing in the past century. Rough as it is, the “sketch,” so to speak, may become increasingly precise along with the opening of more and more archives to the public.

FrontMatter.indb 18

10/19/2010 8:36:28 AM

FA Reading

Preface

xix

I do not dare to make hasty comments on this period of history. What I have done, in my capacity, was to collect and screen historical records on the subject, with sources of information ranging from old newspapers, magazines and books, unpublished writings to interviews with those who had survived those changes. This book is divided into ten parts which, starting from the current realities of Beijing, attempts to record the history of the city’s urban construction over the past 50 years, by using those debates that occurred at different times as the principal line of narration. To be more precise, the book focuses on telling what happened in the 1950s and 1960s, interwoven with stories about the lives of architects and planners including Liang Sicheng, Lin Huiyin (alias Lin Whei-yin), Chen Zhanxiang (alias Charlie Chen) and Hua Lanhong (alias Leon Hoa). By doing so, I attempted to decipher the antecedents and consequences of the “Liang (Sicheng)-Chen (Zhanxiang) Proposal,” to explain how Beijing’s city planning was done in the 1950s and how, on that basis, the current pattern of Beijing’s expansion was formed. The book also records the mushrooming of structures capped by dawuding (large palace- or temple-like concave curved roofs) and the demolition of Beijing’s city walls along with many other ancient structures. These came at different times of that period in history, with different events to feature: the call of the ruling Communist Party for “transforming Beijing from a consumption city to a production city,” criticism of the so-called “attempt to restore the ancient,” the “Great Leap Forward Movement” in the late 1950s and the “Cultural Revolution” from 1966 to 1976. Photos and graphics in the book, more than 300 in total, are as important as the text. Many of the graphics resulted from outstanding achievements made by China’s academic community. Here, I would like to extend my heartfelt respect to those seniors and colleagues of mine who helped me in my research for this book. I owe this book in particular to the following people: • Ms. Lin Zhu, for allowing me to access photos of Liang Sicheng’s life and work, as well as some of the sketches drawn by Liang Sicheng in his notebooks; • Mr. Luo Zhewen, for letting me use his photos of Beijing’s city gate towers and other important ancient structures before they were torn down; • Mr. Liang Congjie, for allowing me to use an unpublished water color sketch by his father, Liang Sicheng; • Mr. Zhang Wenpu, for providing me with a photo portrait of Zhang Xiruo;

FrontMatter.indb 19

10/19/2010 8:36:28 AM

xx

BEIJING RECORD

• Mr. Chen Yanqing, for providing me with photos of Chen Zhanxiang; • Mr. Zhang Kaiji, for allowing me to use photos of his architectural works; • Mr. Zhang Xiande, for allowing me to use his sketches of city gate towers, along with some photos of old Beijing; • Mr. Kuang Han and Mr. Charles Chauderlot for providing me with their drawings of hutongs (narrow lanes and alleys) in Beijing; • Mr. Song Lianfeng, for providing me with some aerial photos of Beijing; and Staff members of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture, for the assistance they gave me. No student of Chinese architecture and city planning can forget the name, Liang Sicheng. It is Liang Sicheng who, in old China, trekked over land and water to find things that could epitomize the quintessence of the Chinese civilization, in total disregard of the physical difficulties and hidden dangers in those almost inaccessible, bandit-infested areas. On that basis, he produced China’s first-ever monograph on the history of Chinese architecture. Liang Sicheng was the first to call for “dwelling to the dweller.” He was also the first to define “contented life and work of residents” as the “ultimate aim of city planning” — in fact the first to work for a rational development of Chinese cities. It is Liang Sicheng who, in disregard of political risks, did his utmost to plea against destruction of ancient structures for construction space. His appeal was turned down again and again but never did he give up. The architect, as portrayed by the Chinese mass media and publications in the most recent years, was a person of tragedy. So many people have been moved by the words he wrote in 1957: “Demolishing a city gate tower, you are cutting a piece of flesh off my body; taking off a brick from the city walls, you are peeling off an inch of my skin.” Earlier still, in 1950, he and Chen Zhanxiang proposed that the administration center of the new government be built outside Beijing so that the ancient capital would be preserved in its entirety. Both were to suffer because of what was dubbed as the “Liang-Chen Proposal,” and their tragedy has moved so many to tears. Over the years I have been hard at work to search for Liang Sicheng’s footprints all over Beijing, to catch his words that seem still echoing, while trying to acquaint myself with the city’s new moods and sentiments. The more I learned, the more I felt that there were still things to dig up. This “vicious cycle” of cognition once made me hesitant. Time and again

FrontMatter.indb 20

10/19/2010 8:36:28 AM

FA Reading

Preface

xxi

An artist’s rendition of Beijing’s Fuchenggmen area now and the demolished Fuchengmen Gate (by courtesy of Beijing Crystal Digital Technology Co. Ltd.)

I stopped writing, and time and again I picked up my pen and pressed ahead. Based on what I wrote for the symposium in commemoration of Liang Sicheng, I produced two relatively complete articles, one submitted to Qinghua University and the other, to the City Planning magazine. Both articles aroused interest among China’s academic community. With encouragement from many seniors and friends, I continued writing and eventually produced this book. Indeed I experienced so much sorrow and had so many regrets during those ten years when I was trying to explore the changes that had taken place in Beijing. Chen Zhanxiang died, and so did Shan Shiyuan, Mo Zongjiang, Zhang Bo, Zhou Yongyuan, Zheng Zuwu and many others. All of them had an ardent love of Beijing, though they had different roles to play in Beijing’s history and held different opinions on the changes that had taken place in the city. Bedridden, Zheng Zuwu exerted himself to the utmost to receive me, inhaling oxygen while trying to talk. Twice Chen Zhanxiang shed tears when talking with me. To sum up, I would like to thank all those I interviewed, not only for the help they rendered me, but also for their honesty toward history. I am grateful to Ms. Lin Zhu for allowing me to access Professor Liang Sicheng’s notebooks and diaries, which came in scores of bound copies,

FrontMatter.indb 21

10/19/2010 8:36:30 AM

xxii

BEIJING RECORD

An artist’s rendition of Beijing’s Chaoyangmen area and the demolished Chaoyangmen Gate (by courtesy of Beijing Crystal Digital Technology Co. Ltd.)

as well as the “confessions” he was forced to write for alleged “anti-Party, anti-socialism crimes” during the “Cultural Revolution.” I spent the whole winter of 1999 at Qinghua University working on these invaluable historical records, an experience forever inscribed in my memory. I must thank Mr. Chai Zhen, my teacher, and Mr. Luo Ruiren, a senior schoolmate of mine, for the encouragement they gave me. I must also thank all those who helped me by offering suggestions on the draft of this book — Ms. Lin Zhu, Mr. Liang Congjie, Mr. Liu Xiaoshi, Mr. Chen Yanqing, Mr.â•‡ Zhang Xiande, Mr. Yang Dongping and Ms. Zhang Zhijun. For years in a row, Mr. Li Jing kept supplying me with newspaper clippings, and I also had the help of Ms. Wang Lei in sorting out those photos. Finally, I must thank my wife Liu Jie who shared the sorrows and joys I experienced over a long decade of hard work. She was able to contribute her knowledge and wisdom to this book as both of us have been studying the same subject — the changes of Beijing where both of us live.

Wang Jun October 29, 2002, Beijing

FrontMatter.indb 22

10/19/2010 8:36:35 AM

FA Reading

Acknowledgement

I

should acknowledge numerous people who have helped me so much with the publication of the English edition of Beijing Record, seven years after the initial Chinese edition came out in 2003. Forgive me, however, for mentioning only a few of them here. Mr. Hu Lujun, my classmate at the Remin University of China, generously sponsored the translation of the book into English. He and Mr. Luo Ruiren — our senior alumni — admired this first book I authored upon graduation, and wished to bring it to more readers. This English edition of Beijing Record is a kind of reward of their desires. My thanks also go to three of my senior colleagues at the Xinhua News Agency: Mr. Li Zhurun, Mr. Jin Shaoqing and Ms. Xiong Lei for their generous help despite their busy schedules. Li and Jin translated the book into graceful English: Mr. Li on the foreword and chapters 1–5, and Mr. Jin on chapters 6–10. Based on their work, Ms. Xiong Lei did the copyediting. Their work has tremendously enriched this English version. I’m equally grateful to Thomas H. Hahn, Jeffrey L. Soule, Liu Yuan, Harvey Solomon and Sidney Wong, who enlightened me considerably on urban planning and offered much encouragement and advice about this English edition’s publication. Their help has been invaluable, and most appreciated. Finally, I’d like to express thanks to two editors of World Scientific Mr. Lim Tai Wei and Ms. Dong Lixi, and to all the others who have made contributions to the publication of this book.

Wang Jun April 15, 2010

FrontMatter.indb 23

10/19/2010 8:36:35 AM

FA Reading

Chapter 1

beijing record.indb 1

10/15/2010 4:49:44 PM

Chapter One Preservation vs. Demolition

“Transformation” of Old Beijing Thirteen peasants from a poverty-stricken area in Sichuan Province, southwest China, were hard at work in an old Beijing compound on September 24, 1998. Large chunks of timber fell as they kept hacking the roof of a building in the compound with their picks and before long, the building collapsed in a cloud of dust. Then the wall was under attack, groaning amid the sound of hacking and shoveling. A part of the compound, known as Yuedong Xinguan, or the “New Guangdong Guild Hall,” was being demolished to make room for the building of a thoroughfare. Ironically, the wanton destruction was carried out allegedly to “move” the building for “relocation” in the same compound for “preservation in its entirety”! Gone was the ancient New Guangdong Guild Hall, where two key figures of contemporary Chinese history, Kang Youwei (1858–1927) and Sun Yatsen (1866–1925), did things vital to the Chinese nation. Kang Youwei was a key figure in the first intellectual movement of modern China. Sun Yat-sun is remembered by Chinese everywhere as their country’s modern founder. The New Guangdong Guild Hall was a “cultural heritage site” under the protection of the Xuanwu District Government of Beijing Municipality. As such, the site should have been carefully surveyed and videotaped if any structure in it had to be relocated, and serial numbers should have been given to the components of the structure, including every brick and tile, so that at the new site the rebuilt structure would be the same as the original. Moreover, everything must be done under guidance provided by experts from the cultural heritage authorities. “Is there any expert available to provide you with guidance?” I asked the head of the team, who identified himself as “Old Wang.” “Some people came and looked around,” the man replied. “They pointed here and there and told us this and that should be kept. Then we started working.”


10/15/2010 4:49:44 PM

FA Reading

Preservation vs. Demolition

3

Walking around, I found beyond the debris, there were a few wooden boards with decorative designs carved on them. “They want these things,” Old Wang told me. “They also asked us to keep some stone plates inlaid on the wall. There are words inscribed on them.” “What’s to be done with the bricks, tiles and timber salvaged from the demolition?” “We just sell them.” “That’s a lot of money, isn’t that?” “No. Nobody would buy those old bricks. Wooden things are difficult to sell. Tiles are dirt cheap.” “Old Wang,” I asked, “do you know anything about Kang Youwei and his reformist movement?” The guy was completely in the dark, his eyes looking into the blank. “Have you ever heard of Sun Yat-sen?” “Yes, I know the name. Does this old compound have anything to do with him?” I had got to know this big-eyed, sunburned Old Wang six days before, on September 18, when he led his men into the New Guangdong Guild Hall on order of the urban construction authorities. But they were asked to stop when they had just removed the tiles on the roof of a building. It turned out that somebody had protested and that in response, the urban construction authorities had decided to negotiate with the cultural heritage authorities for an agreement. After a few days of fuss, Old Wang finally secured the contract on this “demolition-for-relocation” job. “It is eight years since I came to Beijing and I have demolished numerous old buildings like this,” he told me. “Just a couple of months ago I demolished an old temple near the Imperial Directorate of Education (Guozijian). It is a large temple, very large. But I didn’t care. We will demolish anything so long as we are paid for it — even the Forbidden City!” The telephone rang. “Sorry, a truck is coming and somebody wants to buy these things,” Wang New Guangdong Guild Hall before demolition, (photo by Wang Jun, September 18, 1998). said, pointing at the debris.


10/15/2010 4:49:45 PM

4

BEIJING RECORD

The New Guangdong Guild Hall — No. 11, Nanhengjie Street, Xuanwu District, Beijing — was once the residence of Wang Chongjian, a key cabinet minister under Emperor Kangxi (1654–1722) of the Qing Dynasty (1644–1911), and his son Wang Xi. Earlier, it had belonged to Yan Song (1480–1567), a most treacherous, most corrupt court minister of the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644). The compound was renovated in the late 1800s by merchants from Guangdong Province to become their meeting place. A century ago, the Chinese empire, having suffered one humiliating defeat after another in wars launched by imperialist powers against it, was often compared to a “piece of meat to be cut into pieces on a chopping block.” Britain had secured control of areas along the Yangtze River that snakes across the breadth of China; Kang Youwei Germany, of Shandong Province in east China; and Tsarist Russia, of Manchuria in the northeast. Britain and France had been struggling with each other for influence in China’s southern provinces of Guangdong, Guangxi and Yunnan. Under the Treaty of Shimonoseki signed in April 1895 after the First Sino-Japanese War fought in the previous year, China was forced to cede Taiwan to Japan which had already made the southeastern Fujian Province its sphere of influence. It is against such a historical background that a group of enlightened Chinese scholars headed by Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao (1873–1929), father of Liang Sicheng, launched the “One Hundred-Day Reform” which, though short-lived, turned out to be China’s first large-scale campaign for cultural awakening. On April 12, 1898, some 200 reform-minded scholars gathered in the compound of the New Guangdong Guild Hall. “All of us Chinese, 400 million strong, are now living in a building threatening to collapse. We are now on board a boat about to capsize on the stormy sea. We are just like birds confined in a cage, and we are just like prisoners in a jail,” Kang Youwei told the gathering, shouting at the top of his voice. “We are treated not as human beings, but as beasts of burden, as dogs and sheep, as slaves exploited and bullied by others at will. Never has China been so humiliated throughout its history of 20 successive dynasties. Moreover, the influence of the Sage’s Doctrine (Confucianism — Tr.) is waning and our nation has been reduced to the verge of extinction. At the sight of all this, our pains, so piercing, so great, are beyond description.” These words moved many in the audience to tears.


10/15/2010 4:49:45 PM

FA Reading


5

The same day, in the same compound, a national reformist organization called the “Society for Protection of China” (Bao Guo Hui) was founded. Kang Youwei was author of the group’s founding declaration, which reads: “We have gathered to set up this organization, the Society for Protection of China, resolved to save China at a time when it is losing increasingly large tracts of its territory, when it is being deprived of its sovereignty, and when our people’s livelihood is becoming increasingly harsh.” The Society for Protection of China was the largest and also the most influential among a dozen or so Beijing-based reformist organizations founded earlier or later. Emperor Guangxu (1871–1908) backed the reformists headed by Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao. On June 11, 1898, two months after the founding of the Society for Protection of China, an imperial decree was issued, calling for reforms ranging from developing industry, streamlining the government, strengthening the armed services, promoting local selfgovernment and opening what was to become Beijing University, the most prestigious seat of higher learning up to then. The emperor, however, was just a figurehead, a “plaything,” so to speak, in the hands of Empress Dowager Cixi (1835–1908), the “fire-spitting dragon lady” as she was sometimes called in the West. On September 21, 103 days after the imperial decree was issued, the empress dowager staged a coup d’etat and annulled what was to be dubbed as the “One Hundred-Day Reformist Movement.” On September 28, six leading reformists were executed at Caishikou, a business street in what is now Xuanwu District of Beijing Municipality. Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao, however, had fled the country. The Qing, China’s last imperial dynasty, was overthrown in the 1911 Revolution, and China became a republic. But the country continued to be politically chaotic, with the north and south of the country under control of different warlords. In the summer of 1912, Sun Yat-sen, eager to help consolidate the newly founded republic, arrived in Beijing. The New Guangdong Guild Hall turned out to be a hive of activity on September 11 when Sun Yat-sen, a native of Guangdong Province, showed up at a meeting organized by his countrymen to welcome him. Sun Yat-sen took the floor after Liang Shiyi, a financier who doubled as a politician, opened the gathering. He spoke on his plans for China’s modernization, including designating the Hainan Island a province, attracting foreign investment and building a network of railways. Sun Yat-sen


10/15/2010 4:49:46 PM

6

BEIJING RECORD

All the plans mapped out by Sun Yat-sun have now been materialized, but the place where he made public the plans is gone. There used to be two courtyards in the compound of the New Guangdong Guild Hall, the east courtyard and the west courtyard. The east courtyard was the main courtyard, where the Society for Protection of China was founded in 1898 and Sun Yat-sen spoke in 1912. Nevertheless, it was none other than the east courtyard that was to be “removed” by the construction authorities for “relocation” to the north side of the west courtyard. The construction authorities argued that the main structure in the courtyard, and the structures flanking it were too dilapidated for repairs and that the theater and garden were no longer existent. Yes, they said, preservation of the compound was technically possible but would be too costly. Yet many experts were vehemently opposed to the “demolition-forrelocation” plan. The compound, they argued, was largely preserved and it wouldn’t be difficult to have the theater and the garden rebuilt. Moreover, there had been cases of having roads rerouted to ensure protection of important cultural and historical sites. On September 21, 1998, 100 years after the One Hundred-Day Reformist Movement, four most prominent experts appealed to the Beijing Municipal authorities in a last-ditch struggle to save the New Guangdong Guild Hall. They were Luo Zhewen, president of China Cultural Heritage Society; Yu Weichao, former curator of the Museum of Chinese History; Zheng Xiaoxie, vice-chairman of the Experts’ Committee of the State Committee for Protection of Historical and Cultural Heritage Sites; and Xie Chensheng, former advisor to the State Administration of Cultural Heritage. “At this historical moment, the centenary of the 1898 reformist movement,” they wrote, “an important site of the movement, the New Guangdong Guild Hall, is to be partially torn down allegedly for relocation. The site is now in imminent peril, a fact unacceptable to anyone conscious of our history, a fact that everyone detests! We are appealing to the proper authorities to change the construction plan and be cautious with history, so that this site, a mirror of the tremendous changes that have taken place in China, can be preserved.” “In recent years,” they continued, “to facilitate construction, numerous cultural heritage sites have been ‘relocated’ for ‘protection,’ and such sites have invariably ended up in total destruction. This issue deserves the utmost attention of the entire society. A prudent approach must be taken toward removing and relocating structures of historical and cultural value. Removal of such structures must be subject to strict examination and approval (by the proper authorities) in accordance with law. Professional procedures for protection must be followed when such structures have to be demolished for relocation.”


10/15/2010 4:49:46 PM

FA Reading


7

Wang Canzhi, a research fellow at the Beijing Academy of Social Sciences, also did his best to have the New Guangdong Guild Hall preserved. On April 23, 1998, the Culture and History Committee of the Beijing Municipal Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), the highest local consulting body, met for a briefing by the urban construction authorities on what they were to do with the New Guangdong Guild Hall. “What you are going to do is totally unacceptable,” he told officials present at the meeting. “My heart aches when you say this and that will have to be demolished. How can a site of cultural value exist with this or that part of it missing? The New Guangdong Guild Hall witnessed some events of great importance in history. It is where Kang Youwei spoke and founded the Society for Protection of China, but it will no longer be there! Places in Beijing where Sun Yat-sen made his presence are few, and his speech in the New Guangdong Guild Hall was of great historical importance. What a pity if the New Guangdong Guild Hall disappears! Can you reroute the road so that the compound will be preserved, like what has been done in construction of Ping’an Avenue? I have to stress that demolition of an ancient structure, supposedly to have it rebuilt elsewhere, is definitely the worst possible policy. Cultural heritage sites must remain where they have always been — forever!” Despite all the appeals and protests, the New Guangdong Guild Hall was doomed. The New Guangdong Guild Hall had been used by a middle school. Before it was demolished, Wei Tao, a teacher, would rush forward to tell any visitor what was to happen to it. “Is it true that there will be no way of having the site kept? The Society for Protection of China and the 1898 reformist movement are written down into textbooks of history. How can I explain to my students why it will have to disappear?” Time: November 23, 2000. Place: 75, Dongtangzi Hutong, Dongcheng District, Beijing, former residence of Cai Yuanpei (1868–1940), a leading liberal educator of the early 20thcentury China. “Is this courtyard really worth preserving?” a man, who identified himself as an urban construction official, asked the author in a loud voice. “Yes, it had a little something to do with Cai Yu-


Cai Yuanpei

10/15/2010 4:49:46 PM

8

BEIJING RECORD

anpei — so what? Look, can it be called a site of cultural heritage?” I looked around, and found that in the courtyard several buildings on one side of the hutong — alley — were already roofless, largely demolished. The roofs of some other buildings had big holes Former residence of Cai Yuanpei after repairs dug through, and the walls were also broken. Outside, on either side of the gate, the same Chinese character chai, meaning “to be torn down,” was brushed on the walls. Ironically, the sign reading “Former residence of Cai Yuanpei, a cultural heritage site under protection of Dongcheng District” was still there, inlaid on the wall beside the gate of the courtyard. Hu Jincai, the last resident in the courtyard, showed me round. “This is not an ordinary courtyard,” he said, heaving a long sigh. “Cai Yuanpei lived here when he was president of Beijing University, during the May Fourth Movement (of 1919). From here student protesters staged a demonstration to seek science and democracy.” “Cai Yuanpei held a very high position but he led a simple life,” Hu Jincai continued. “True, this is an ordinary courtyard. Simply because it is ordinary, the courtyard testifies to Cai Yuanpei’s great personality!” In 1892, Cai Yuanpei won the title jinshi, meaning “metropolitan graduate,” after emerging victor in the highest-level imperial examination for civil service. He became a sympathizer of the reformist movement after the First Sino-Japanese War (1894–1895). In 1902, he founded the China Education Society in Shanghai. Later that year he founded the Society of Patriotism, an organization devoted to the ongoing revolution that aimed to overturn the Qing Dynasty. Then he went to France for study. He returned home after the 1911 Revolution, and was appointed minister of education by the Nanjing-based Provisional Government of the Republic of China. As president of Beijing University from 1917 to 1926, he advanced the principle of “freedom of thinking and all-inclusiveness” for higher education, which has inspired Chinese educators of all generations until now. On May 2, 1919, Cai Yuanpei learned that the Beijing-based Chinese government was to sign the Versailles Treaty that concluded World War I, under which Germany’s territorial rights in China were not to be returned


10/15/2010 4:49:48 PM

FA Reading


9

to the Chinese, but were instead to be turned over to the Japanese, even though China was a victorious nation in the War. Immediately afterward, he informed student representatives of Beijing University of what the government was to do. On the afternoon of May 4, some 3,000 students of Beijing University and other schools gathered at Tiananmen (the Gate of Heavenly Peace) in the heart of Beijing for a rally of protest. Outraged, the students then marched to the residence of Cao Rulin (1877–1966), the vice-minister of foreign affairs and a most notorious pro-Japanese politician, at Zhaojialou and set it ablaze. On May 8, Cai Yuanpei was forced by the warlord-controlled government to resign for his role in what was to be known as the “May Fourth Movement” — the very first intellectual revolution in China. It was a socio-political movement directed toward national independence, emancipation of the individual’s mind and rebuilding of society and culture. Now, some 80 years after the May Fourth Movement, this courtyard, once the residence of Cai Yuanpei, was still there, facing the Red Building of Beijing University in the west and Zhaojialou in the east through Zhaotangzi Hutong, serving as material evidence to an event that turned a new page in the Chinese history. But, all of a sudden, a developer set about building a business plaza in this central Beijing area. By the time I visited the area, old housing buildings round Cai Yuanpei’s former residence had already been torn down and the residence itself was being demolished. Fortunately, the Beijing Municipal Administration of Cultural Heritage intervened before it was too late. It turned out that the plan for “relocating” the courtyard had no approval from the authorities. To the dismay of the developer, the Municipal Administration of Cultural Heritage issued an order demanding that the courtyard be preserved in its entirety, at the original site. This time, appeals of experts, headed by Professor Hou Renzhi of Beijing University, worked. Repairs of Cai Yuanpei’s former residence began on November 24, 2000. When I went there a second time on December 5, the structures on the side of the hutong had been restored and workers had also got rid of the Chinese characters chai (to be demolished) on the walls flanking the gate. Nevertheless, destruction remained evident: the door and windows of the south-facing building in the backyard were missing and its roof was broken. Moreover, a huge hole had been dug through the wall of the backyard. On May 2, 2002, Cai Sui’ang, son, and Cai Yingduo, daughter, of Cai Yuanpei came to see their father’s former residence at Dongtangzi Hutong. They were in Beijing for the opening of the Memorial Museum of the New


10/15/2010 4:49:48 PM

10

BEIJING RECORD

Cultural Movement and the Museum of the History of Beijing University. A guy from a certain company emerged from the courtyard and using rude language, he asked them to leave. The Cai brother and sister came again the following day, and again they were denied entry. The only thing they were able to do in commemoration of their father was to have a picture taken in front of his courtyard. In June 2000, the Beijing Municipal Government decided to earmark 330 million yuan for repairs of cultural and historical sites in areas under its jurisdiction. This represented the biggest effort it had ever made for protection of such sites since the People’s Republic was founded in 1949. In November, the Beijing Municipal Government designated 25 areas of cultural and historical value for protection, including Shichahai (the inner city’s lake district), Guozijian and Dashila (one of the oldest pedestrian shopping districts in Beijing), which together account for 17 percent of “old Beijing,” the once walled capital city of the Ming and Qing dynasties. Plus sites previously designated for protection and their surrounding areas where construction is under control, 37 percent of old Beijing’s total area would, 1 in theory, be under protection. But, in December of the same year, the municipal authorities made public a plan for demolition of residential buildings classified as too old and dilapidated for repair. The plan was to be fulfilled, by and large, in five years. To be precise, such buildings on 164 tracts, with a combined floor space of 9.34 million square meters, were to be torn down. That means more areas in old Beijing — areas not under protection — would Jizhao Hutong to be razed, with the Chinese character chai be “transformed.” As a (demolition) brushed on the walls (A drawing by Beijing painter Kuang Han in March 2003) result, old Beijing has

1 Fifteen more areas are designated for protection under the Plan for Protection of Beijing as a City of Cultural and Historical Importance published by the Beijing Municipal Government in September 2002, bringing to 40 the total number of protected areas. Of these 40 areas, 30 are in the once walled old Beijing, which together occupy 1,278 hectares or 21 percent of the old Beijing’s total area. Plus sites previously designated for protection and their surrounding areas where construction is under control, 2,617 hectares or 42 percent of old Beijing’s total area are, in theory, to be protected.


10/15/2010 4:49:49 PM

FA Reading


11

since then resounded with the roaring of bulldozers, and hutongs and siheyuans — walled courtyards in traditional style — have been systematically razed. Before the plan was published, Professor Wu Liangyong of Qinghua University, who doubles as academician of both the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Engineering, commented: Urban construction in ancient China is characterized by an integration of urban planning with urban designing, architectural designing with gardening. This is globally unique. No precedence is found among the best-designed ancient cities in both the East and West, and old Beijing definitely stands out as the best among them. It is indeed no exaggeration to describe old Beijing as the best example, the “gem,” of ancient city planning across the world. ... Protection of old Beijing vs. its development is bound to remain for a long time as a thorny issue. Development is the main aspect of this contradiction in so far as the entire Beijing Municipality — 16,800 square kilometers in area — is concerned. Nevertheless, protection should be stressed when planning is done for the redevelopment of old Beijing … Unfortunately, the limit on the height of the new buildings in old Beijing, which was imposed in the 1980s in response to concerns the late Premier Zhou Enlai had shown and also on the basis of past experiences in exercising control over construction there, is completely ignored. The open space in old Beijing, which is centered on the Forbidden City and Imperial City, feature a gentle terrain. It is being threatened, and so are the areas along Beijing’s north-south axis, on either side of which there are the best ancient structures in the capital city. In these places, the built space ratio is exceedingly high, and this has resulted in blocked visions and deteriorating living conditions. Traffic is becoming increasingly congested there and the environmental quality is deteriorating. Those newlybuilt high-rise buildings and overpasses seem to have made Beijing look “modern,” but the fact is that these epitomize an ongoing change of Beijing from the best-planned, best designed city into a “second-hand city.” … In the old city of Beijing, virtually all structures of cultural value have been demolished and numerous ancient trees have been felled to make room for construction projects that are meant for maximum profits from exploitation of the limited land space, and gone are so many sites of historical interest. Beijing’s value as a world-renowned cultural and historical city has been ignored and, as a result, the city is being used merely as a construction site. Does that differ from tearing invaluable ancient paintings into pieces for use as raw material for production of


10/15/2010 4:49:49 PM

12

BEIJING RECORD

paper pulp, or smashing bronze vessels thousands of years old into bits of scrap metal? It seems that Beijing still has some resemblance of an ancient capital because some of the key structures in old Beijing, for example Shichahai, the Drum Tower on the north end of the city’s northsouth axis, and Guozijian, etc., are still there. The fact, however, is that old Beijing as we are able to see right now is something destined to be buried in oblivion because plans to “transform” it have been or are being approved and structures not really too dilapidated for repairs are also being demolished. If no resolute measures are taken to set things right, protection of old Beijing would be utterly impossible. Once destroyed, old 2 Beijing can never be restored. On October 11, 2001, some 100 experts in various disciplines of study attended a meeting in Langfang City, Hebei Province, for assessing the results of a major research project to plan the development of the envisaged “Greater Beijing” that encompasses both the urban and rural areas in Beijing and Tianjin municipalities and northern Hebei Province. The meeting was organized by the Ministry of Construction. Professor Wu Liangyong, then 79 years old, spoke at the meeting in his capacity as head of the research team. He noted that in the current era of economic globalization, development of global-caliber metropolises is a choice of strategic importance for a country or region in striving for development. “Greater Beijing,” he said, should be a global-caliber metropolitan region, which is to be developed by taking full advantage of the influence of Beijing as the capital of China, a growing world power, by providing it with the most essential conditions for participation in global politics and cultural activities and for international exchange. “Greater Beijing,” he noted, should also be good enough to help the entire country gain the upper hand in international competition. Meanwhile, he insisted, plans for “Greater Beijing” should at the same time be designed to alleviate the pressure on Beijing in its development. As indicated by the research, among cities similar in size in 12 countries, the use of land in Beijing, calculated on a per capita basis, is definitely the most intensive. Central Beijing has a population averaging 14,694 per square kilometer, far exceeding 8,811 per square kilometer for New York, 4,554 for London and 8,071 for Paris. For a long time, Wu Liangyong said, Beijing has directed its urban planning toward “transformation” of old Beijing, resulting in excessive concentration of the city’s urban functions there. This state of affairs has not only made protection of cultural heritage sites there difficult, 2 Wu Liangyong: Comments on Detailed Plans for Controlled Development of Old Beijing, from Academic Notes of Wu Liangyong on Cultural Matters, 1st edition, China Youth Publishing House, February 2002.


10/15/2010 4:49:50 PM

FA Reading


13

The 25 areas in old Beijing to be protected for historical, cultural value (April 1999) 1. Nanchangjie Street 2. Beichangjie Street 3. Xihuamen Area 4. Nanchizi Area 5. Beichizi Area 6. Donghuamen Area 7. Wenjinjie Street 8. Jingshanqianjie Street 9. Jingshandongjie Street

10. Jingshanxijie Street 11. Zhishanmenjie Street 12. Jingshanhoujie Street 13. Di’anmennei Avenue 14. Wusi (May 4) Street 15. Shichahai Area 16. Nanluoguxiang 17. Guozijian Area

18. Fuchengmennei Avenue 19. Xisi North Alleys (No. 1–No. 8) 20. Dongsi North Alleys (No. 3–No. 8) 21. Dongjiaominxiang Area 22. Dashila Area 23. Dongliulichang Area 24. Xiliulichang Area 25. Xianyukou Area

if not impossible, but has also given rise to a host of other problems, most notably traffic congestion and environmental pollution. Efforts must be made without delay to decentralize Beijing’s urban functions in a well-organized way and the same holds true for Tianjin and


10/15/2010 4:49:54 PM

14

BEIJING RECORD

A diagrammatic sketch showing the spatial development of the envisaged “Greater Beijing,” drawn by the Greater Beijing Planning Group (Source: Study of the Planning for Urban and Rural Development of Greater Beijing Encompassing Beijing, Tianjin and North Hebei, 2001)

northern Hebei cities, Wu Liangyong insisted. It is a must to change the state of affairs in which the core cities have too great a concentration of urban functions. Cities in “Greater Beijing” must be “regrouped.” There is the need to let Beijing and Tianjin serve as the “dual-core” of the region, the “axis” of the region, and the cities of Tangshan and Baoding, as its “flanks,” with a view to decentralizing their urban functions and restructuring the region’s economic establishment. Meanwhile, Wu Liangyong said, medium-sized cities should be developed to increase the density of cities in the region. For common prosperity, “city groups” should be formed in such a way as to allow all cities in the “Greater Beijing” metropolitan sphere to bring into full play their respective advantages while capable of supplementing one another’s needs. Cases of regional planning to facilitate development of super-large cities are not exceptional in the world. After World War II, the so-called “Greater London” and “Greater Paris” were planned in an effort to improve the cities’ development. As expected, decentralization of the cities’ urban functions has made it possible for the cities to embark on a road of sound, orderly development. Far back in 1950, architects Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang already called for doing what London and Paris had then been aimed at, hoping that this would help Beijing achieve a sustainable development. Their attempt, however, was doomed for political reasons. Their attempt and its failure constitute the theme of this book. Today, half a century after the dream of Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang was shattered, Wu Liangyong was defying all difficulties to revive and realize it. But Beijing right now is no longer a well-preserved ancient capital as it was half a century ago.


10/15/2010 4:49:55 PM

FA Reading


15

During the meeting, a reporter put this question to Wu Liangyong: “Are you sure that plans for ‘Greater Beijing’ will succeed? In 50 years from now, will such plans be marked the way Liang Sicheng is being remembered?” “Let history answer this question,” he replied, in a loud voice.

Demolition vs. Preservation Statistics show that back in 1949, Beijing had more than 7,000 hutongs, long or short. By the 1980s, only about 3,900 had survived. As “transformation” of old Beijing gathers momentum, some 600 have disappeared annually in 3 the most recent years. Members of the Chinese intelligentsia hold diametrically antagonistic views on the fate of hutongs, on what should be done with those narrow lanes and alleys seen by many as a most salient cultural feature of this ancient capital. In an article titled Siheyuan Courtyards and Flush Toilets, writer Liu Xinwu expresses sympathy toward people living in old walled courtyards flanking hutongs. “If you place yourself in the position of those residents in siheyuan courtyards that are hidden deep in hutongs,” he writes, “those who have to use communal toilets outside even late in winter nights when the north wind is howling, you’ll know how eager they want to leave for a better life.” Another writer, Li Guowen, asserts that those walled courtyards can produce a “fairly negative mental effect” on residents living in them. He has the following to say in an article titled Looking beyond the Siheyuan: “Selfenclosure is the most striking feature of the siheyhuan... If the Chinese fail to free themselves from the kind of mentality generated in them by those

Here is the residence of Zhao Zichen (1888–1979), a most reputed Chinese theologian, and his daughter Zhao Luorui (1912– 1988), a Beijing University professor of English literature, in a painting by French artist Charles Chauderlot. This typical siheyuan courtyard (No. 22, Meishuguan Houjie Street) was demolished on October 26, 2000.

3 Six Hundred Hutongs Disappear Every Year; Map of Beijing Renewed Each Passing Month, Beijing Evening News, Page 4, October 19, 2001.


10/15/2010 4:49:55 PM

16

BEIJING RECORD

walled courtyards, I’m afraid it would be difficult for them to make big progress and achievements.” Writer Chen Jiangong is reputed for his stories filled with a “Beijing flavor.” Nevertheless, he goes so far as to be joyous over the demolition of hutongs along with those siheyuan courtyards hidden in them. “Life goes on exactly like that,” he writes in an article titled Demolition. “If the character chai (to be torn down) is not seen on the walls flanking the narrow lanes and alleys called hutong, and if there are no bulldozers roaring into those narrow lanes and alleys, the Capital Financial Street, now rising to the west of the Xidan area, would have simply been non-existent. Residents living in hutongs will never be freed from the kind of sufferings they have had to endure for so long, the kind of life characterized by packed living spaces and absence of modern conveniences.” Writer Wang Shuo seems to be a strongest supporter for demolition of hutongs. “I wouldn’t feel sorry even if all the hutongs are razed,” he says in The Hutong, the Disgusting. “My family used to live in the shadow of Chaoyangmen Gate, in a place popularly known as Chaoyangmen Chenggen’er. There were dilapidated siheyuan courtyards all over the area, hidden in a web of winding, dilapidated hutongs. None of the siheyuan courtyards there had any resemblance of those chosen to ‘showcase’ Beijing’s architectural tradition, those pictured to show foreigners how a typical siheyuan courtyard looks like. As far as I remember, residents in the area were mostly in rags and look famished… Living in such a place, how can one feel happy?”

Jing’er Hutong about to be demolished. Note the Chinese character chai (to be demolished) on the wall, (photo by Wang Jun, November 23, 2000)


10/15/2010 4:49:56 PM

FA Reading


17

Equally strong, however, is the call for preserving the siheyuan courtyards and hutongs in Beijing. The late writer, translator and journalist Xiao Qian (1910–1999) said he was heartbroken at the sight of the demolished hutongs. “Those narrow lanes and alleys, or hutongs,” he noted in Old Beijing and its Hutongs, “are civil Bird’s-eye plan of a typical siheyuan (Source: History of Ancient Chinese Architecture, 1994) structures left over from the middle ancient times... I have seen quite a lot of lanes and alleys like our hutongs in ancient foreign cities such as London and Munich… These are always improved through repairs and people hate to see them got rid of... If only fewer hutongs are demolished! If only more of them are preserved!” As writer Feng Jicai sees it, preservation of hutongs and siheyuan courtyards in Beijing amounts to preservation of the local culture. “Among historical remains found in a city, relics and culture represent two different concepts,” he told a meeting of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), China’s highest consulting body, in March 2000. “Cultural heritage sites and relics are classic humanistic creations, of which imperial and religious structures are the most outstanding representatives. The local culture, however, is represented mostly by residential structures. In residential structures we find a trove of historical and cultural ‘gems,’ the ‘flesh and blood’ of history, things that embody the kind of spirit that makes the city different or even unique. Take for example Beijing. The ‘soul’ of the city is not to be found in the Temple of Heaven (Tian Tan) or the Forbidden City. It is epitomized by the hutongs and siheyuan courtyards. In China, cultural relics are protected, but (local) cultures are not. Residential structures can be demolished at will because they are not seen as cultural relics that deserve protection. The problem is getting increasingly serious, to the extent that even residential structures designated for protection can be torn down at will.” Writer Shu Yi, son of Lao She (1899–1966), a most prominent contemporary Chinese writer, is a “hard-line protectionist.” In an article titled Save and Protect Beijing’s Hutongs and Siheyuan Courtyards, he says: “Business and administrative office towers are mushrooming as developers are


10/15/2010 4:49:57 PM

18

BEIJING RECORD

invading central Beijing, allegedly for ‘transforming’ those dilapidated residential structures left over from the past. Whole hutongs and siheyuan courtyards on whole tracts of land are being eliminated in a massive drive of destruction. With eyes wide open, startled Beijing citizens, Chinese from elsewhere and even expatriates are asking Wu Liangyong (left) and Ieoh Ming Pei, (photo by Wang Jun, April 30, 2002) the same question: Can this city still be called ‘Beijing?’” Ieoh Ming Pei, an American Chinese who has a global reputation as an architect, was obviously worried when he spoke with the author in September 1999 and June 2001. During both interviews with the author he urged Beijing to learn from Paris its experience in preserving its old part by developing a new urban area outside it. Author: Some experts call on Beijing to follow the example of Paris in developing la Defence and to have new structures built outside old Beijing. What’s your comment? Pei: This is the best, in fact the most desirable way of preserving old Beijing while improving it. High structures must be built outside the city. Siheyuan courtyards must be preserved — I mean whole tracts of them must be preserved. It won’t do to limit the protection effort to singling out one princely mansion here and another there for protection. Siheyuan courtyards are not only Beijing’s representative structures. They are a part of the Chinese culture. Author: Your view is identical with that of Professor Liang Sicheng. To ensure preservation of old Beijing in its entirety, some 50 years ago Professor Liang Sicheng called for having a new administration center built outside old Beijing, which should be home to those high-rise buildings now towering along Chang’an Avenue. Pei: Mr. Liang’s view was definitely correct. The city walls shouldn’t have been torn down. To have all those high-rise buildings built outside old Beijing and let old Beijing keep its original character — that should have been the best method, the most ideal method, for Beijing’s redevelopment, and that’s what has been done to Paris. I was unable to discuss the matter with Mr. Liang because I was not in Beijing at the time. I met with him in 1947 or 1948 when he was


10/15/2010 4:49:58 PM

FA Reading


19

Yuan Dynasty streets and lanes as presented in Map of Beijing under Emperor Qianlong (partial), (Source: History of Ancient Chinese Architecture, 1994)

advisor of architecture to the United Nations. He asked me to go back to China to help him. I was unable to go back for I could not obtain a passport (of New China). In 1950, Beijing lost a good opportunity for (sustainable) development. The government rejected the call of Liang Sicheng and others for developing a new Beijing while preserving the old. Instead, it made transformation of old Beijing the orientation of the city’s redevelopment. Then the walls surrounding old Beijing were demolished, replaced by a ring road. As a result, control was lost over the city’s expansion and the continuity of the city’s history was broken. This was definitely wrong. Were the walls still there, Beijing wouldn’t have become what it is today. Author: Would you comment on Beijing’s urban construction, and do you have any ideas to contribute to it? Pei: Beijing is the oldest and also the largest among the surviving ancient cities across the world. It represents the quintessence of the centuries-old Chinese art of urban construction. This ancient city has suffered some damage but its overall shape is still there, with large tracts of hutongs and siheyuan courtyards adding beauty to those temples and palaces. Some international friends have advised the Beijing Municipal Government to properly protect old Beijing and apply to the UNESCO to have old Beijing with the Imperial City as center enshrined in the List of World Cultural Heritage Sites. It is obvious that despite the damage it has suffered, old Beijing still deserves protection. Old Beijing is a well-planned, well-designed whole, which is in fact its most salient feature. It should be protected in its entirety.


10/15/2010 4:49:59 PM

20

BEIJING RECORD

A bird’s-eye view of the streets, hutongs and siheyuan courtyards in the Xianyukou and Dashila area, (photo by Song Lianfeng, October 4, 1999)

A bird’s-eye-view of the Sun-Facing Gate (Zhengyangmen or Qianmen) and its surrounding areas in the early Republican period (by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture)


10/15/2010 4:50:04 PM

FA Reading


21

Beijing was once reputed across the world for a unsurpassed beauty. Unfortunately, many of its beautiful things have disappeared. Many of them have been torn down and those that have survived the destruction are now overshadowed by newly-built structures that are ugly-looking. The city’s old skyline is gone. There is the need to take the Forbidden City as the center in Beijing’s urban planning. Round this center, zones should be delimited to ensure control over the heights of construction projects. Construction projects in the central zone should be low in height. Higher buildings may be allowed beyond the central zone, in areas from the Second Ring Road to the Third Ring Road, where structures may be higher and higher as they spread farther and farther away from old Beijing. High-rise buildings should be located beyond the old city — that’s 4 what Paris has done for a new, orderly outlook. Some experts, however, fail to understand the significance of the “learning-from-Paris” call made by experts like Ieoh Ming Pei. Instead, they stand for learning from Baron Geoges Eugène Haussmann (1809–1891), who performed a series of “major operations” on Paris after he was appointed by Napoleon III to the post of prefect of the Seine département of France in 1853. In an article titled My Views on Beijing’s Urban Outlook published in the June 2000 issue of Beijing Urban Planning and Construction journal, Professor Wu Huanjia of Qinghua University said: “Whatever you call it, an ‘outstanding creation’ or something else that ‘epitomizes the fine traditions of ancient cities,’ it is, after all, deplorable that for well over 200 years from the 17th century on, the city of Beijing made no progress and remained what it had always been. We deeply regret that contemporary Chinese economy and society were stagnant as the A bird’s-eye-view of Beijing’s Imperial City, (photo by Song Lianfeng, September 28, 1999) country was conservative

4 Wang Jun: Let Beijing’s Magnificent Skyline be Restored — An Interview with Ieoh Ming Pei, Xinhua News Agency, December 17, 2002.


10/15/2010 4:50:05 PM

22

BEIJING RECORD

and backward. The same is true to the development of our cities which, too, is regrettable... The shape of Beijing as an ancient capital has gone by and large, and it has assumed a new look. Because of this, an all-round preservation of the city’s original shape and outlook is now impossible... Some people are worried, saying that if this state of affairs continues, sooner or later Beijing will be turned into something like Hong Kong or Singapore. I think this view is a bit too simplistic... Regarding the ancient structures in Beijing and the city’s original shape, the only correct policy should be one of redeveloping what remains useful while discarding what has become useless.” Professor Wu Huanjia cited what Geoges Eugène Haussmann did to Paris to justify his argument: For a long time after Paris was made the capital of France toward the end of the 9th century, the city had nothing but a web of narrow, winding streets plus clusters of single-story wooden structures. It was not until Renaissance did work begin to give the city a new look. From the 17th century on, French kings invariably devoted themselves to the transformation of Paris. Many old, dilapidated residential buildings were torn down and replaced by multi-storey structures built with stones and bricks. Hand-in-hand were construction of new roads and squares. Old city walls were largely demolished under Louis XIV (1643–1715), and a round-the-city ring road was built on the ruins of the walls. Also during this period, Avenue des Champs Elysees and what is now Place Charles de Gaulle that features the Arc de Triomphe began taking shape. By the 19th century, large numbers of five- and six-storey buildings had mushroomed to accommodate a rapidly increasing population resulting from a growth of the capitalist economy. Also, omnibus services and gas lamps had appeared in the city. Sweeping transformation of Paris was carried out under Napoleon III (r. 1852– 1870) by Geoges Eugène Haussmann. The remaining city walls were demolished to make room for a new ring road. Wide, straight boulevards and tree-lined streets were built in medieval Paris, along with parks, gardens and residential estates. The prefect of the Seine département of France also supervised over the construction of the Opéra National de Paris. Thanks to the transformation, Paris came to be recognized as the most advanced, most beautiful city in the world. Cover of the May 27, 2000 issue of Le Figaro


10/15/2010 4:50:06 PM

FA Reading


23

Just one month before the article was published, the May 27, 2002 issue of le Figaro magazine ran a cover story that asked sternly: Haussmann: Is that You Who Destroyed Paris? The article was authored by Alexandre Gady, a young historian on the Committee for Conservation of Old Paris. Look, a hundred years after Haussmann died, Parisians are condemning him for “massacre” of the medieval Paris! Challenging Georges Valance, an expert in urbanism who called Haussmann a “giant” in his book L’affaire Haussmann, Gady described the same man as an “incompetent planner” and held him responsible for the destruction of the French capital’s cultural heritage. It is worthwhile to note that even Georges Valance had to admit that people of Haussmann’s time had no idea of the need to protect historical and cultural heritage. No one denies that Haussmann did bring about some positive changes to Paris. Today, when the human race is becoming increasingly keen to cultural conservation, more and more people have sided with Alexandre Gady in criticizing Haussmann for breaking the historical and cultural continuity of Paris. On August 16, 2002, Liu Thai Ker, a prominent urban planner and chairman of the National Arts Council Singapore, talked to the author on Haussmann’s transformation of Paris. He was in the Chinese capital for a symposium on the development of the Beijing Central Business District (CBD). Author: Some scholars stand for transforming Beijing the way Haussmann transformed Paris. What’s your opinion on the idea? Liu Thai Ker: I am totally against this idea. A few centuries ago, urban development had to proceed at a much slower pace than now. Therefore, there was no talk about preservation of old buildings and streets. Today, once bulldozers start working whole tracts of built space in a city could be razed in the twinkling of an eye. This is a new problem facing cities in the contemporary world, a problem not really very old. Even Paris has had its development re-planned. The change of Paris into what it looks Here is a diagrammatic sketch of old Beijing in comparison with old Paris 1841–1845. Old Paris is slightly smaller than old now has been a prolonged Beijing in area but is better preserved process. Look beyond Av(Source: Comments on Beijing’s City Planning by Wu Liangyong, 1979) enue des Champs Elysees.


10/15/2010 4:50:07 PM

24

BEIJING RECORD

Near the city’s axis you can still find many Gothic structures. Likewise, there are still some old buildings in and around (the once walled) old Beijing; that’s why I am calling for effort to ensure that the old and the new in Beijing continue to exist side by side, to make the old and new an integral whole. Let’s see Lyon. In that fantastically beautiful city, you’ll see old things still there, including even things left over from the Roman Empire period. Why is it that Beijing couldn’t be a city like Lyon? Author: But siheyuan courtyards are seen by some people as not worthy of protection, as they are too old for preservation. Liu: Those old courtyards are, as a matter of fact, what people outside China are most interested in. Siheyuan courtyards are seen by some as unsuitable for use simply because they are not fixed with modern conveniences. The fact is that siheyuan courtyards can’t be better in so far as the living environment is concerned. The living environment provided by siheyuan courtyards is especially good in spring and autumn when they are bathed in sunshine. Siheyuan courtyards suit Beijing’s weather conditions most perfectly, testifying to the wisdom of the ancestors of the Chinese. Doubtlessly, such courtyards deserve preservation. Author: There are also people who insist that siheyuan courtyards should be torn down because they are already dazayuan — dilapidated courtyards packed with too many households. Liu: You need to do your best to preserve siheyuan courtyards as a whole, though some individual courtyards are too dilapidated for repairs and therefore have to be demolished. There are many ways to preserve them. One is to demolish a siheyuan courtyard and then restore it, in such a way as to ensure that the rebuilt courtyard looks exactly the same as the original. You can also do major repairs to an old courtyard, making sure that its vital components are painstakingly preserved so that these can be returned to where they should be when the repairs are done. Where there is will, there is a way. What is crucial is whether you have the will (to preserve siheyuan courtyards). Another aspect of the protection effort concerns money. Where to get the money needed for it? May I ask this question: Do you really treasure your history? If you do, I think money shouldn’t be too big a problem. Author: People who call for demolishing hutongs say these lanes and alleys are so narrow that it is impossible to have public utilities installed there. What is your comment on such an assertion? Liu: That is basically a technical problem, to be exact. But it is not purely technical because again, the will counts. Yes, some siheyuan


10/15/2010 4:50:07 PM

FA Reading


25

courtyards have to be demolished to make room for facilities vital for people’s life such as parking lots and transformer stations. Nevertheless, I’m sure the problem can be resolved. Not long ago, in Suzhou, I saw some revamped old structures. Everything there was well done. I think Beijing can do an equally good job so long as it has the will. On September 1, 2002, Zhang Kaiji, a most reputed Chinese architect, aired his views at a symposium held by the Culture and History Committee of the Beijing Municipal CPPCC Committee on transformation and protection of old Beijing. The 88-year-old architect said: I have been to many cities, and I count Paris and Beijing as among the best. Paris is well-preserved, but I cannot bear the sight of Beijing. In an interview with me, a woman correspondent of the Italian newspaper l’Unita called Beijing a “poor imitation of Hong Kong.” It is indeed deplorable that this globally renowned cultural and historical city is now seen as inferior to Hong Kong! The value of Beijing stems from its city walls and skyline. It’s a pity that virtually all the city walls have been torn down. The Oriental 5 Plaza is too large and it is detrimental to the cultural environment of the Forbidden City. Its building is a mistake that could have been forestalled. A few high-rise buildings were once built in Paris, but people were vehemently opposed to construction of such buildings. In the end, la Defence was made home to high-rise buildings. In contrast, Beijing has been so indifferent toward its ancient structures!

Siheyuan courtyards with trees inside (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

5 The Oriental Plaza, which was initially built in 1999, lies in between the Wangfujing Business District and Dongdan Business Street, at the north side of East Chang’an Avenue. Seen as overshadowing the Forbidden City just a few blocks away in the west, it is one of the most controversial construction projects undertaken in Beijing in recent years.


10/15/2010 4:50:08 PM

26

BEIJING RECORD

Construction of high-rise buildings must be brought under control — this is vital to Beijing. Do those high-rise buildings and glass screen walls mean modernization? It’s naïve to think that way! At an academic symposium held in Beijing on June 29, 2002, Kenneth Yeang of Malaysia, a globally renowned architect specializing in designing of ecologically friendly structures, cited siheyuan courtyards in Beijing in support of his theory. He classified residential structures into the following three categories: those capable of ensuring comfort to the dweller without having to use energy or mechanical means; those partially dependent on use of energy or mechanical means to provide comfort to the dweller; and those totally dependent on use of energy and mechanical means for the purpose. Those of the first category, siheyuan courtyards in Beijing for example, are the best, and the worst are those of the last category. “Look,” Yeang told the gathering, “by integrating designing of the structures in a courtyard in light of the local ecological conditions, you’ll build something that is warm in winter and cool in summer even though not much energy is used.” “That,” he continued, “is what I have worked persistently to achieve.” Asked to comment on the demolition of siheyuan courtyards, Yeang replied bluntly: “Rebuild those that have been demolished.”

“Will our Capital City be Moved to another Place?” On August 7, 2002, a 23-member delegation from the Coordination Commission of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) arrived in Beijing for study of the city’s preparations for the 2008 Olympic Games. It was a day of clear, blue sky after rain. “We are happy to see the gorgeous blue sky of Beijing. It would be a blessing to keep it that way for the opening of the Olympic Games in 2008,” François Carrard, the IOC Coordination Commission’s director-general, told the press shortly after alighting the plane, hinting that environmental problems would be vital for China’s first-ever Olympics. Two days afterward, Chairman Hein Verbruggen of the IOC Coordination Commission spoke on Beijing’s traffic conditions. He said he was “surprised” to find that each and every year, the city had 250,000 more cars running on its streets. “That would be a big challenge to traffic during the Games,” he said. Comments from these IOC officials testify to a deplorable fact that traffic congestions and environmental pollution are most serious problems facing Beijing.


10/15/2010 4:50:08 PM

FA Reading


27

For decades, urban Beijing has kept expanding. Old Beijing, the once walled part of what is now Beijing Municipality, is designated the center of the city’s expansion, around which newly urbanized areas spread out, in a way popularly dubbed as tandabing — the “making of a pancake.” As time goes by, this “pancake,” so to speak, has grown larger and larger and heavier and heavier, compelling experts to warn against a possible “bursting” of the city. Beijing is now gasping under traffic and environmental pressures. The city right now has about two million cars, fewer than many other large cities in the world, but it is becoming increasingly notorious for traffic congestions. Old Beijing, now lying within the Second Ring Road built on the demolished city walls, was a vast expanse of green in the 1960s. Now, looking down from atop the Jingshan Hill, the commanding height

A topographic map of Beijing (Source: Collected Works of Hou Renzhi, 1998)


10/15/2010 4:50:09 PM

28

BEIJING RECORD

of central Beijing, you’ll find that the same area has turned into a sea of tall, concrete buildings with green patches seen only occasionally. What is broadly referred to as shiqu, or “urban Beijing,” now comprises the “central cluster (of built spaces)” with old Beijing as its core and ten “fringe clusters” on the city’s former suburbs, including Beiyuan (the North Imperial Hunting Ground, 13 kilometers from Tiananmen), Nanyuan (the South Imperial Hunting Ground, 11.5 kilometers from Tiananmen), as well as the Shijingshan and Dingfuzhuang areas, which are 17 kilometers and 16 kilometers from Tiananmen. The central clusters and fringe clusters are separated by green belts and the entire urban Beijing is serviced by ring roads one within another. To put it another way, old Beijing now serves as the city’s sole urban center, around which urban Beijing spreads out in all directions. Due to this pattern of development, urban Beijing has expanded 4.9 times in area since the early 1950s, and its population has increased nearly four times.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Beijing’s expansion as shown by this map (Source: Atlas of Beijing, 1994) 1. Second Ring Road built on the demolished city wallsâ•…â•… 2. Third Ring Roadâ•…â•… 3. Fourth Ring Road 4. Fifth Ring Road


10/15/2010 4:50:09 PM

FA Reading


29

As the sole urban center of the city, old Beijing has had to play the impossible role of being the business, administrative and tourist center of the entire metropolis. As a result, high-rise buildings have kept mushrooming there. By the 1980s, traffic congestions had become unbearable, compelling the authorities to build ring roads one within another around old Beijing. Building of the second, third and fourth ring roads has been completed and 6 the fifth and sixth are being built. Even with these ring roads in service, there is still no significant improvement in Beijing’s traffic. According to 2001 statistics provided by Beijing’s traffic police, serious congestions are frequent occurrences at 99 of the city’s 400 main road crossings. In theory, in an hour, 19 buses should be able to pass through Zhongguancun Street on the No. 332 bus route. In rush hours, however, only nine are able to inch through. It takes a bus on the No. 300 route an average of 160 minutes to run end-to-end along the Third Ring Road, 40 minutes longer than planned. Traffic congestions are blamed for the deteriorating quality of central Beijing’s environment. Atmospheric pollution is the top environmental problem facing Beijing. According to some studies, car emission is now more than 60 percent responsible for the atmospheric pollution in areas within the Third Ring Road, while a decade ago, at the end of the 1980s, the corresponding figure was around 30 percent. Other sources of pollution, such as coal-burning stoves and boilers, are also to blame, but it is beyond doubt that cars, now rapidly increasing in numbers, are the major culprit. Due to an endless, increasingly intensified development, central Beijing is now dotted with new structures high enough to render normal airflows 7 hardly possible, resulting in increased density of pollutants in the air. More than half of Beijing’s business companies and traffic concentrate in old Beijing, once the walled capital city of the Ming and Qing dynasties. Despite that, development of old Beijing continues to accelerate for commercial purpose. While going all-out to expand and modernize the Wangfujing Business District, the Dongcheng District Government vows to develop the area under its jurisdiction into Beijing’s “core area” while sweating to complete the development of the so-called “Beijing Central Commerce District”. In Xicheng District, work is under full swing to develop the Beijing Financial Street, the local version of the “Wall Street.” Also in Xicheng District, the Xidan Business District is being expanded to eventually 6 Beijing’s Fifth Ring Road was opened to traffic in October 2003. The Sixth was partially opened to traffic before the Beijing Olympic Games in August 2008 — Tr. 7 Wang Jun and Liu Jiang: On the Building of a New Beijing by Changing the City’s Construction Plans, No. 14 issue, Outlook weekly, April 1, 2002.


10/15/2010 4:50:10 PM

30

BEIJING RECORD

Use of construction space in Beijing (1951)





Urban Beijing’s expansion since the 1950s (Source: Study of the Planning for Urban and Rural Development of Greater Beijing Encompassing Beijing, Tianjin and North Hebei, 2001)

cover 1.5 million square meters. In Chongwen District, old structures on a vast area beyond the already demolished Chongwenmen Gate are being torn down to make room for business plazas, supermarkets, department stores, malls and hotels. In Xuanwu District, workers are racing against time to develop a business area with the ancient Caishikou Street as center. Everywhere in the city, whole tracts of land are being “cleaned” amid the roaring of bulldozers, and gone are those hutongs and siheyuan courtyards, replaced by high-rise structures supposedly “highlighting” achievements of Beijing’s modernization drive. The endless construction drive to increase central Beijing’s “focusing effect” has brought about an increasingly great pressure upon the city in terms of population densities, employment, traffic and environment. Decentralization of the population in old Beijing has always been a major task the Municipal Government tries to fulfill through expansion of the city. The task is duly stressed in the Beijing Urban Master Plan (1991–2010), an overall blueprint worked out by the Beijing Municipal Government for


10/15/2010 4:50:12 PM

FA Reading


31

the city’s development, which won approval of the State Council, China’s central government, in 1993. According to the plan, new residential areas and satellite towns shall be built to accommodate families moved out of old Beijing, from the “central cluster” of urban Beijing. Nevertheless, the planned targets have proved to be far from being realistic. As Beijing’s urban functions are concentrated in old Beijing, government officials find it difficult to persuade people living there to leave. Moreover, old Beijing has become increasingly attractive to developers as the policy puts the stress on “transforming” instead of preserving it. The population densities of old Beijing have constantly grown while new buildings keep rising there. Hand-in-hand with “transformation” of old Beijing goes construction of residential estates in suburban Beijing, a job that has been largely thrown into disarray. The so-called “fringe clusters” are meant mainly to provide living spaces. Meanwhile, most jobs, as always, have remained in the “central cluster” where the most important urban functions of the capital city — administrative, business, commercial, cultural, educational, etc — are performed. Meanwhile, satellite towns even further away from the “central cluster” have been or are being constructed, in places like Liangxiang (29 kilometers from Tiananmen), Daxing (29 kilometers from Tiananmen) and Changping (37 kilometers from Tiananmen) to accommodate people who moved out of the “central cluster.” The municipal authorities are building a residential area called Wangjing lying nine kilometers from Tiananmen, which is expected to be home to somewhere between 250,000 and 300,000 people. Also being built is the Huilongguan residential area 19 kilometers from Tiananmen for up to 300,000 residents. Both are large enough to be full-fledged cities in terms of population, but few jobs are available there and day after day, residents have to spend long hours in chokingly jammed buses and subway cars commuting between their homes and old Beijing where they are employed. This state of affairs, in turn, discourages people living in the “central cluster” to move out. With few jobs available, neither “fringe clusters” nor satellite towns can in any way be attractive to the working masses. Here is the dilemma: redevelopment of the “central cluster” impedes development of suburban Beijing, and vice versa. Studies show that this “pancake-making” way of expansion can hardly continue as open spaces available in urban Beijing have kept dwindling. According to government plans, urban Beijing should be limited to 1,040 square kilometers in area. A relatively appropriate way of using the space is to designate 614 square kilometers for construction while reserving the rest,


10/15/2010 4:50:12 PM

32

BEIJING RECORD

426 square kilometers, for greening to ensure that the city will be congenial to live in. The population of urban Beijing should be limited to 6.45 million. If the limit is overstepped, experts have warned, Beijing will suffer an even more acute shortage of resources. Now let’s hear what Wu Liangyong says on the two graphics showing how construction space is related The shortage of water is already to a city’s environment. On the upper graphic, he says: keenly felt. Beijing is one of the thirstiDust screens are frequently seen in the core est cities across China. Water resources areas of some large cities in the West, where there is too great a concentration of high-rise buildings. available in areas under the jurisdicDust and smoke resulting from activities in a city invariably rise. The flow of air will become stagnant tion of Beijing Municipality average when meeting with cold air over the city’s core 342 cubic meters for each member of area, forming a convective current or “dust screen” that aggravates the so-called “heat island effect” the local population, far less than the and dissipates only when there is strong wind or national average of 2,517 cubic merain. (Source of information: Science America) Wu Liangyong has the following to say on the ters. The amount of exploitable water lower graphic: Let’s assume that those low buildings in old resources in the area is calculated at Beijing are preserved along with the green spots 4.2–4.5 billion cubic meters per year, and water surfaces there while all the high buildings are located outside, within an appropriate breaking down into 2.2 billion cubic distance from old Beijing. Then we will have a “horizontal” Beijing. This way of doing things will meters of surface water and 2–2.5 bilnot only enhance the city’s aesthetic value, but will lion cubic meters of underground waalso cut the average height of buildings in central Beijing and the population densities there. Meanter. Depression cones are now found while, the green area in central Beijing will inbeneath areas around urban Beijing, crease. To some extent, the damage done by urban activities to the environment can be repaired and the result of excess exploitation of the “dust screen” effect can be avoided or alleviated. To sum up, Beijing, the core of the envisaged underground water over the decades, Greater Beijing, will be congenial for living. suggesting that the shortage is likely to become even more acute in the years to come. Beijing also suffers an increasingly acute shortage of land resources. Arable land now averages 0.1 hectare for each member of Beijing’s rural population, down from the 0.23 hectare per capita in 1952. Furthermore, ecological and traffic problems, as well as problems with energy supply, are 8 also impeding Beijing’s development. What merits even greater attention, however, is the fact that of the 1,040 square kilometers designated for urban Beijing, 490.1 square kilometers had, by 1999, been used for construction. Moreover, Beijing’s urban popula-

8 Wang Dong: On the Planning and Construction of Beijing’s Satellite Towns, in Collected Papers Submitted to the Academic Symposium on Beijing’s Development Through to 2049, compiled by the Beijing Urban Planning Society, September– October of 2000.


10/15/2010 4:50:13 PM

FA Reading


33

tion had grown to 6.112 million, close to the planned limit of 6.45 million. To sum up, urban Beijing can no longer be expanded without restraint. The municipal authorities have adopted a series of technical measures to address the ever-growing environmental and traffic problems, busying themselves with building new roads and flyovers while trying to bring the emission of pollutants under control. Some technical problems may become less serious as a result, but such measures can in no way bring about a fundamental resolution to those problems that are threatening to ruin Beijing’s effort for a sustainable development. Tokyo serves as a typical example of trying to resolve its problems by taking technical measures. The city is reputed for a highly efficient mass transit system, a result of huge public spending. Despite that, many other vital problems are still there, forcing the Japanese to discuss the possibility of moving their capital city elsewhere. Tokyo and Beijing are roughly of the same size in terms of population, and the cities are also identical in pattern, both featuring a “core area” surrounded by ring roads one within another. Back in the 1940s, there were plans to build a complete system of green spots and a ring-shaped green belt round urban Tokyo. These, 1–5 kilometers thick and 180 square kilometers in combined area, would be located 10 to 15 kilometers beyond central Tokyo. After World War II, such plans were shelved and meanwhile, urban Tokyo rapidly spread out into its suburban areas. The city’s population increased by an average of 300,000 people each year during the 1950s and by the 1960s, had exceeded 10 million. Tokyo’s urban construction plans were revised again and again, pushing the planned green spots and belts farther and farther away from central Tokyo. By 1968, the area of planned green belt had been cut to some 90 square kilometers. In the 1980s, plans were made for building a “green buffer zone” 50–60 kilometers away from central Tokyo. Interestingly, the way Tokyo expands is dubbed as “making of konomiyaki,” a kind of pizza-like pancake. Traffic congestions once plagued Tokyo which, like Beijing, features a high concentration of urban functions in its core area. This compelled the government to spend huge sums of money improving the city’s traffic infrastructure. As a result, Tokyo is now serviced by a highly developed mass transit system, a network of subways and urban rail lines that covers the entire city while linking central Tokyo to all cities in the Tokyo metropolitan sphere. Public transport has become the primary choice of Tokyoites when they venture out of their homes. It accounts for 70 percent of the travels recorded daily in the 23 districts of metropolitan Tokyo, topping any other city in the world, and the figure is even higher —


10/15/2010 4:50:13 PM

34

BEIJING RECORD

90.6 percent — for the core area of Tokyo. Wherever you are in the city, there is a subway station within 500 meters at the most. Meanwhile, Tokyo subways enjoy the dubious distinction of being among the world’s most crowded. Moreover, atmospheric and noise pollution caused by traffic remains serious, prompting the general public to call central Tokyo the “hell of the working masses.” The authorities have come to realize that the policy of using technical means to solve traffic problems and increase the city’s space for development has been driven to the extreme and consequently, the possibility of “moving the administration center out of central Tokyo” is being discussed. Beijing is facing the same problems as Tokyo as both cities have identical development patterns. — Green space has kept on dwindling. According to its 1959 plans, urban Beijing should be surrounded by a green belt zone some 300 square kilometers in area. By 1982, the planned area of the zone had been cut to 260 square kilometers. It continued dwindling, to a mere 244 square kilometers by 1992. Even within what remained of the planned green zone, non-built spaces were no more than 160 square kilometers. For other major cities in the world, green and built spaces normally assume a ratio of 1:2. Beijing, however, is far from being able to meet that ratio. — Urban Beijing has been rapidly expanding. By 1993, just two years after the State Council approved the Beijing Urban Master Plan (1991– 2010), Beijing’s core area had expanded to 288.07 square kilometers, meeting the planned target 15 years ahead of schedule. The area’s population had grown to 5.27 million, 820,000 more than what was planned for 2010. — The municipal authorities have tried hard to use technical methods to solve the city’s traffic and environmental problems, but the results are far from being satisfactory as Beijing’s urban functions are getting increasingly concentrated in central Beijing. Problems facing Beijing, taken as a whole, are not so serious like those facing Tokyo, but such problems are bound to become worse. Here is the question: Is Beijing finding itself in an impasse like Tokyo? The way Beijing has expanded is based on blueprints for the expansion of Moscow. It was decided in the mid-1950s under the guidance of advisors from the former Soviet Union. When those Soviet advisors were in Beijing guiding local officials and experts in mapping out plans for the city’s


10/15/2010 4:50:13 PM

FA Reading


35

1. Border line of urban and rural Moscow 2. Border line of Moscow’s outskirts 3. Zones of construction (completed) 4. Zones of construction (planned)\ 5. Expressways 6. Radial roads

A sketch map of Moscow (Source: The Development of Beijing Seen from the Population Movements of Large Cities in the World by Bai Demao, 1985)

A diagrammatic sketch of Moscow’s urban planning after readjustment. Under the new plans, Moscow shall be divided into eight residential districts with a city-level urban center and a population of 1 million for each (From A Collection of Research Papers on Beijing’s Urban Planning, 1996)


10/15/2010 4:50:14 PM

36

BEIJING RECORD

development, problems were already emerging from Moscow’s expansion in all directions with the Kremlin as the center. Since the 1960s, new plans have been made to address traffic and other problems affecting the life of the local residents, calling for developing diverse urban centers while extending the wedge-shaped green belt linking the suburban forests into central Moscow. Ironically, Beijing has stuck to the Moscow-style urban development pattern until today. On February 22, 2000, the Economic Reference News devoted a whole page to an article titled Will Our Capital City be Moved to another Place? “Beijing is bursting while its cultural quintessence is being wiped out,” Fang Ke and Zhang Yan, young urban planners, wrote. “The on-going massive demolition in old Beijing, supposedly to make room for new roads, can in no way ease the increasingly serious traffic congestions, but will instead aggravate the problems caused by concentration of the city’s urban functions there.” They compared this state of affairs to the making of flour dough by hand: “Water is added when there is too much flour and flour is added because there is too much water — a vicious cycle that goes on and on.” “The Japanese are considering whether to move their overcrowded capital to another place,” Fang and Zhang wrote. “If the way old Beijing expands cannot be changed — remember: traffic congestions frequently occur even on the 100 meter-wide Chang’an Avenue — it won’t be impossible for us to have to move our capital elsewhere.” The article continued, “Over the decades, the municipal governments that have run the city in succession all have tried to accomplish ‘big’ things within their terms of service while counting on the central government for support and assistance in resolving the city’s problems. That explains why none of them has worked in real earnest to study matters of strategic importance to Beijing’s development in the future. Beijing’s urban construction planning has always been directed toward the city’s immediate needs for economic expansion, with the focus invariably placed on the redevelopment of old Beijing. As a result, opportunities have been lost one after another for a proper resolution to the conflict between preservation and modernization of old Beijing.” The article recalled what happened half a century ago to Beijing’s city planning. Back in the early 1950s, Fang and Zhang wrote, many things were waiting to be done in Beijing that had been designated capital of New China just a couple of years before. Among these, the most urgent was to decide where Beijing’s “core area,” or the envisaged central administration district of New China’s government should be located. On this matter there were two diametrically opposed views. One called for using old Beijing as the administration district of the central government. According to its


10/15/2010 4:50:14 PM

FA Reading


37

exponents, old Beijing had always been the capital of China and logically, should be home to the central government of New China. Opponents, who were headed by Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang, stood for building a new administration center in the Gongzhufen area on the city’s western suburbs so that old Beijing would be preserved in its entirety. “Under the influence of the prevalent ideology,” Fang and Zhang wrote, “old Beijing was seen as ‘heritage of feudalism,’ as something that must be ‘revolutionized’ and ‘transformed.’ And before long, the debate, which was academic in nature, was made a political issue and the view calling for preserving old Beijing was rejected.” “Today,” they continued, “people can’t help marveling the foresight and sagacity of Liang Sicheng at the sight of what has happened to the city by basing the administration center in old Beijing. Here is the glaring fact: in just about 40 years, urban Beijing has spread out to the Fourth Ring Road. Urban Beijing of today is six or seven times as large as old Beijing even with those satellite towns not counted. It means that over the decades, six or seven new cities as large as old Beijing have been built. Diverse, new urban centers would have sprung up outside old Beijing had the capital city’s development been appropriately planned. It is now clear that Liang Sicheng’s view concerned not only the selection of a site for the new Chinese government. It crystallized a sound, strategic thinking on the development of Beijing.” Here is the circle drawn by history: Beijing’s urban development has ended up where it began.


10/15/2010 4:50:14 PM


FA Reading

Chapter 2


10/15/2010 4:50:14 PM

Chapter Two Antagonizing Views on Beijing’s City Planning

Differences Surface “Long live Chairman Mao Zedong!” “Long live Generalissimo Stalin!” Shouts of joy resounded throughout the hall. The gathering was permeated with an atmosphere of jubilation, highlighting the extraordinarily great friendship between the Chinese and Soviet peoples thanks to the presence of a Soviet delegation of artists and scientists along with some individual experts from the Soviet Union. A prolonged ovation greeted our Soviet friends when they entered the hall. These paragraphs are found in a news report published on Page 2 of the October 10, 1949 issue of the People’s Daily, organ of the ruling Communist Party, on a meeting held the previous day to inaugurate the Beijing Association for Friendship between China and the (former) Soviet 1 Union. Architect Liang Sicheng, who was on the association’s executive committee, attended the meeting in Zhongshan Hall of Zhongshan (Sun Yat-sen) Park to the right of the Tiananmen or the Gate of Heavenly Peace. Among the guests from the Soviet Union were 21 experts in municipal administration. Earlier, on June 30, Mao Zedong published an article titled On People’s Democratic Dictatorship. He said: Architect Liang Sicheng (by courtesy of Lin Zhu)

“You are leaning to one side.” Exactly. The forty years’ experience of Sun Yat-sen and the

1 Consolidating and Develop the Sino-Soviet Friendship, Bridging the Chinese and Soviet Cultures — the Beijing Association for Friendship between China and the Soviet Union Inaugurated, People’s Daily, Page 2, October 10, 1949.


10/15/2010 4:50:15 PM

FA Reading

Antagonizing Views on Beijing’s City Planning

41

twenty-eight years’ experience of the Communist Party have taught us to lean to one side, and we are firmly convinced that in order to win victory and consolidate it we must lean to one side. In the light of the experiences accumulated in these forty years and these twenty-eight years, all Chinese without exception must lean either to the side of imperialism or to the side of socialism. Sitting on the fence will not do, nor is there a third road. We oppose the Chiang Kai-shek reactionaries who lean to the side of 2 imperialism, and we also oppose the illusions about a third road. In July, Liu Shaoqi (1898–1969), a top leader of the Communist Party of China who was to be made president of the People’s Republic later, paid a secret visit to the Soviet Union as head of a CPC delegation. Now that the birth of New China was drawing near, the delegation was to seek advices from Stalin and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on government administration and economic management. The talks resulted, among other matters, in a Soviet decision to send 220 experts to help the government of New China in its work. On September 16, a group of Soviet experts in municipal administration 3 arrived in Beiping. They were supposedly to help the new government in its work to plan the city’s development. In reality, however, they were to have absolute say in everything due the “leaning-to-one-side” mentality then prevailing in China. In 1956, Zhou Enlai said that Soviet experts in China were to “advice,” 4 not to “dictate.”â•› But they did “dictate” everything in China’s reconstruction, and this state of affairs continued until the conflicts between China and the former Soviet Union surfaced in 1960. At 3:00 p.m. on October 1, 1949, Liang Sicheng found himself on the Tiananmen Rostrum for the ceremony to inaugurate the People’s Republic of China. Also present were those Soviet experts to “advise” the new government on Beijing’s municipal administration. Overlooking the capital city from atop the Gate of Heavenly Peace, the Soviet experts began offering advices. Pointing at the Dongjiaominxiang

2 Selected Works of Mao Zedong, Vol. 4, 2nd edition, published in June 1991. 3 Beijing (meaning the “north capital”) had its name changed into “Beiping” (pacification of the north) on June 20, 1928 when the Kuomintang government decided to designate Nanjing as its capital. On July 29, 1937, Beiping fell to the Japanese. On April 17 of the following year, the puppet government ordered restoration of the city’s old name, Beijing, which the Kuomintang government refused to recognize. The First Session of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, which was held September 21–30, 1949, decided to designate Beiping capital of the People’s Republic of China. On September 27, the name, Beijing, was restored. 4 Wang Wenke: About the November 1960 Decision of the Party on Control of Construction, in A Review of New China’s City Planning over the Past 50 Years, 1st edition, compiled by the China City Planning Society the Commercial Press, November 1999.


10/15/2010 4:50:15 PM

42

BEIJING RECORD

playground in the south, which was across the square, they told their hosts to have an office complex built there to serve as the headquarters of the new Central Government. Construction of the project, they added, would be the beginning of the city’s “transformation,” according to Chen Zhanxiang in an interview given to the author on March 2, 1994. These Soviet experts did not know that just seven months before, Liang Sicheng and other experts had succeeded in blocking the People’s Daily’s plan to have an office complex built there, and they also proposed that the 5 playground be turned into a green spot such as a public park. It is obvious that differing opinions already surfaced on how the ancient capital, Beijing, should be redeveloped. The same day, also on the Tiananmen Rostrum, Zhou Enlai, who had just been appointed Premier of the Central Government Administrative Council (now the State Council, China’s central government — Tr.), told Liang Sicheng his idea about the rebuilding of the square. Here is an account of the event given by Cheng Yuangong, head of Zhou Enlai’s bodyguard squad: Joyously, he (Zhou Enlai) called together architect Liang Sicheng and officials of the Beijing Municipal Government and relevant central government departments and told them his idea about the rebuilding of Tiananmen Square. “The square is the largest of all squares in capital cities across the world, and we must change it into the most beautiful square as well,” he said, with pride. He led the group to the southeast corner of the Tiananmen Rostrum. Pointing to the east side of the square, he said: “There should be a history museum — a huge structure — there.” He then led the group to the southwest corner of the Tiananmen Rostrum. Pointing to the west side of the square, he said: “The National Grand Theater should be built there.” Finally, he led the group back to the middle, saying: “Tiananmen Square lies in the heart of Beijing. In front of us are the Sun-Facing Gate (Zhengyangmen or Qianmen) and the Arrow Tower (Jianlou), and in front of them we should build a monument (to honor the people’s heroes) … There should be a history museum on the east side of the square and the National Grand Theater on the west side. Behind us are the Forbidden City, the Cultural Palace of the Laboring People and Zhongshan Park. Upon completion of its transformation, Tiananmen Square will be center

5 Zhang Ruliang: The Beiping Municipal City Planning Commission under the Beiping City Construction Bureau, in History of Planning, 1st edition, compiled by the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party Records Collection Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995.


10/15/2010 4:50:15 PM

FA Reading


43

of mass activities and entertainment for the people of Beijing, nay, for the 6 people of the entire country.”â•› In Cheng Yuangong’s memoirs, there is no mention of Liang Sicheng’s immediate response to Zhou Enlai’s remarks, but the architect was to stand firm against this way of “rebuilding” the square for fear that it would lead to a “rebuilding” of the entire capital. The stand was to be accurately presented in the Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government or the “Liang-Chen Proposal” he and Chen Zhanxiang jointly worked out in February 1950. Even before he ascended the Tiananmen Rostrum on October 1, 1949 for New China’s inauguration ceremony, Liang Sicheng, it seemed, already had a foreboding that for better or for worse, the city would have to change. In a letter to Mayor Nie Rongzhen (1899–1992) on September 19, 1949, he asked Faculty members of Qinghua University charged with designing the National Emblem (by courtesy of Lin Zhu) the new government to be “prudent” in starting Beijing’s reconstruction. Nevertheless, his worries and misgivings gave way to joy, to a prospect of a better China under the new government. He was given an important task, the task of helping the CPPCC — the provisional parliament — decide on New China’s National Anthem, National Emblem and National Flag. 7 The patriotic song March of the Volunteers was designated the National Anthem, on insistence of Liang Sicheng and some other National Emblem design adopted prominent intellectuals. At a CPPCC meeting The by the CPPCC on June 23, 1950 (by on September 27, 1949, Liang Sicheng spoke courtesy of the CPPCC Archives Office)

6 Cheng Yuangong: Zhou Enlai and Beijing’s Urban Construction, in Zhou Enlai and Beijing, 1st edition, Central Documentation Press, February 1998. 7 This song was composed by Nieh Erh in 1932, one year after the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and was dedicated to the volunteers who rose to defend the nation long before Japan launched an all-round war against China. The lyric was written by Tian Han — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:50:16 PM

44

BEIJING RECORD

on the different designs collected so far for the National Flag. But none of the designs for the National Emblem was good enough. On request of the CPPCC, Liang Sicheng organized the faculty members of the Qinghua University’s Department of Architecture to produce one for participation in the nationwide contest of National Emblem designs. On June 23 of the following year, the design worked out by Liang’s group was adopted by the CPPCC. At first, Liang Sicheng was reluctant to have Tiananmen, the main gate of the Forbidden City, in New China’s National Emblem. It is Premier Zhou Enlai who persuaded him into agree8 ing to change his idea. He gave the Gate of Heavenly Peace a new cultural connotation by placing it below the five-star National Flag on the National Emblem. One of his opponents, however, was to use his design of the National Liang Sicheng, in bed for illness, discusses National Emblem to criticize him for his stand Emblem designs with Lin Huiyin (by courtesy of Lin Zhu) for having old Beijing preserved: The fact is that the moment the decision was adopted on use of Tiananmen Square as the venue of New China’s founding ceremony, city planning ideas for keeping the entire old Beijing as it had always been was repudiated. The task of transforming old Beijing was given by history to all planners when the first National Flag was hoisted over Tiananmen Square, when the Gate of Heavenly Peace became a main component of the National Emblem. It is a pity that not everybody realized this. There were people who tried by a thousand and one ways to have the old city of Beijing preserved in its entirety. They only saw the good aspects of old Beijing but they ignored its bad aspects. They took note of the beauty and magnificence of old Beijing but they ignored the fact that it was dirty and ugly at the same time. Old Beijing was a hell where the laboring masses had to struggle for a meager living. In the eyes of those who stood for its preservation, it was a “paradise” on earth — the kind of “paradise,” as 9 we see it, for the rich and powerful only.

8 The National Emblem in Historical Data by the author, Beijing Youth Daily, July 19, 1998. 9 Chen Gan: The Origin of Beijing’s Urban Pattern and Scattered Urban Clusters, in Collected Works of Chen Gan — Thoughts on Beijing’s Development, compiled by the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, 1996.


10/15/2010 4:50:16 PM

FA Reading


45

7 8

9

Dadu of the Yuan Dynasty 1. Central Terrace 2. Forbidden City (The frontal part was where state affairs were handled. The rear part was where the imperial family lived) 3. Imperial City 4. Imperial Ancestral Temple 5. Shejitan (Altar of the Land and Grain) 6. Marketplace 7. Jishuitan Lake (also known as Haizi) 8. Taiyechi Lake 9. Tonghui River (the north end of the Grand Canal) Change of the Old City of Beijing from Zhongdu of Jin to Beijing of the Ming and Qing (Source: Collected Works of Hou Renzhi, 1998)

The City of Beijing (early Ming period) 1. Bell Tower (north) Drum Tower 2. Longevity Hill (the name to be changed into Jingshan Hill or Meishan Hill) 3. Forbidden City 4. Imperial Ancestral Temple 5. Shejitan (Altar of the Land and Grain) 6. Chengtianmen Gate (name to be changed into Tiananmen, or the Gate of Heavenly Peace) 7. Temple of Heaven 8. Shanchuantan (Altar of Mountains and Rivers; name to be changed into Xiannongtan — Altar of the God of Agriculture)

In 1959, ten years after he witnessed the birth of New China, Liang Sicheng wrote about his feelings at that historical moment: The moment I looked down from atop the Tiananmen Rostrum on the afternoon of October 1, 1949, I caught sight of a vast sea of red flags, a scene beyond my wildest imagination — indeed a forever unforgettable scene! Suddenly, the strength of the broad mass became something tangible, something visual, in my mind’s eye. Meanwhile, a big question mark flashed across my mind at the sight of the crowds below: What would the Communist Party do to get the 450 million people organized, and to give full scope to their strength? How would the expected socialist transformation be carried out? Meanwhile, confidence in the Communist Party and Chairman Mao prompted me to think that THEY could manage it. Ten years ago, “THEY” was the only word I thought was proper for use in reference to the Party, not realizing that I had become a drop of water in that “red sea” and that the Party had already “made” me a member of


10/15/2010 4:50:19 PM

46

BEIJING RECORD

this large collective though I was still on my old job. The Party had already “given full scope” to the little strength of mine and I myself was being 10 transformed to suit socialism.

Beijing, the Greatest “In city planning, Beijing of the Ming Dynasty was, in principle, modeled after Chang’an, the capital of both the Sui (581–618) and Tang (618–907) dynasties. The Qing Dynasty took over the city (from the Ming Dynasty) in its entirety, which has been preserved till this day. Among ancient capitals found across the world, Beijing is definitely the greatest.” These words are from History of Chinese Architecture by Liang Sicheng which, finished in 1943 but never published in his lifetime, was the first monograph on the history of Chinese architecture ever produced by a Chinese architect. Most historians, architects and experts in city planning the world over share Liang Sicheng’s view on old Beijing. Steen E. Rasmussen of Denmark commented: “The entire city is one of the wonders of the world, in its symmetry and clarity a unique monument, the culmination of a great civilization.” In his book Design of Cities (Penguin Books, 1976, p. 244), American architect Edmund N. Bacon said: “Possibly the greatest single work of man on the face of the earth is Peking (old spelling of Beijing which was annulled in 1979 — Tr.). This Chinese city, designed as the domicile of the Emperor,

The axis of Beijing stretching south, seen from atop Jingshan Hill (photo by Wang Jun, September 2002)

10 Liang Sicheng: Never Will I Let My Second Prime Time Slip Idly By, Guangming Daily, Page 2, March 10, 1959.


10/15/2010 4:50:19 PM

FA Reading


47

was intended to mark the center of the universe. The city is deeply enmeshed in ritualistic formulae and religious concepts which do not concern us now. Nevertheless, it is so brilliant in design that it provides a rich storehouse of ideas for the city of today.” Henry S. Churchill, an American expert in planning, had the following to say in his book The City Is The People: “Peking is one of the great city plans, a unit of manifold variety of parts, a pattern as intricate as the design of an ancient bronze, and as well ordered and composed. Here is the superblock — the main thoroughfares making traffic-free islands of dwellings, infinite variety within a rectilinear frame... Peking was designed in three dimensions — the two storied palaces, the towers, the gates, all placed for definite effect, their gold tiles shining over the dull roofs of the ordinary one-story houses.” Looking down from atop the Jingshan Hill, the commanding height of central Beijing, before the city’s “transformation,” one had a clear, prosodic view of those neatly arranged siheyuan courtyards in the ancient city. Dating from some 700 years ago, these courtyards, distinguished by walls built with bluish bricks and roofs covered by gray tiles, had trees growing from inside, forming a vast expanse of green. A 7.8-kilometer-long axis runs southnorth, straight through the middle of the city, through the Sun-Facing Gate (Zhengyangmen), the Gate of Heavenly Peace (Tiananmen), the Forbidden City, the Drum Tower (Gulou) and the Bell Tower (Zhonglou). Golden and red were the dominant hues of these palatial structures, forming a pleasant contrast with the sea of bluish-gray courtyards, producing a visual impact so great as to be beyond description.

The axis of Beijing stretching north, seen from atop Jingshan Hill (photo by Wang Jun, September 2002)


10/15/2010 4:50:20 PM

48

BEIJING RECORD

The history of Beijing, which served as the capital city of two succeeding dynasties, the Ming and the Qing, can be traced to Dadu, the “Grand Capital” of the Yuan Dynasty (1206–1370), which Italian traveler Marco Polo had acclaimed as the most beautiful and most magnificent city he had ever seen. The guideline set in The Artificers’ Record in The Ritual of Zhou (Zhou Li·Kao Gong Ji), a classic works for city building dating to the Zhou Dynasty (1066– 256 BC), was adopted in the building of Dadu, which began in 1264: “In building a city, artisans and craftsmen must make sure that the city shall be a square with each side nine li (In the Zhou Dynasty, one li was equivalent to 415.8 meters — Tr.) in length and three gates on each side of the wall that surrounds it. The city shall have nine south-north roads crossing with nine east-west roads. The altar dedicated to the ancestors shall be located in the left of the city and the altar dedicated to the Land and Grain, in the right. The south part of the city shall be reserved for the royal palace and the north part, for marketplaces.” Moreover, builders of Dadu were bold enough to divert water of a natural lake — the Lake of Shichahai as it is known today — into the city through a man-made channel that crossed with the city’s axis, thus completing the master plan on the basis of which old Beijing was developed. While epitomizing teachings of Confucianism — ancient China’s mainstream ideology — the city of Dadu featured an architectural style that also gave prominence to a basic teaching of Taoism: “Man is subordinated to Earth, Earth to Heaven, Heaven to Tao (the Great Way), and Tao, to Nature.” In 1368, Dadu fell to General Xu Da of the Ming Dynasty. On his order, the north side of the city wall was moved 2.5 kilometers southward. Building of the Forbidden City began in 1405 on order of Zhu Di, the third emperor of the Ming Dynasty. In 1417, construction of Beijing’s Imperial City began. In 1420, the south side of the city wall left over from the Yuan Dynasty was moved about one kilometer south, from what is now Chang’an Avenue to Qiansanmen (the section of the city wall along which there used to be three gates: Xuanwumen, Qianmen and Chongwenmen). In 1553, Emperor Zhu Houcong of the Ming Dynasty ordered the building of a wall to surround Beijing’s Outer City so as to strengthen Beijing’s fortification. By then, four walls had been built, separately surrounding the Forbidden City, the Imperial City, the Inner City and the Outer City, making the entire capital resemble the Chinese character “凸” in shape. The Qing Dynasty inherited almost all the institutional practices of its predecessor, the Ming, and made few changes to the capital city, thus ensuring its preservation until the 1950s.


10/15/2010 4:50:21 PM

FA Reading


49

South Capital of the Liao Dynasty Zhongdu of the Jin Dynasty Dadu of the Yuan Dynasty

Beijing of the Ming and Qing dynasties

Diagrammatic sketch showing changes in the location of Beijing (Source: A Comprehensive Discussion of Beijing’s City Planning and Construction by Zhang Jinggan, 1997)

A diagrammatic sketch of the Royal City of Zhou in Illustrated Rituals of Ancient Times by Nie Chongyi of the Song Dynasty (Source: Twenty Lectures on Ancient Chinese Architecture given by Lou Qingxi in 2001)


According to Wu Liangyong’s textual research, China’s capital cities from the year 800 to 1800 were the largest in the world in terms of population and also the best designed. This was true to Chang’an (what is now Xi’an, capital of Shaanxi Province) and Kaifeng in what is now Henan Province, and in particular to Beijing. Beijing was the “world’s best” except for a short period from 1650 to 1700 when it was overtaken by Constantinople (Istanbul).Wu Liangyong said that Beijing fully deserves the honor of being known as the largest of all capital cities of

10/15/2010 4:50:22 PM

50

BEIJING RECORD

The Building Standards edited by Zhu Qiqian in 1925 and the title page inside it

the ancient times the world over. It also had the longest history, was most complete in planning and had the largest concentration of buildings. For all that, Beijing represented the highest achievement in city development until 11 London emerged to overtake it after 1800. In China, Liang Sicheng was one of a few who pioneered scientific studies of ancient Beijing’s city planning and construction. In 1925, Liang Sicheng, a student at University of Pennsylvania Department of Architecture, received from his father, Liang Qichao, a copy of The Building Standards — Rules for Structural Carpentry of the Song Dynasty (Ying Zao Fa Shi), an important monograph on ancient Chinese architecture. The 34-volume book was compiled by Li Jie, superintendent of construction at the court of Emperor Huizong (1101–1125) of the Song Dynasty (1960– 1279). It was printed for the first time in 1103, and was reprinted after edit12 ing by Zhu Qiqian. Richly illustrated, it contains detailed discussions of architectural designing along with the relevant rules and standards. Before 11 Wu Liangyong: A Brief History of Ancient Chinese City Planning, 1986. 12 Zhu Qiqian (1874–1964), alias Zhu Guixin, was born in Xinyang of Henan Province. He was minister of communication, minister of internal affairs and acting prime minister of the Beijing-based government of the Republic of China in the early 20th century. As such, he supervised over a range of projects to revamp old Beijing. Included were the rebuilding of the Sun-Facing Gate; connection of the East Chang’an Avenue and West Chang’an Avenue to form the main thoroughfare of Beijing; the opening up of Nanchangjie, Beichangjie, Nanchizi and Beichizi streets in the vicinity of the Forbidden City, which had been closed to ordinary people; and the building of a loop railway line round the city. He was the man who opened the first park in Beijing, the Central Park or Zhongshan Park as it is called now. He was also founder of the Beijing Cultural Relics Museum, the first museum in the city. On his insistence, some of the imperial sites were opened to the general public. He withdrew from politics in 1916, after Yuan Shikai (1859–1916) failed in his attempt to transform China from a republic into a monarchy. In 1929, he founded the Institute for Research in Chinese Architecture, an academic organization devoted to the study of ancient Chinese architecture. Liang Sicheng and Liu Dunzhen (1897–1968), also a prominent architect, were members of the institute, Liang working as director of its Technical Studies Section and Liu, as director of its Documentary Studies Section.


10/15/2010 4:50:22 PM

FA Reading


51

sending the book to his son Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin, his son’s fiancée, Liang Qichao wrote these words on the title page: “Some 1,000 years ago, this outstanding book was produced, and indeed our nation should take pride in it. Zhu Qiqian edited the book and sent me this copy. I am sending it to Sicheng and Huiyin, hoping they will value it forever.” The book was destined to affect Liang Sicheng’s entire life. He was inspired even though this 1,000-year-old book, particularly those technical terms in it, was largely beyond his comprehension. The book imbued him with a desire to follow his father’s teaching and embark on the study of ancient Chinese architecture. In the end, he became resolved to write a book on the history of Chinese architecture, which was to be the first ever written by a Chinese expert. In September 1931, Liang Sicheng joined the Institute for Research in Chinese Architecture (IRCA), an academic organization founded by Zhu Qiqian for the study of ancient Chinese architecture, and was made director of the institute’s Technical Studies Section. From that time on, he devoted himself to a systematic study of ancient Chinese architecture, of which ancient Beijing was always the subject of paramount importance. With help of old artisans and his own surveys of the structures in the Forbidden City, he gained a full understanding of The Structural Regulations (Gong Bu Gong Cheng Zuo Fa) of the Qing Dynasty. Meanwhile, he collected many hand-sheets on construction from private collectors. His effort culminated in the publication in 1932 of the Ch’ing (Qing) Structural Regulations, the first monograph on ancient Chinese architecture examined

Photo shows Zhu Qiqian (middle, wearing a high hat) directing the rebuilding of the Sun-Facing Gate in 1915, in his capacity as Minister of Internal Affairs of the Beijing-based government of the Republic of China (by courtesy of the Library of the Qinghua University School of Architecture)


10/15/2010 4:50:23 PM

52

BEIJING RECORD

Former residence of Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin at Lizhuang Village of Sichuan Province, where Liang finished writing the History of Chinese Architecture (photo by Wang Jun, October 5, 2000)

under modern, scientific spotlights and by using modern, scientific methodology. Defying untold difficulties, Liang Sicheng, together with fellow members of the IRCA, later surveyed, photographed, studied and analyzed more than 2,000 ancient structures — structures of the Han (202 BC–220 AD), Tang (618–907) and succeeding dynasties. He toured vast areas in north and southeast China before the War of Resistance against the Japanese Aggression erupted (1937–1945) and southwestern areas during the War, setting foot in some 200 counties in 15 provinces. Meanwhile, he made a painstaking study of The Building Standards. Despite poverty and illness, Liang Sicheng finished writing the History of Chinese Architecture in a farm cottage in a village named Lizhuang in Sichuan Province. On July 31, 1946, about a year after the War ended, Liang Sicheng and his family came back to Beiping and he founded the Qinghua University’s Department of Architecture. “I thought,” he recalled later, “after returning to Beiping it would be good if I could work as the head of the city’s public works bureau, so that I would be able to completely eradicate what the 13 Japanese did to the city’s townscape.” Beiping fell to the Japanese after the July 7, 1937 incident — the “Lugou Bridge (Marco Polo Bridge) Incident” as it is popularly known in China, which marked the beginning of China’s nationwide war of resistance against

13 Liang Sicheng: My “Sentiments of Patriotism” Re-examined (unpublished), October 1968, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:50:25 PM

FA Reading


53

Japanese aggression. Large numbers of Japanese flocked to the city as the aggressor army drove deeper and deeper into the south. From December 1936 to December 1939, the Japanese population in Beiping increased ten times, from 4,000 to 45,000. Meanwhile, many Chinese also came to stay. As a result, Beiping’s population increased from 1.53 million in 1936 to 1.604 million in 1938. In 1938, the occupation authorities set up the socalled “Huabei (North China) Construction Administration” as a part of the puppet government. The “administration” was charged with the task of addressing problems caused by such a rapid increase in the local population, in particular to ward off, as far as possible, problems that may arise from the mingling of Chinese and Japanese. In December 1938, the “administration” published a master plan for Beiping’s redevelopment, calling for building a settlement or a “new urban area” exclusive for the Japanese on the city’s western suburbs, at Wukesong, 10.5 kilometers from Tiananmen. Here is a gist of the master plan: — Beiping shall be the political, military and cultural center of northern China. Its population is expected to grow to 2.5 million over the next 20 to 30 years; — Beiping shall be preserved as a cultural and tourist city. Plans for developing a new urban area on the suburbs of the city shall be acceptable. This is because redevelopment of the walled city would be too costly. Moreover, those traditional-style residential buildings in the city are distributed and designed in such a way as to be unable to suit the needs of the Japanese in their life while difficult to rebuild and detrimental to the value of Beiping as a tourist city.

Map of Beijing’s city planning done by the Japanese-controlled Beijing City Government A: Ruins of the Garden of Perfect Splendor ; B: Longevity Hill; C. Jade Spring Hill; D. Airport built by the Japanese on the city’s western suburbs; E. Central Square; F. Forbidden City, Tian’anmen; G. Lugou Bridge (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)


10/15/2010 4:50:26 PM

54

BEIJING RECORD

— A new urban area shall be built to accommodate the Japanese, in order to avoid their mingling with the local Chinese. — The new urban area for the Japanese shall be located on the western suburbs in light of the city’s topography and other conditions. For

New urban areas on the eastern and western suburbs of Beijing, planned in 1940 (Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998)

Map of the new urban area on Beijing’s western suburbs during the Japanese occupation (by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture)


10/15/2010 4:50:28 PM

FA Reading


55

Chinese expected to come to Beiping in the future, residential areas shall be developed outside the city, in places near the walls. Industrial enterprises shall be located to the east of the city, with Tongzhou to be developed into the city’s heavy industrial zone, in light of factors including the availability of water sources, wind direction and the canal linking the city with Tianjin. — Overall planning shall be done for the redevelopment of the entire city of Beiping and its suburban areas, along with sites of cultural interest such as imperial structures, the Longevity Hill, Xiaotang14 15 shan , Changxindian , etc. As a tourist city, Beiping shall Xingya Avenue in the new urban area on Beijing’s western suburbs (1941) have a sightseeing road link(Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998) ing Nanyuan, Tongzhou, the Yongding River and the Baihe River. “The Chinese cultural characteristic of the city shall be kept. There shall be plans to turn the Longevity Hill (Wan Shou Shan), the Jade Spring Hill (Yu Quan Shan) and other sites of cultural interest into public parks. It is hoped that courtyards, forests, ornamental rocks and natural hills and rivers in these places and in the surrounding areas shall be permeated with a Chinese demeanor. The Garden of Perfect Splendor (Yuan Ming Yuan, also known as the Old Summer Palace) burnt by the Anglo-French Joint Forces (in 1860) shall be rebuilt in the future. In short, the Chinese features of 16 the city shall be kept as far as possible.” 14 A hot spring resort — Tr. 15 An ancient town on the southwest suburbs of Beijing — Tr. 16 Beijing’s City Planning translated from Japanese into Chinese by Huang Shimeng, quoted in Liang Sicheng’s Thinking on Protection of Ancient Cities and City Planning by Gao Yilan and Wang Menghui in issues 1–5 of 1991 of the World Architecture magazine.


10/15/2010 4:50:29 PM

56

BEIJING RECORD

Diagrammatic sketch of Beiping’s city planning done in 1946 (Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998)

Diagrammatic sketch of the planned Beiping Railway Station (1946) (Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998)


10/15/2010 4:50:31 PM

FA Reading


57

Shortly after Japan surrendered in August 1945, the new Beiping City Government set about planning the ancient capital’s redevelopment. By the following year, it had finished the formulation of the Outlined Plan for Beiping’s Municipal Construction by using as reference similar plans worked out by the Japanese while getting some Japanese technical personnel to be involved in the job. According to the Outlined Plan for Beiping’s Municipal Construction, Beiping would become the national capital in the future. The ancient capital city would be preserved and be developed into a unique tourist city. A new urban area shall be developed on the western suburbs of the city, where all office buildings of the government were to be constructed, along with residential buildings for its employees and shops and other service facilities. Roads shall be built to link the new and old parts of the city so as to allow the city to duly perform its urban functions. An industrial zone shall be developed on the city’s eastern suburbs, and small- and medium-sized producers of daily necessities and arts and crafts articles shall account for the majority of the enterprises there. The Summer Palace, the Western Hills and the Hot Spring Area shall be reserved for public recreation and entertainment. Chen Zhanxiang, who was studying as a Ph.D candidate in Britain under Professor Sir Patrick Abercrombie (1880–1957) and who had been involved in regional planning of three cities in southern England, was invited to join Beijing’s city planning. He was however unable to assume the role as the Nanjing-based Kuomintang government insisted that he should work with them instead. On May 29, 1947, the Beiping City Planning Commission was set up to finalize Beijing’s city planning, for which Mayor He Siyuan (1896– 1982) set down the principle of “retaining the original features of Beiping’s appearance while giving the city a modern outlook.” On the basis of field studies covering the entire city, the Public Works Bureau of the Beiping City Government prepared a report on eight specific aspects of Beiping’s city planning, including its basic principles and objectives, the city’s boundaries, communication and other infrastructure facilities, public hygiene, public recreation and entertainment facilities and housing construction. According to the report, there would be a new urban area to be developed on the basis of what the Japanese had done at Wukesong in the city’s western suburbs. Here is a gist of the report: — Beiping shall be developed into a modern metropolis. Meanwhile, attention shall be paid to preserving and protecting the cultural relics and sites of historical interest in the city. Tourism shall be developed and sufficient importance shall be attached to the development of


10/15/2010 4:50:31 PM

58

BEIJING RECORD

Planned boundaries for the City of Beiping (1946) (Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998)

culture and education. Work shall be continued to develop the new urban area in the western suburbs. Meanwhile, there shall be a need to build satellite towns on the basis of the towns and villages already in Beiping’s suburban areas. — The gates on the city walls shall be linked by main roads within the city. Outside the ancient capital there shall be garden-like ring roads — at least two — surrounding the city. Tramcars in the city shall phase out, to be replaced by trolleybuses. Coach services shall be developed to link central Beiping and its suburbs. A subway line shall be built to link central Beiping and its western suburbs. — Green spots shall be built along both the outer and inner sides of the city walls. Public parks shall be built on the tops of the city walls. The city shall also have gymnasiums, squares, children’s playgrounds and cemeteries good enough to serve the needs of the general public. — Coal gas shall be used to replace coal. Work shall be done to increase the city’s garbage transportation capacity. — Residential zones shall be developed in the southwest part of the Outer City for ordinary citizens. New types of structures affordable


10/15/2010 4:50:32 PM

FA Reading


59

to ordinary citizens shall be built there, along with marketplaces, shops, groceries and other service facilities. The report also called for developing an automatic telephone system to 17 replace the old system that had been used since the early 1900s. Liang Sicheng was not involved because he was absent from Beiping, working in the United States as a visiting scholar from November 1946 to July 1947. But facts were to prove that in city planning, his ideas were identical with those of the Beiping City Government. In a letter to President Mei Yiqi (1889–1962) of Qinghua University on March 9, 1945, Liang Sicheng proposed the establishment of a department of architecture by the university. “Our country remains backward, and ordinary Chinese are still living a kind of medieval life,” he wrote. “Nevertheless, China is bound to industrialize rapidly after the War and life of our people will inevitably improve. We need to keep up with the needs of the upcoming new era, and on no account must we be caught unprepared.” Basing himself on experiences of foreign cities in development, Liang Sicheng stressed the importance of city planning. To suit the needs of life in the contemporary world, he noted, a city should be developed into an “organic whole” comprising different kinds of structures in their tens of thousands. Gone are the years when “city planning simply meant how to build streets or clear a city of its slum areas.” Instead, he said, city planning is now meant to ensure that “the urban functions can be duly performed in every part of a city, and that every piece of work that needs to be done is properly done,” so that “an all-round, appropriate planning will be possible for resolution of the local socio-economic problems.” He said, “City designing, as a matter of fact, is architectural designing in an expanded form, and city designing and architectural designing are, as a matter of fact, the two sides of the same coin.” Liang Sicheng held that “in undertaking post-War reconstruction of cities, the focus of attention should be placed on the positive aspect of the job. (By doing so) a good opportunity will be ushered in for development of Chinese cities... Britain, the Soviet Union and other countries began planning post-war reconstruction even when the War had just broken out and was just beginning to cause damage to their cities. In contrast, China has had no such planning at all and it also suffers from an acute shortage of people specializing in this field... Even in ancient times, there were officials specially charged with construction. It is known to all that people will be

17 General History of Beijing, Vol. 9, 1st edition, China Bookstore, October. 1994.


10/15/2010 4:50:32 PM

60

BEIJING RECORD

happy to work only after they have got a roof over their heads... Training of competent specialists in architecture is, indeed, a matter of major 18 importance, a question that merits public attention.” In an article titled On Systematic Planning for Cities and Towns published in August of the same year in Ta Kung Pao newspaper, Liang Sicheng advanced his ideal for social progress, which he summarized as “dwelling to the dweller” and “one bed for each person.” He noted that “establishment of architecture and city planning faculties in universities is a basic step toward improving city planning, something to eventually give birth to a range of cities and towns suiting the needs of the future.” In the same article, Liang Sicheng defined “contented life and work of residents” as the “ultimate aim of city planning.” Liang Sicheng was alerted to those problems that had cropped up in Western cities in the course of industrialization in the second half of the 19th century, such as an excess concentration of population in cities and traffic congestion and slum areas. He urged China not to follow this old track. “Once a mistake is made,” he warned, “it may take a hundred years to correct it, during which residents will have to endure endless sufferings.” What should be done so as not to follow this old track? To answer the question, Liang Sicheng advanced the principle of “organic decentralization.” He meant to say that a large city should be divided into several “towns” or “districts” each having a proper concentration of population while being self-sufficient in urban functions. The different towns or zones should be separated by “green belts that serve as public parks at the same time.” The size of the population in every town or district must be strictly controlled, and so must be construction spaces, so that it will not “expand, without a limit, eventually into a huge mess.” Planning of Greater London, which Chen Zhanxiang’s supervisor Patrick Abercrombie was working on, caught Liang Sicheng’s attention. “Most of the metropolises in Europe and the United States are now huge messes,” he commented. “Most areas in the vicinity of industrial and commercial centers are occupied by slums. Relatively rich people have had to seek refuge in the suburban areas. Unable to pay the living expenses in areas near their workplaces, many commuters have to spend about two hours daily aboard railway trains, tramcars or buses, which is a huge loss of time and money... The City Council of London is trying to address the problem by resorting to the method of ‘organic decentralization.’ For large cities like London and

18 Letter of Liang Sicheng to Mei Yiqi, in A Collection of Papers in Celebration of the Jubilee of the Qinghua University School (Department) of Architecture, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1996.


10/15/2010 4:50:32 PM

FA Reading


61

New York, I am afraid, ‘organic decentralization’ may take 50 or even 60 years to come true.” It is a mutual understanding of the theory of “organic decentralization” that prompted Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang to get to know each other and become intimate friends, culminating in the Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government they were to jointly make in 1950. The theory was advanced by the Finnish-born Eliel Saarinen (1873– 1950), a globally renowned expert in city planning. When planning the development of the Greater Helsinki in 1917, he found that those satellite towns built in the city’s suburbs were just “dormitory towns,” and residents there still had to work in central Helsinki. This state of affairs caused a huge increase in traffic between the satellite towns and central Helsinki which, in turn, gave rise to a host of social problems. Basing himself on painstaking studies of the situation, Saarinen proposed building some “semi-independent” towns near Helsinki, where jobs would be available to at least some of the residents, so as to alleviate the pressure on central Helsinki. According to his theory of city planning, a city must “decentralize” its urban functions step by step. In other words, the satellite towns should undergo a process of “organic” separation from their mother city, instead of “jumping away” from it. In 1943, Eliel Saarinen published The City: Its Growth, Its Decay and Its Future, thus finalizing the development of his thinking on what the spatial layout should be like for cities of a new generation. The book is a systematic summary of the theory of “organic decentralization,” which has since exerted a worldwide influence on city planning and development. On June 20, 1944, Vice-President Henry A. Wallace (1888–1965) of the United States was in China for a visit. Liang Sicheng received a stack of books, including a copy of The City: Its Growth, Its Decay and Its Future, which Wallace had taken along with him on request of his friend John King Fairbank (1907–1991), a sinologist. After success in the competition for the Chicago Tribune Tower in 1922, Saarinen moved to the United States the following year. In 1950, he designed the complete area of the Cranbrook Academy and School near Detroit. Liang Sicheng met with Saarinen in July 1947 when he was giving lectures in the United States while on the United Nations Board of Architecture. While sharing his knowledge and expertise with him, he urged Saarinen to take some students from China. Here is what he wrote about the meeting in his diary:


10/15/2010 4:50:32 PM

62

BEIJING RECORD

On the guiding principles for teaching of architecture, he (Saarinen) stood for basing it on practical problems, not on hypothesis. If Chinese students come, he said, they should bring with them problems China is facing, which he will help resolve. The school has only one graduate class, with the number of students limited to ten, which is taught by the old gentleman (Saarinen) personally. The course of designing is somewhat unique, with the stress on subjects on city planning. For a school year of nine months, a student just pays 1,050 dollars that covers food and accommodation as well — inexpensive, indeed. Aside from architecture, students study subjects on painting, sculpturing, porcelain-making and textile production. They are keen to acquire practical skills and to create things new. With sculptures and water fountains here and there, the 19 campus can’t be more beautiful. Upon returning home, Liang Sicheng recommended his assistant Wu Liangyong to Saarinen to study under his guidance. This student of Saarinen’s was to become a prominent leader of China’s city planning and architecture community.

Debate between Friends On March 31, 1948, Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin hosted a party in their home to celebrate the 20th anniversary of their wedding. Though ill, Lin Huiyin gave an impromptu talk on the capital 20 city of the Song Dynasty. The couple was, however, ill at ease for an article published in the Ta Kung Pao newspaper of the same day. Titled Cultural Relics, Old Books and Writing Brushes, the article was authored by Zhu Ziqing (1898–1948), a friend of the Liangs, who was working as a professor at the Chinese language and literature at Qinghua University. At a meeting held a month before, in February, the Beiping City Commit-

Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin honeymooning in Europe, April 1928 (by courtesy of Lin Zhu)

19 Liang Sicheng’s diary, July 8, 1947, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 20 Whilma Fairbank: Liang and Lin-Partners in Exploring China’s Architectural Past, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994.


10/15/2010 4:50:33 PM

FA Reading


63

tee for Preserving Cultural Relics decided to ask the Beiping City Government to outlay the money allocated for its operation in the first half of the year and urge it to “improve the management and use of ancient structures so that sites of historical value would be better protected.” Zhu Ziqing, a prominent contemporary Chinese writer, was one of the critics of the decision, asserting that at this time of war and hunger, it was inappropriate to spend money on things that may “sugar up the reality.” In this article, Zhu Ziqing condemned the government for “spending huge sums of money” to repair ancient structures. That money, he said, should be spent on “food and clothing.” He stood for protecting ancient things, but he was opposed to their “salvaging.” “Protection of ancient things can be laid aside until after the people are ensured of food and clothing,” Zhu Ziqing said in the article. “Even if protection of old things comes late, it won’t matter much though it is somewhat regrettable. This is because food and clothing, after all, are most essential. I don’t agree to ideas that overstress the importance of ancient things and the importance of Beiping as a cultural city.” In his opinion, “cultural relics, old books and writing brushes” had the same message to carry, all belonging to the category of heritage, history or the old culture. People who stood for preserving them, he said, “invariably muse over the remote past while seeking to protect the quintessence of our culture.” He said, “Nevertheless, the call for ‘preserving the quintessence of the Chinese culture’ now should be seen as negative,” as a call for “cherishing the outworn and clinging to it, which amounts to infatuation with the dead and let the dead pin down things still alive.” Zhu Ziqing (1948) “Among those calling for preserving old things,” he continued, “most are veterans of the May Fourth Movement and therefore shouldn’t have such conservative ideas. In some ways I share their sentiments but I dare say I am not so conservative like them. A careful enough analysis of their stand reveals that they just muse over things of the remote past while seemingly sincere in calling for protecting the ‘quintessence of the Chinese culture.’ According to their logic, things of the remote past are worth preserving and merit our care precisely because they epitomize the (cultural) achievements of our ancestors. Nevertheless, we should, after all, be different from people of the past generations. We must preserve things


10/15/2010 4:50:33 PM

64

BEIJING RECORD

of the remote past the way we preserve fossils, and on no account must we dream of bringing them back to life. We must understand that there is the need to let bygone be bygone.” He came to the conclusion: “In creating a new culture and a new art, we must take a critical approach toward use of the old culture and old art. There might be elements in old things that are useful to the Chinese literati and officialdom and common people alike — even to foreigners as well. But under all circumstances priority must be given to the needs of the current time and the needs of China. I am afraid that reforms would be unable to go far enough as they are often held back by things left over from the past — maybe unable to proceed at all. Therefore, it would be better for us to make a fresh start. Some old materials may be used in building things new, but things that should be phased out must be phased out.” The article reflected the prevalent mood of the Chinese intelligentsia — weariness with old things, disappointment with reforms, and aspiration for a “fresh start.” After the victory of the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression in 1945, Zhu Ziqing returned to Beiping from Kunming, Yunnan Province, 21 where he had taught at the Southwest China United University, and continued working as a professor at the Department of Chinese Language of 22 Qinghua University. While working on The Collected of Works by Wen Yiduo (1899–1946), he aspired for the rehabilitation of the nation scarred by the War. Nevertheless, “the nation was chaotic again, with no hope of peace when Zhu Ziqing, after a respite, had barely recovered from illness. Life was 23 as hard as during the War, and never had he been so depressed.” After some painful rethinking, Zhu Ziqing became increasingly radical even though he loved, as always, the kind of life characterized by “tranquility and freedom.” He developed a “sympathetic understanding” of those literary works that are strongly political and militant, those for political agitation, which he expressed in an article titled On Slogans. On one hand, he criticized the “collected force” highlighted by slogans “strong enough to disrupt the tranquility we have enjoyed for a long time,” describing it as something that “suppresses and impedes freedom of the individual.”

21 After the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression broke out in 1937, Beijing, Qinghua and Nankai universities, the most important seats of higher learning in China, were forced to evacuate to the southwest, China’s strategic rear. In May 1938, the three schools were merged into the Kunming-based Southwest China United University. In June 1946, the three universities returned to their original campuses — Tr. 22 Like Zhu Ziqing, Wen Yiduo was an influential contemporary Chinese writer and poet. He was assassinated on July 15, 1946 by secret agents of the Kuomintang government for opposing a civil war it was starting against the Communists — Tr. 23 Pu Jiangqing: A Brief Biography of Zhu Ziqing, in the fifth issue of the third volume of the Literature Magazine published in October 1948.


10/15/2010 4:50:34 PM

FA Reading


65

“Intellectuals have got used to a tranquil life,” he said. “No wonder they see slogans as something designed to create disturbance, as clamors, as amulets, as linguistic wizardry.” On the other hand, he defended slogans by putting himself in the position of those who had raised slogans. “People need to be fed in order to survive — why should they be blamed for creating disturbance, for making a hue and cry? ‘Amulets’ or ‘linguistic wizardry’ — these are not totally bad so long as they are effective in helping people gain what they need.” “Slogans may not be totally acceptable for us intellectuals, but there is a reason for their existence, which we’d better try 24 to understand.” Zhu Ziqing spoke his mind at a discussion held at Qinghua University on “today’s tasks of intellectuals.” He said: “Intellectuals have two roads to follow. There are those who try to climb the power ladder by assisting the tyrant in victimizing the people. Intellectuals of this kind are often found under both feudalism and capitalism. There are also intellectuals who are willing to go into the midst of the lower people. Intellectuals can either be a part of the ruling class or a part of the downtrodden. They do not form an independent class, but a social stratum. Many intellectuals have vested interests and it won’t be easy to give them up. We are not accustomed to living the way ordinary people live. That, however, does not mean we are unwilling to accept the way ordinary people live. Rational knowledge tells us that we should accept it, but habits prevent us from accepting it. That is 25 why I say that our re-education will be a slow process.” Zhu Ziqing was even more outspoken in an article titled On Discontent with the Realities. He said: “Discontent will be prevalent and public anger will keep mounting when the realities become so bad that one just cannot maintain even a meager living no matter how hard one works. The masses of people will then rise up at any cost, resolved to change the realities. Not knowing how to change the realities, they will break up whatever they think is unjust without a second thought, thinking that hope could be there after the realities are changed.” In the same article, Zhu Ziqing commented on the roads intellectuals may choose to follow: “Below the ivory tower there is a crossroad. Moreover, the ivory tower is being demolished, forcing those inside to evacuate and go amidst the people, sharing with them their depression when the realities are so bad that it is difficult for one to eke out even a meager living. If this state

24 Zhu Ziqing: On Slogans, in the fifth issue of the Knowledge and Life magazine published on June 16, 1947. 25 Wu Han: In Memory of Mr. Zhu Ziqing, in Zhong Jian magazine, the sixth issue of Volume III, published on August 20, 1948.


10/15/2010 4:50:34 PM

66

BEIJING RECORD

of affairs continues, the masses are likely to rise up to break up the realities when driven beyond the limit of their forbearance.” While undergoing a drastic change in thinking, Zhu Ziqing found it impossible to compromise the old with the new. As he saw it, it was now time to decide whether the old must die out or be kept. Naturally, he came to regard cultural relics as symbolic of the old. Liang Sicheng lost no time to start a debate with his friend Zhu Ziqing. “In a recently published article titled Cultural Relics, Old Books and Writing Brushes,” he said in an article titled Cultural Relics in Beiping Must Be Preserved, “Mr. Zhu Ziqing mentions the ongoing work to preserve the cultural heritage sites and relics in Beiping. Though he claims to ‘stand for preserving cultural heritage sites and relics,’ he thinks that repairs of ancient structures should be postponed as there is a proper order of priority for things to be done. He says he does not support the ‘salvaging’ of cultural relics. He argues that the job should be limited to preservation of cultural relics, that ‘we must preserve things of the remote past the way we preserve fossils.’ I am wondering whether Mr. Zhu Liang Sicheng in 1947. He was then on the United Board of Architecture (by courtesy of Lin Ziqing means to say that cultural relics Nations Zhu) should be left as they are. May I say if my guess is correct, his view should be labeled as one-sided, as discriminative, as reluctance on his part to understand the myriad matters involved in architectural engineering.” Though China was suffering from an economic depression, Liang Sicheng insisted, Beiping had the pressing need to ensure protection of its cultural relics. “Seen from whatever angle, from its city planning and history, or from its artistic value, Beiping, for the order of its structures, fully deserves the honor of being rated as the gem of architecture, a fact that has been recognized by all... Beiping is a large, surviving ancient city and as such, it is facing a host of problems that require continuous effort to resolve.” “In so far as the value of its city planning is concerned, Beiping features a perfect shape characterized by a harmony of the horizontal layout and vertical organization of its structures. This was the case when the city served as the capital of imperial China, and still is. Even when scrutinized


10/15/2010 4:50:34 PM

FA Reading


67

by modern theories of city planning, Beiping is characterized by what many modern metropolises have failed to achieve: for example the rational distribution of its avenues (streets) for the mainstream traffic and its subsidiary roads (hutong lanes and alleys) with residential courtyards inside, as well as its parks (originally imperial palaces, gardens, temples, altars and other monuments)... Cultural relics left over from history exert a special influence on the minds of the people, which are most effective in imbuing our people with a confidence in the Chinese nation and the entire human race... It is beyond doubt that Beiping’s cultural heritage sites and relics will forever deserve care and preservation unless we are willing to repudiate art and history along with the historical and artistic value of our cultural relics.” From the perspective of architectural engineering, Liang Sicheng answered Zhu Ziqing’s question about the “conflict” between preservation of cultural relics and the people’s livelihood. He said: “Were buildings just like fossils as Mr. Zhu Ziqing says, the question would be much simpler. But the reality does not accord with what he says. If no repairs are done to them, ancient structures in Beiping will be reduced to ruins in just a few decades... When their dilapidation reaches a certain level, these structures will become bad enough to be rated as ‘dangerous’ under (government) regulations on construction, to become a threat to people’s safety. That means they will have to be demolished, and their existence can no longer be allowed as they are utterly beyond repair. Demolition of these structures will likely be several times costlier compared with partial repairs to them... Our people are indeed living in destitution, but we need to note that our work to protect cultural relics is meant, in part, to create jobs for at least some povertystricken artisans, to provide them with a means of living, at a time when Beiping is bedeviled by an economic depression. Moreover, some small industrial and commercial businesses may also be sustained. In short, the money (spent on protection of cultural relics) will return to the people’s pockets in the end... To sum up, we will get more than the worth of the outlay made semi-annually (on protection of cultural relics), which is said to be ‘huge’ but actually small. By using it, we will preserve the beautiful shape of Beiping to the benefit of the local residents and preserve the city’s historical and cultural sites and relics for China and the human race, while providing some local residents with a means of livelihood. Moreover, our people will be free from the nightmare of one more Pompeii, and the truly huge sums of money (to be otherwise spent on demolition of ancient structures) will be saved.” Liang Sicheng also criticized Zhu Ziqing for indiscriminately lumping together cultural relics, old books and writing brushes. “Old books and


10/15/2010 4:50:34 PM

68

BEIJING RECORD

writing brushes should not be covered by the subject of our discussion,” he said. “Despite that, Mr. Zhu Ziqing equates them with cultural relics, compelling us to explain why his argument is incorrect. Writing brushes are tools. Better tools are needed for higher efficiency in work. For this reason, I fully agree to the revocation of the old rule under which use of writing brushes by students was compulsory. Books are carriers of texts, and it is the text that determines the value of a book, not the book’s physical existence. But some writing brushes and books are artworks or things of historical value. Different from ordinary writing brushes and books, these should, as a matter of fact, be preserved. As regards ancient structures in Beiping, these were once meant for practical use like tools. As time goes by, however, they have become artworks with a historical value and therefore should be allowed to exist forever. Cultural relics, old books and writing brushes should not be mentioned in the same breath. They do not mean the same thing as Mr. Zhu Ziqing says, unless the Ministry of Education rules that all primary and middle school students must use writing brushes in writing essays in Chinese, that block printing and paper made from bamboo must be used in production of textbooks, that all textbooks must be in threadbound editions, and that all school buildings must resemble ancient palaces and temples in architectural style.” Liang Sicheng said that during World War II, the American army had an expert in cultural relics in the staff of every unit at the regimental and higher levels. He noted that a small mountain town in Italy was reduced to ruins after attack by American troops but its landmark building, a cathedral, remained intact. When the Americans attacked a German military airport in France, he continued, the only damage done to a cathedral nearby was some scratches on its walls left behind by shell splinters. “Cultural relics were protected even during war times, and even those on enemy lands were protected, so we are even more justified to protect our own cultural relics,” Liang Sicheng wrote. “On no account must we doubt or think back and forth about the utter necessity for protecting Beiping’s cultural relics!” The debate between Liang Sicheng and Zhu Ziqing took many by surprise. They had been close friends. On November 22, 1947, President Mei Yiqi of Qinghua University held a party to welcome Liang Sicheng and archeologist Chen Mengjia (1911–1966) back from the United States where they had been on academic tours. Zhu Ziqing was present. Both Liang Sicheng and Chen Mengjia spoke during the party, proposing that Qinghua University set up a new department, the Department of Art History. Later, Zhu Ziqing, though fully engaged in work, took time out to help Liang Sicheng, Chen Mengjia and art historian Deng Yizhe (1892–1973) in


10/15/2010 4:50:34 PM

FA Reading


69

finding a proper site for the office of the Art History Research Center of Qinghua University. On July 9, 1948, both Zhu Ziqing and Liang Sicheng joined professors of Beijing, Qinghua and Yanjing universities and Beiping Normal College in signing a declaration condemning the Beiping-based military authorities for killing student protesters from the northeast who wanted to continue their studies and refused to be conscripted into the Kuomintang army. Despite their friendship, they differed on the need to preserve Beiping’s ancient structures. But before his article was published, Liang Sicheng had it sent to Zhu Ziqing. After reading it, Zhu paid a visit to Liang in his home. The same day, he wrote the following in his diary: “Visited Sicheng. Read his article on cultural relics. He has some unique ideas about developing 26 Beiping as a surviving ancient city and about preserving it.”â•› The debate between Liang Sicheng and Zhu Ziqing, both of noble character, had an ending that is still talked about until today. Zhu Ziqing died of illness on August 12, 1948. Writer Shen Congwen (1902–1988), a friend of both Zhu and Liang, wrote an article in his memory, which was titled The Unforgettable Receding Figure. He described the deceased as a “pure gentleman who merits praise by history,” a man “ordinary while great.” “He was too tired,” Shen Congwen lamented. “He labored hard, 27 without a minute of respite. He broke down from overwork.”â•› In early 1948, Shen Congwen had published a fiction titled Socrates on Beiping’s Needs, in which he called for protecting the ancient capital, using the Greek philosopher (470–399 BC) to air his own views. “It would be good for Beiping to have a mayor who is well-versed in philosophy, history and fine art while fond of music,” “Socrates” said. “If a mayor of that caliber is not available, we may seek the second best alternative by transforming the various working department of the city government while setting up specialized committees to assist them in their work. Only in this way can the government be competent enough to run the city... If Liang Sicheng is made vice-mayor of the city, ‘Socrates’ said, the entire country will be blessed.” Shen Congwen expressed worries about the future of Beiping. “People living in this ancient capital are invariably impressed by its beauty and magnificence and at the same time, are sad about its destitution and poverty. What worries them is the prospect of this ancient capital being ruined by ‘ignorance’ despite its fame and historical value... Let us assume that a building of extremely great aesthetic value is entrusted to an ignorant 26 Zhu Ziqing’s diary, April 5, 1948, Collected Works of Zhu Ziqing, Vol. 10, Jiangsu Educational Press, 1st edition, March 1998. 27 Shen Congwen, The Unforgettable Receding Figure, New Road weekly, No. 16, Vol. 1, August 28, 1948.


10/15/2010 4:50:35 PM

70

BEIJING RECORD

person for management, a person who knows nothing about art history and the importance of this building in art history. Nevertheless, the guy, stupid as he is, takes pleasure in doing this and that to the building, in changing it here and there. If such stupidity is allowed to go on and on, no one would believe that the building can still retain its original shape in 10 or 20 years.” With humor, “Socrates” gave the rein to Shen Congwen’s thoughts: “Beiping is just like a huge garden, where policemen are as many as gardeners and they draw the same salaries as gardeners. The police chief is not necessarily a person with affiliation to a political party. It would be good if he is chosen from among conductors of modern drama or from among orchestra conductors. Members of the police force have been trained mainly in social services, in public hygiene and gardening. Neighborhood leaders under the Bao Jia system double as general practitioners (GP), who serve their neighbors with a missionary zeal. The head of the Public Works Bureau was chosen from among art designers. The guy is so keen to his job that he will not hesitate to use his own money to have the public lighting system improved. The head of the Education Bureau is a master of arts and crafts. The City Council once tried to impeach him because on the bureau’s budget there is a fund specially for awarding students outstanding in making arts and crafts articles. The crisis was over after he gave a proper explanation to the City Council.” In Shen Congwen’s dream, Beiping should be a “capital of art.” “A part of the City Government’s guesthouse is reserved for visiting artists. The guesthouse has in it three globally famed exhibition halls separately for Beiping’s cultural relics, locally produced arts and crafts articles and artworks from China’s border regions. The Beiping Academy of Fine Art has two departments, the Department of Pure Art and the Department of Applied Art. Its supervisor is a philosopher who is also a prestigious poet. Seldom does he interfere in the day-to-day affairs of the academy but due to a superb personality, he is influential across the world, not only in the academy itself. A residential estate should be built near the Beiping City Library to accommodate visiting librarians and professors from all over the country. Buildings there may not necessarily be too high and elegant but should feature the beauty of harmoniously planned designing. There should be six groups of pure white marble and bronze statues on the largest lawn in Beihai Park, highlighting the most important achievements made over the past 50 years in the development of literature, art, drama, music, 28 architecture and filmmaking.” 28 Yi Shi Bo newspaper, Page 6, January 10, and Knowledge and Life magazine, No. 21, February 16, 1948. Shen Congwen published this article using the pen name Wang Yuntong.


10/15/2010 4:50:35 PM

FA Reading


71

Here is the question: Was the dream to come true?

Map of Monumental Structures in Besieged Beiping From December 10 to 17, 1948, Changping, Shahe, Tongxian, Shijingshan, Fengtai, Nanyuan and other suburban areas of Beiping fell in succession to the Communist-led People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Beiping was now a besieged city, and the defending Kuomintang troops, half a million strong, were tightly surrounded. In the morning of December 13, Aunt Liu, the Liangs’ housekeeper, came from her home at Chengfucun Village near Qinghua University, and told the couple about what she saw when she opened the door of her home earlier that morning. There were men of the PLA all over the village. They said they had arrived at night. They were so quiet that not a dog barked when they were coming. They had slept in the open, in hutongs, in the freezing cold. Villagers offered them hot water to drink, and only after saying “thanks” again and again would the soldiers take the offer. “I am now in my 60s and never in the past did I meet troops as good,” the old lady said. “Everybody says Communist troops are good but I didn’t believe that. 29 Today I saw how good they are!” Liang Sicheng met a PLA soldier who had walked for a mile to return a broken basket to its owner — that was his first encounter with the Chinese Communists. “In contrast, two days earlier, the commander of a Kuomintang regiment took away everything owned by a woman, even her clothes, when the guy and his men fled. What the PLA soldier did moved me so much that 30 I was unable to utter a word.” In the campus of Qinghua University taken by the PLA on December 15, troops were drilling in mock street battles while busying themselves with making scale ladders in preparation for attack on the walled city. A bloody battle seemed imminent. One day, students of Qinghua attended a talk given by a ranking PLA officer — the deputy head of the political department of a PLA army corps — on the situation. They asked the speaker why the PLA had not started attacking Beiping and what the PLA planned to do to ensure protection of the ancient capital when they were attacking the city. “We can take Beiping any time,” the officer said. “At this moment we are trying our best to seek a peaceful liberation of the city so that no damage will be done to it and that losses suffered by the people can be minimized. The Central Committee of 29 Liang Sicheng: Why I love the Party So Ardently?, People’s Daily, July 14,1957. 30 Same as footnote 29.


10/15/2010 4:50:35 PM

72

BEIJING RECORD

our Party has ordered us to see to it that monumental buildings and sites in the city are protected if we have to attack to capture it. We’ll resolutely carry 31 out that order.” On December 17, the Communist Party’s Central Military Commission instructed troops ready to attack Beiping to pay sufficient attention to protecting the city’s industrial areas and historic monuments: “Personnel employed by the Kuomintang government to take care of cultural relics in Shahe, Qinghe, Haidian, the Western Hills and other (already liberated) areas of Beiping shall remain on their posts. The duty of our troops stationed there shall be limited to guarding these areas and maintaining liaison with these personnel. There is the special need for you to contact faculty members and students of Qinghua, Yanjing and other universities and consult them on how to reduce, as far as possible, the losses in case Beiping has to be 32 attacked.” Following this instruction, a PLA officer, accompanied by Professor Zhang Xiruo (1889–1973), dean of the Qinghua University Political Sciences Department, visited Liang Sicheng in the evening of the following day. The guest asked Liang Sicheng to draw a map of monumental structures in the besieged city for use by the troops in case they had to fight to seize it. Liang Sicheng was moved to tears. Never had he expected that the Communists would attach so great an importance to culture relics, and would be so keen to their protection. He had been worried about the fate of Beiping’s cultural relics, but had found himself powerless to do anything to help. Seven years later, he gave an account of the meeting: A PLA officer visited me three days after the campus of Qinghua University was liberated. He assured me that the PLA would find a thousand and one ways to ensure the safety of the monumental buildings if it had to attack the city. He asked me to mark these buildings on a map with an annotation to each about their historical and artistic value. As a child, I had already learned what Mencius said of the popularity of an army fighting for a just cause: “With food and drinking water in their hands, the people would welcome in the royal army.” On that day, I saw in my mind’s eye an army exactly of that kind. I had had no idea of what the Communist Party was all about, but on that day, I fell in love with it 33 instantly. 31 Fond Memories Cherished by People of Qinghua University, People’s Daily, December 4, 1985. 32 Selected Documents of the CPC Central Committee, 1st edition, Vol. 17, compiled by the Central Archives, published by the Central Party School Publishing House in October 1992. 33 Quoted in A Few Stories about Mr. Liang Sicheng by Wang Guoyu, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986.


10/15/2010 4:50:35 PM

FA Reading


73

Beijing had undergone numerous wars in contemporary times. Fortunately, the ancient capital suffered no major damage and was even spared of damage in several wars. In 1860, the British-French allied forces burned down a range of imperial gardens on Beijing’s northwestern suburbs, including the Garden of Perfect Splendor (Yuan Ming Yuan), Enjoy-the-Spring Garden (Chang Chun Yuan), Garden of Clear Ripples (Qing Yi Yuan), the Clean-Bright Garden (Jing Ming Yuan) and Garden of Tranquility and Appropriateness (Jing Yi Yuan). The ancient capital city itself, however, suffered no serious damage after the British-French allied forces stormed into it. For selling Western medicine, Lao De Ji Pharmacy at Langfang Toutiao Alley in Dashila area was torched by rebels of the Boxer Movement in 1900, and large numbers of residential buildings nearby were burned down as well. The fire spread to the Sun-Facing Gate. The Arrow Tower of the SunFacing Gate, also known as the “Qianmen Arrow Tower,” was damaged, but the structure did not collapse. In August of the same year, Tianjin fell into the hands of the allied 34 forces of eight imperialist powers. After entering Beijing, the aggressor troops set up artillery batteries on the Altar of Heaven (Huan Qiu) in the Temple of Heaven (Tian Tan) for bombardment of the Sun-Facing Gate. The Qianmen Arrow Tower was destroyed, followed by destruction of the Sun-Facing Gate Tower in a fire caused by a bonfire set by some Indian soldiers inside the gate. The allied forces also bombarded the arrow towers of Chongwenmen and Chaoyangmen gates. To allow passage of a railway into the walled city to reach the Sun-Facing Gate, a section of the city wall to the east of Yongdingmen Gate and the section of the East Access Gate (Dongbianmen) were demolished and the enclosure for defense outside Chongwenmen Gate was dug through. Moreover, American soldiers opened a passage through the wall for their own convenience in boarding railway trains. Instigated by Yuan Shikai (1859–1916), warlord Cao Kun (1862– 1938) burned down the Dong’anmen Gate on the wall surrounding the Imperial City in February 1912, in a bid to intimidate revolutionaries in the south who were trying to lure Yuan Shikai into giving up his power base in the north by making him president of the Nanjing-based Provisional Government of the Republic of China. 34 The allied forces set up an office to run Tianjin after the city fell into their hands. In 1901, the wall surrounding the city was demolished on order of the office to make room for the building of a ring road. The city was returned to China the following year, on condition that batteries for the city’s defense were to be demolished and rebuilding of the city wall was banned. See Contemporary History of Tianjin City, 1st edition, compiled under the editorship of Luo Shuwei, China Social Sciences Publishing House, July 1993.


10/15/2010 4:50:35 PM

74

BEIJING RECORD

In July 1917, Zhang Xun (1854–1923), a diehard loyalist warlord, led his troops into Beijing and reinstalled Aisinjero Puyi, the last Qing emperor who had abdicated in the 1911 Revolution. In response, Duan Qirui (1864– 1936), another northern warlord, started an expedition war against Zhang. The first-ever air strike in China’s military history occurred during the war. Planes of the so-called “Army for Punitive Expedition against Traitors” dropped bombs on the Palace of Heavenly Purity (Qianqing Gong) and the Hall of the Mean (Zhongzheng Dian), a Buddhist shrine in the Forbidden City, and fortunately, the structures only suffered some minor damage. Meanwhile, the “Army for Punitive Expedition against Traitors” refrained from attacking Beijing directly, allegedly to preserve the ancient capital, in fact hoping to end the conflict diplomatically. Nevertheless, the troops demolished a section of the Imperial City wall parallel to the moat known as the “Changpu River” when attacking Zhang Xun’s residence. In the end, Zhang Xun fled to the Embassy of the Netherlands for refuge. On October 5, 1923, Cao Kun of the north China-based Zhili warlord clique made the puppet parliament elect him president by resorting to both coercion and bribery. Shortly afterwards, the Guangzhou-based Military Government under Sun Yat-sen ordered a punitive war against Cao. On September 4, 1924, Zhang Zuolin (1875–1928) of the Fengtian warlord clique in control of Manchuria declared war on the Zhili clique. On October 23, General Feng Yuxiang (1882–1948) of the Zhili clique changed sides. He started an armed coup against Cao and placed him under house arrest. Beijing suffered no damage during the turmoil. In April 1926, allied forces of the Fengtian and Shandong warlord cliques entered Beijing. In June, troops under the command of Zhang Zuolin and Wu Peifu (1874–1939) launched an all-round attack on Feng Yuxiang’s army at Nankou on the northern suburbs of Beijing. Feng’s army was routed. The walled city, however, was spared. In spring and summer of 1928, the National Revolutionary Army (NRA) started the Second Northern Expedition against warlords who had secured control of northern China. Zhang Zuolin ordered complete withdrawal of his troops from Beijing after negotiation with the NRA. On June 8, the NRA entered the city through the Guang’anmen Gate for a “peaceful takeover” of the city. This was followed by a debate on which of the two cities, Beijing or Nanjing, should be designated the national capital. On June 20, the Kuomintang government decided to name Nanjing the national capital and change the name “Beijing” (meaning the “north capital”) into “Beiping” (meaning “pacification of the north”).


10/15/2010 4:50:35 PM

FA Reading


75

In April 1930, Shanxi-based Yan Xishan (1883–1960), Feng Yuxiang and Guangxi-based Li Zongren (1891–1969) formed an armed alliance against Chiang Kai-shek (1887–1975). In May, Chiang Kai-shek fought back. The war was fought mainly in central China’s Henan Province. In September, Zhang Xueliang (1901–2001), son and designated successor of Zhang Zuolin, led his troops southward, into northern China, in support of the NRA under Chiang Kai-shek’s command. The situation suddenly turned for the worse for the allied forces, and Zhang Xueliang entered Beiping without fighting. On July 7, 1937, the “Lugou Bridge Incident” happened. On July 28, Chiang Kai-shek ordered China’s 29th Army to withdraw southward, and Beiping fell to the Japanese. During the Japanese occupation, the puppet government of Beiping city had two openings dug through the east and west sides of the wall surrounding the Inner City, which they named the “Gate of Enlightenment” (Qimingmen) and the Gate of Eternal Peace (Chang’anmen). The names were changed into the “Gate of National Reconstruction” (Jianguomen) and the “Gate of National Rehabilitation” (Fuxingmen) after Japan surrendered. Among those wars mentioned above, the 1900 invasion by the allied forces of eight imperialist powers was most damaging. Structures they destroyed were mostly gate towers and arrow towers. Among these, the SunFacing Gate Tower and Arrow Tower and the Chaoyangmen Arrow Tower were to be rebuilt in 1903.

Xizhimen Gate in 1948 (photo by Luo Zhewen)


10/15/2010 4:50:36 PM

76

BEIJING RECORD

Beiping City was besieged once more in December 1948, this time by the Communist-led PLA. To strengthen the city’s fortification, defending troops under General Fu Zuoyi (1895–1974) created a 200-meter-wide no-man’s belt outside the city outermost wall. A war, mostly likely more destructive than any previous wars, was imminent. On January 7, 1949, Kang Tongbi, daughter of Kang Youwei, and Zhang Peilan, widow of Wu Peifu and other prominent women published in local newspapers an appeal for protection of Beiping from the ravage of war. “History testifies to the cultural importance of Beiping City,” said the appeal drafted by Kang Tongbi. “It is a trove of cultural treasures left over from four dynasties, which crystallize the quintessence of the Chinese civilization. This cultural capital with a history of some 1,000 years is one of the five greatest ancient capitals in the world... How can we face people of the generations to come if we fail to preserve this historical city?... We now appeal to the military authorities of both sides not to fight in the city, in order to ensure that this cultural capital will be preserved for the sake of the 35 human race, for the Chinese people and their futurity.” On January 16, 1949, the Central Military Commission of the CPC issued one more instruction to the headquarters of the PLA troops on the Beiping front, demanding that “attack on Beiping be painstakingly planned and utmost effort be exerted to avoid destruction of the Forbidden City, the universities and other sites of cultural and historical value... You must make minute investigations into every part of the city. Commanders of every unit must know where attack is allowed and where attack is forbidden. Maps with texts to this effect shall be issued to you, one copy for each. The order 36 must be carried out.” The general public demanded peaceful handover of Beiping to the Communists, in order to ensure safety of the cultural relics in the city. At a meeting of local intellectuals and celebrities held by Fu Zuoyi in mid-January, Xu Beihong (alias Ju Peon or Hsu Pei-hung, 1895–1953), a prominent painter and educator of fine art, urged the Kuomintang general to ensure preservation of the ancient capital. “Beiping is a globally renowned cultural capital,” he said. “It has many magnificent ancient structures, including for example the Forbidden City, the Temple of Heaven and the Summer Palace. I hope that General Fu Zuoyi can give due consideration to the overall situation and comply with the demand of the people for preserving the city, so 35 Beiping Women Appeal to Both Sides Not to Fight within the City on the front page of the January 7, 1948 issue of Ming Bao newspaper. 36 Selected Documents of the CPC Central Committee, 1st edition, Vol. 18, compiled by the Central Archives, published by the Central Party School Publishing House in October 1992.


10/15/2010 4:50:36 PM

FA Reading


77

that destruction of our cultural relics will be avoided and loss of lives and property will be prevented.” Historian Yang Renpian also spoke at the meeting. “If General Fu Zuoyi contributes to protection of Beiping from destruction in flames of war,” he said, “as a historian I will write elaborately about this in my records of history.” Kang Tongbi had the following to say: “Cultural relics in Beiping are among the most valuable, in fact priceless, creations of the human race. 37 On no account must the city be ruined in flames of war.” By January 27, both sides of the war had, through secret talks, by and large agreed on peaceful takeover of Beiping by the PLA. On that day, Chiang Kai-shek sent a cable to Fu Zuoyi, informing him that he was sending some planes to Beiping to evacuate officers of major and higher ranks in the 13th Army Corps from the besieged city along with some heavy military equipment. Fu Zuoyi found it difficult to downright refuse to comply, and in reply, he promised to do as instructed. Meanwhile, he sent a cable to the PLA, proposing that the PLA artillery bombard the improvised airstrip in the Temple of Heaven, with the Hall of Prayers for Good Harvests (Qinian Dian) as target, to make landing of planes impossible. Chiang Kai-shek’s plan was thwarted by bombardment of the airstrip in the following days, but a corner of the hall was damaged. The Temple of Heaven became venue of Beijing’s first sports meet after national liberation. Mao Zedong and other leaders of New China attended its opening ceremony, and Fu Zuoyi was also present. After watching some of the competitions, Mao led Fu to see the Hall of Prayers for Good Harvest to which repairs had been done. “You did a great thing to protect Beijing,” Mao told Fu. “Will it be good if we award you a medal as big as the Temple 38 of Heaven?” Beiping was liberated peacefully on January 31, 1949. On instruction of Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai, PLA officers visited Liang Sicheng again, this time asking him to work out a list of monumental buildings across the country. The list was to be used by PLA troops to drive south to liberate the entire country. In March, Liang Sicheng produced A Concise Catalogue of China’s Architectural Relics. “Beiping in its entirety” topped the list, with a note reading: “Beiping was built in 1280 under the Yuan Dynasty, and rebuilt around 1400, during the early Ming period. Bricks were laid on the surface of the old city walls and the wall surrounding the Outer City was built 37 Beijing in Contemporary China, 1st edition, Vol. I, China Social Sciences Publishing House, September 1989. 38 Li Feng: Democratic Personages among Ministers of New China’s First Government, in 1998 No. 1 issue of Zong Heng magazine.


10/15/2010 4:50:36 PM

78

BEIJING RECORD

around 1530, during the reign of Emperor Jiajing of the Ming Dynasty. Repairs were done repeatedly to those ancient structures during the Qing Dynasty... Beijing is the best preserved and the greatest of all the surviving middle ancient cities in the world. The entire city is an integral whole, with everything arranged in symmetrical order, exhibiting a magnificence no 39 other city can match.” In the same month, the Beiping City Construction Bureau organized an investigation into conditions of the walls surrounding Beiping’s inner and outer cities, resulting in a report on the damage having been done to the walls. On April 18, the bureau worked out a plan for repairs and made an oral briefing about it to the new Beiping City Government. On April 25, Mayor Ye Jianying and Vice-Mayor Xu Bing approved the plan. Repairs of the walls began the following day, on order of the Construction Bureau. At a discussion organized by the bureau in March, Liang Sicheng proposed that the headquarters of the Central People’s Government to be set up soon be built somewhere on the city’s western suburbs, side by side 40 with the headquarters of the CPC. At another discussion held later in early May, however, Liang Sicheng was challenged by Hua Nangui (1875–1961), a prominent expert in civil engineering, who called for demolishing the city walls and building a sewer 41 system by using bricks salvaged from the demolition.

Xizhimen Gate after repairs in 1950, photo by Luo Zhewen

39 A Concise Catalogue of China’s Architectural Relics, compiled by Qinghua University and the Institute of Architecture under the non-government Institute for Research into Architecture in March 1949 (by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture). 40 Zhang Ruliang: The Beiping Municipal City Planning Commission under the Beiping City Construction Bureau, in History of Planning, 1st edition, compiled by the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party Records Collection Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995. 41 Same as Footnote 40.


10/15/2010 4:50:38 PM

FA Reading


79

Hua Nangui, born in Wuxi City, Jiangsu Province, was a pioneer in the development of modern civil engineering in China. At 21, he won the title ju ren as a successful candidate in the imperial examinations at the provincial level. At 25, he went to study at Ecole Speciale des Travaux publics in France. Determined to serve China by using what he had learned, he came back after finishing his studies, together with Rosenthal Hoa, a Polish woman he had married while studying in France. Hua Nangui worked on a series of projects in his motherland. He supervised over the laying of tracts for a section of the Beijing-Hankou Railway and served as deputy director of the Engineering Department of the Beijing-Hankou Railway Administration. He was vice-chairman of a committee for examination of the design for a steel bridge across the Yellow River, midway on the Beijing-Hankou Railway. He was involved in planning and designing the Guangzhou-Wuchang Railway and in revamping the railway linking Beijing with the northeast. He also participated in projects 42 for harnessing the Haihe River in the Tianjin area. As director of the Beiping City Public Works Bureau 1928–1929, Hua Nangui supervised over the expansion of the city’s waterworks. Two main streets were widened on his order — Di’anmen East-West Street and the T-shaped street from Shatan to Xisi, passing the north-facing main gate of Beihai Park. In a talk titled What is the Disaster of the Beijing Culture he gave in 1932 at Qinghua University, Hua Nangui appealed for protection of the water resources in the Jade Spring Hill on the city’s western suburbs, the most important part of the Beijing area’s water system. He condemned those aristocrats and landlords for plundering the water resources there, noting that the Jade Spring Hill “now only has a tiny amount of water to feed into 43 the Sanhai... The days of the water resources there are numbered,” he said. “The day water in the Jade Spring Hill runs dry will be the day the Beijing culture dies. That’s why I am raising a cry of warning to the general public (against the imminent disaster).” Hua Nangui also expressed regret over the 44 damage done to the Yungang Grottos by theft and robbery, and on the death of large numbers of ancient trees in Beijing’s Temple of Earth due to 45 moth-eating and human neglect. 42 Hua Nangui: Biographic Notes of Hua Nangui (unpublished). 43 “Sanhai” is the collective reference of the water body situated to the west of the Forbidden City and the Jingshan Park. It consists of Beihai, Zhonghai and Nanhai, literally meaning the “North Sea, Central Sea and South Sea.” Zhongnanhai (Central-South Sea) is now the site of China’s central government — Tr. 44 Located at the southern foot of Wuzhou Mountain some 16 km west of Datong City, Shanxi Province, the Yungang Grottoes is a trove of Buddhist art dating from some 1,500 years ago — Tr. 45 Hua Nangui: What is the Disaster of the Beijing Culture printed in December 1932, now in the collection of the Beijing Capital Library.


10/15/2010 4:50:38 PM

80

BEIJING RECORD

As chief engineer of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission after New China was founded, he proposed building of the Guanting and Miyun reservoirs, the Beijing-Miyun Canal to divert water from the reservoirs into Beijing, and water-control projects on the turbulent Yongding River. All the proposals were accepted. Hua Nangui and Liang Sicheng had consensus on many areas with regard to protection of cultural relics. Hua was once on the Tianjin Cultural Relics Protection Committee, and he was a member of the Institute for 46 Research in Chinese Architecture (IRCA) from 1930 to 1937. Hua Nangui was an intimate friend of Zhu Qiqian, founder and president of the IRCA. As minister of internal affairs in 1914, Zhu Qiqian ordered repairs of the Temple of Land and Crops to the left of the Gate of Heavenly Peace and its opening to the general public as Central Park (now Zhongshan Park), the first of its kind in China. Hua Nangui was elected a member of the Executive Committee of the Central Park Management Board. He was also one of a hundred people responsible for raising funds needed to start the park’s operation. Zhu Qiqian exerted a great influence on Liang Sicheng’s academic life. He did his best to have Liang Sicheng and other experts work with him in 47 the IRCA. “Now that Professor Liang Sicheng and Professor Liu Shineng have joined the Society,” he wrote in a chronological record of himself, “the 48 cause to which I am devoted is now on a firm footing.” As a member of the IRCA, Hua Nangui often met with Zhu Qiqian for discussion of the institute’s work. “It’s never tiring to talk with him though I meet him almost every day,” he wrote in his unpublished biographic notes. Both Liang Sicheng and Hua Nangui worked heart and soul for the IRCA, but they had different views on cultural heritage. In Hua’s opinion, 49 the three most important structures in the Forbidden City are cultural 46 Lin Zhu: A Concise History of the Institute for Research in Chinese Architecture, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, October 1995. 47 Liu Shineng is the style name taken by Liu Dunzhen (1897–1968). Liu Dunzhen, born in Hunan Province, went to study in Japan in 1913 and graduated from the Architecture Department of Tokyo Technology University in 1921. From 1925 on, he taught at the Architecture Department of Suzhou Technology College. In 1927, the college and Southeast University were amalgamated into the No. 4 Central University, which had its name changed into Central University the following year. Liu Dunzhen was a founder of the Central University Architecture Department, the first of its kind in China. In 1932, he was made director of the Documentary Studies Division of the Institute for Research in Chinese Architecture and as such, he joined Liang Sicheng in investigating ancient structures in different parts of China. In 1943, Liu Dunzhen resumed his professorship at Central University. From 1944 on, he was dean of Central University Architecture Department and concurrently professor at Chongqing University. In 1946, he became dean of the Central University School of Technology. After 1949, he was professor of Nanjing University Architecture Department and then dean of the Architecture Department of Nanjing Institute of Technology. 48 Zhu Qiqian’s Self Chronology, The Travel Notes of Huogong — Life of Mr. Zhu Qiqian, China Culture & History Press, 1st edition, September 1991. 49 The three main structures in the Forbidden City are the Hall of Supreme Harmony (Tai He Dian), Hall of Central Harmony (Zhong He Dian) and Hall of Preserved Harmony (Bao He Dian) — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:50:38 PM

FA Reading


81

heritage, so is the Summer Palace, but the city walls are not. Once, he had the following to say: “We should differentiate the essence of cultural heritage from its dross. The three main palaces in the Forbidden City and the Summer Palace represent the quintessence of our cultural heritage and therefore should be preserved. Built with bricks and earth, the city walls 50 cannot be mentioned in the same breath.” With this understanding, Hua Nangui naturally stood against preservation of the ancient city in its entirety. In the early 1950s, he submitted to Beijing’s new city government his The Master Plan for Beijing in 30 Years. Attached to it is a diagrammatic sketch, showing that he wanted to have the city walls demolished to make room for a ring road. Only a few architectural monuments, such as the Forbidden City, the Temple of Heaven, the Temple of Earth and Tiananmen Square are seen on the sketch, which is thickly dotted with small squares. Later, Liang Sicheng criticized this idea of Hua Nangui’s, dubbing it as “doctrine of exclusive concern for communication.” In his opinion, engineers had numerous professional limitations in their views on city planning. In a letter dated September 19, 1949 to Mayor Nie Rongzhen, Liang Sicheng stressed the professional differences between architects and engineers: Civil engineers specialize in designing construction projects such as railways, highways, water control facilities and bridges. Their knowledge of architectural structures is limited to calculation and use of building materials. Architects, however, are different, in that beside the knowledge of architectural structures possessed by civil engineers, they have undergone four or five years’ rigorous training centered on how to satisfy people’s needs in their life. Architects have the task of using the smallest possible amount of building materials and land to maximize the usable floor space (of a building) and achieve the most beautiful façade of a building — the kind of façade featuring a superb beauty of simplicity, something not flashy or ornate in style. The most economical use of building materials, the highest possible utilization efficiency (for buildings), and the physical and mental health of the dweller — these are what architects seek to achieve. In recent years, there is increasing international attention to train architecture majors for that purpose. Moreover, matters which architects focus their attention on have become increasingly different from matters with which civil engineers are most concerned with. Architects pay greater attention to indoor lighting, sound waves, air quality, sunshine, traffic, trees and roads that are closely associated with people’s health. Modern 50 People’s Deputy Hua Nangui Inspects Beijing — He Stands for Demolishing City Walls, Beijing Daily, Page 2, June 3, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:50:38 PM

82

BEIJING RECORD

architecture is related to a myriad field of sciences, of which architects must have a good knowledge of. Now that reconstruction of Beiping has begun, I hope that the government will, first of all, acquire a good understanding of the differences between architects and civil engineers in so far as their respective professions are concerned… Architects should be encouraged to cooperate with civil engineers, in order to build the kind of structures most beautiful in appearance while most cost-effective, most suitable for living, and with the highest utilization efficiency. This cooperation can help forestall errors in designing that may lead to waste of human and material resources of 51 the country and people and also to damage to the townscape. Hua Nangui, however, thought that civil engineers should still have a bigger role to play in city planning. In May 1950, both he and Liang Sicheng attended a meeting on Beijing’s city planning. Hua spoke during the meeting, telling leaders of the Beijing Municipal Government that in city planning, they “are attaching too much importance to architects while failing to pay sufficient attention to civil 52 engineers.” Participants at this meetHua Nangui’s diagrammatic sketch on Beijing’s redevelopment ing discussed Hua Nangui’s (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New proposal for demolishing the China, 1986) city walls. Did Liang Sicheng voice opposition right at the meeting? If he did, how he justified his stand? These questions remain unanswered. But what merits our attention is the fact that at the meeting, Liang Sicheng reiterated that the new urban area developed in the city’s western suburbs during the Japanese occupation should be used in the development of Beijing as the capital of New China. He had raised the proposal twice, at two meetings of experts held by the Beiping City Construction Bureau in March and early May of 1949. The 51 Liang Sicheng: Letter to Comrade Nie Rongzhen, in Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986. 52 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, May 1950, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:50:39 PM

FA Reading


83

proposal, as a matter of fact, fell in line with the Proposal on Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government he was to make jointly with Chen Zhanxiang. According to Zhang Ruliang who attended both meetings, “As problems (discussed at the meetings) would take time to resolve, Zhong 53 Sen proposed establishment of a city planning commission to serve as a 54 permanent body for study of the relevant matters.” The proposal was accepted, and Liang Sicheng, along with Hua Nangui, Zhong Sen and some others, was chosen as members of the preparatory group for the establishment of the Beiping Municipal City Planning Commission. The Commission was inaugurated on May 22, 1949 at a meeting in Hua Fang Zhai (Painted Boat Studio) of Beihai Park. Liang Sicheng, Wang Mingzhi, Zhong Sen and Hua Nangui were on the Commission. Addressing the ceremony, Vice-Mayor Zhang Youyu (1899–1992) charged the Commission with the task of helping turn this ancient, “feudal” city into a “modern production city” under the principle that the city would be good enough to serve as China’s political and cultural center and that preservation of its cultural relics would be ensured. The Beiping City Construction Bureau was charged with organizing a survey of the new urban area in the western suburbs. Liang Sicheng was authorized to lead the faculty and students of Qinghua University

Hua Fang Zhai (Painted Boat Studio) (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

53 An architect then working with a German company. 54 Zhang Ruliang: The Beiping Municipal City Planning Commission under the Beiping City Construction Bureau, in History of Planning, 1st edition, compiled by the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party Records Collection Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995.


10/15/2010 4:50:40 PM

84

BEIJING RECORD

Department of Architecture in working out a draft design for development of the area. To sum up, Liang Sicheng’s stand for preserving the ancient capital in its entirety was, to a large extent, endorsed.

“Transforming Consumption Cities into Production Cities” On March 5, 1949, on the eve of New China’s birth, the Second Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) was opened at Xibaipo Village in Pingshan County, Hebei Province. The session was to exert a major influence on the development of Chinese cities in the second half of the 20th century. In his report to the session, Mao Zedong said: “Only by restoring and developing production in cities and by transforming consumption cities into production cities can the people’s power be consolidated.” On March 17, the People’s Daily ran an editorial titled Transforming Consumption Cities into Production Cities. The editorial stated: “Left over from old China, a semi-feudal, semi-colonial country, large cities like Beiping, where members of the ruling class assembled, are mostly consumption cities. It has been a long time since cities like Tianjin began to develop modern industries, but essentially, these are still consumption cities. For survival and prosperity, large cities depended entirely on exploitation of the countryside and the working class… This state of affairs will not be allowed to continue after we (the Communists) enter the cities. We must bring an end to it by taking well-planned steps to rapidly restore and develop production.” To ensure implementation of the decision of the Second Plenary Session of the Seventh CPC Central Committee, the CPC Beiping City Committee adopted a decision on its “core task” after the city’s peaceful takeover from the Kuomintang. “Restoration and development of production,” declared the Decision of the Beiping City Committee of the CPC on the Current Core Work for Beiping City, “is the current core task for the Party and government establishments and also for all civilians and service people in the city. All other work must be arranged around this core task and subordinated to it.” In a report to a session of the Conference of Representatives of People from all Walks of Life in Beiping on August 9, Ye Jianying (1897–1986), first deputy secretary of the CPC Beiping City Committee, had the following to say: “For a time after Beiping was liberated, we concentrated on taking over the powers (of the Kuomintang government). Our central task now is one of restoring, improving and developing production. We will take whatever measure to restore and develop production so long as it is effective.”


10/15/2010 4:50:40 PM

FA Reading


85

In January 1950, Mayor Nie Rongzhen published an article titled In Celebration of the First Anniversary of Beijing’s Liberation. “Our task,” he wrote, “is one of completely wiping out the remnant forces of the reactionaries and building a government strong and efficient enough for exercising the people’s democratic dictatorship. This is meant to clear away all obstacles to the development of production and reconstruction and create conditions necessary for the transformation of Beijing from a consumption city into a production city... Along with the restoration and development of the entire national economy, Beijing will doubtlessly become a modern metropolis.” Addressing Beijing’s First Municipal People’s Congress in August 1950, Peng Zhen (1902–1997), the city’s Party chief, said: “Right from the day when Beijing was liberated, we began working to transform it from a consumption city into a production city, from an old, backward city into a modern city.” Liang Sicheng, however, was quite at a loss for what the new government decided to do. In his late years, he recalled: “Peng Zhen told me this instruction of Chairman Mao’s: ‘Beijing, a consumption city left over from the past, must be transformed into a production city.’ I just couldn’t understand it then … I had thought it would be better to develop Beijing into the (national) administration center like Washington, a city with a beautiful environment, a city 55 congenial to live in.” “Peng Zhen explained the policy for Beijing’s reconstruction, the policy of letting it ‘serve the needs of production, the laboring people and the central government.’ He also said that Beijing must be transformed into a production city. He told me that Chairman Mao, standing on Tiananmen Rostrum, once pointed to areas south of the square and said that looking afar from here, there should be a forest of chimneys… I was ill at ease Photo shows the 180 meter-high chimney of on hearing these words. I thought a Beijing No. 2 Thermal Power Plant built in 1976 right beside the Pagoda of Tianning Temple country so large like China shouldn’t which was built in Liao Dynasty (907–1125) depend on so small a place like Beijing (Photo by Wang Jun, October 2002) 55 Liang Sicheng’s “confession” during the “Cultural Revolution,” November 5, 1968 (by courtesy of Lin Zhu).


10/15/2010 4:50:41 PM

86

BEIJING RECORD

for industrial and agricultural output. Beijing should be developed into the national administration center, pure and simple, into a city as beautiful and tasteful as Washington. In particular, attention should be paid to preserving the demeanor of the city left over from the past, which is epitomized by its 56 city planning and architectural style.” “I was resentful of Chairman Mao’s instructions on ‘transforming Beijing from a consumption city into a production city,’ on building a ‘forest of chimneys’ that can be seen from atop Tiananmen. Since China is so large, I thought, why is it that factories have to be built within this walled city that 57 has limited open spaces?” Even the Soviet advisors did not understand why there should be 58 “chimneys” everywhere in the walled city. Tumanskaya, an advisor to the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, said that not a single 59 chimney was seen in Moscow. Nevertheless, the Soviet advisors were not opposed to Beijing’s industrialization. They introduced the so-called “Stalin’s principle for city planning” to China, which was summarized as “transforming consumption cities into production cities.” Under this principle of Stalin’s, “the capital cities of all socialist countries must be large, nationally important industrial centers.” Here is the logic of the CPC: to establish the status of the working class as China’s leading class, industries must be developed in a big way for the numerical superiority of the working class. Only by turning Beijing into the national economic center will it be worthy of its status as the national 60 capital. Beijing, however, happened to be a cultural city, home to numerous historic monuments and universities. Moreover, Tianjin, a large neighboring city, instead of Beijing, had played the role in industrializing northern China in contemporary times. In 1930, Liang Sicheng and a friend named 61 Zhang Rui took part in a contest organized by the Tianjin Special Cityâ•› Government for the city’s construction plans. Their plan, which was awarded the top prize, called for “promoting and cultivating industrial and 62 business development to ensure prosperity (of the city).”â•› It is obvious that 56 Liang Sicheng’s “confession” during the “Cultural Revolution,” written in November 1968 (by courtesy of Lin Zhu). 57 Liang Sicheng’s “confession” during the “Cultural Revolution,” Written in January 10, 1969 (by courtesy of Lin Zhu). 58 Most of the Soviet advisors mentioned in the book are identified only by their family names because nowhere were their full names available — Tr. 59 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, March 11, 1954 (by courtesy of Lin Zhu). 60 Gao Yilan and Wang Menghui: Liang Sicheng’s Thinking on Protection of Ancient Cities and City Planning, Issues 1–5 of 1991 of the World Architecture magazine. 61 “Special cities” were those directly under the central government before 1949. Tianjin was one of them — Tr. 62 Liang Sicheng and Zhang Rui: Plan for Construction of Tianjin, Beiyang Art Press, 1930.


10/15/2010 4:50:41 PM

FA Reading


87

as Liang Sicheng saw it, Beijing and Tianjin should have different functions to perform. History of the past 50 years since New China’s birth has proved that Beijing’s endeavor to industrialize despite shortage of locally available water and mineral resources has not only caused numerous problems for Beijing itself. Tianjin has declined because the two cities, just about 100 kilometers apart, have redundant economic structures. Currently, China’s industrial establishment is divided into 130 sectors, of which Beijing has 120 — something rarely found in any other capital city across the world. Heavy industries once furnished 63.7% of Beijing’s economic output, a 63 ratio smaller only than that for Shenyang, a key base of heavy industries. By the end of the 1980s, the number of chimneys in Beijing had exceeded 64 14,000, and air pollution had become unbearable in urban Beijing. Basing itself on a rethinking of history, in April 1980 the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee issued a four-point instruction on Beijing’s development, stating that “Beijing may not necessarily be developed into an industrial center.” In reply to the request of the Beijing Municipal Government for examination of a master plan for the city’s development, the CPC Central Committee and State Council went further to explicitly state on July 14, 1983 that “Beijing shall be the national political and cultural center” and as such, “should cease to develop heavy industries.” In a reply on October 6, 1993 to a request for examination of the revised Beijing Urban Master Plan (1991–2010), the State Council reaffirmed that Beijing “should cease to develop heavy industries.” In 1999, the Beijing municipal authorities decided to remove 134 polluting industrial enterprises out of the 65 once walled city in five years through to 2004. The slogan “production first, (people’s) livelihood second” was raised in the early 1950s when industrialization was stressed. There were similar slogans such as “one foot for industrial growth, one inch for improvement in (people’s) livelihood.” As a result, construction of housing and service facilities needed in people’s life was to be neglected for a long time. Also resulting from a rethinking of history, the Beijing Urban Master Plan formulated in 1982 called for “increasing the construction of housing and service facilities needed in people’s life over a fairly long period to come, so that problems such as the shortage of housing and inconvenience in people’s life can be alleviated step by step.” The ratio used to be 1:1 between 63 Wang Dong: Planning and Designing for Beijing’s Satellite Towns, in A Collection of Papers to the Symposium on Beijing’s Urban Development Through to 2049, compiled by the Beijing City Planning Society, September–October 2000. 64 Wu Zhulian: A Review of Master Architect Liang Sicheng’s Thinking, in Architectural Creations journal, No. 3 issue, 2001. 65 Great Effort Under Way to Relocate Industrial Enterprises, the Beijing Daily, Page 13, May 29, 2001.


10/15/2010 4:50:42 PM

88

BEIJING RECORD

structures for production and structures for people’s life under construction plans of the government. It was changed into 1:2. That ushered in a boom of property development that has lasted until now. Back in the early post-liberation period, New China’s leaders felt ill at ease because the national capital was a “consumption city.” “This globally renowned ancient capital was unable to produce any decent industrial goods except ivory and jade carvings and jingtailan (porcelain with cloisonné enamel) that crystallize the superb wisdom and craftsmanship of our laboring people, as well as scissors and cooking knifes of the famous Pockmarked-Faced Wang brand. Blacksmithing was the city’s ‘metal processing industry.’ The textile mills had no modern spinning and weaving equipment at all, unable to produce a single inch of fine woolen cloth, and crude woolen and linen fabrics were their only products. Moreover, people were 66 living in absolute poverty.” New China’s decision-makers were even more concerned with the expansion of the capital’s working class. To justify this concern, historian Deng Tuo (1912–1966) found, through textual research, that during the Ming dynasty, miners from Mentougou, a coal-rich area in Beijing’s western suburbs, staged street protests in the capital city. “The struggle waged by this new social force under feudalism was of great historical significance,” he 67 claimed. Even before he entered Beiping on the eve of national liberation, Mao Zedong had already urged the Party to pay sufficient attention to the importance of the working class. He said: “Chiang Kai-shek has his capital in Nanjing, and capitalists in Jiangsu and Zhejiang provinces are his power base. Once in Beiping, we need to form a power base for ourselves, and our power base comprises none other than the workers and other laboring 68 people in the city.” Watching the mass parade fome a top the Tiananmen Rostrum on October 1, 1953 to celebrate the fourth anniversary of New China’s founding, Mao Zedong was somewhat displeased, thinking that there were too few industrial workers in the parade. “Do we have to choose another place for our capital?” he asked Liu Ren (1909–1973), the No. 2 man on the Beijing Municipal Committee of the CPC. Liu Ren felt the weight of his words 69 instantly. 66 Zheng Tianxiang: My Recollection of the 17 years in Beijing, Records of Travel, 1st edition, Beijing Publishing House, August 1994. 67 Deng Tuo: The Earliest Mass Protests Stage by Beijing’s Laboring People, in Evening Chats at Yanshan, 1961. 68 Biography of Liu Ren, first edition, compiled by the Biography of Liu Ren group of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, Beijing Publishing House, July 2000. 69 Same as footnote 68.


10/15/2010 4:50:42 PM

FA Reading


89

Liang Sicheng, however, stuck to his stand despite all the controversy. He had an article On Shapes of Cities’ and City Planning published in the People’s Daily on June 11, 1949. “First of all,” he wrote, “I would like to discuss the basic principles for planning the shapes of cities, hoping that citizens concerned with the future of our cities will voice their comments and oversee work of our leaders responsible for such planning.” According to the article, residence, employment, leisure and rest and communication are the four basic urban functions of a city. In other words, a city should be good enough for activities in these four areas. Liang Sicheng criticized what he saw as drawbacks in the planning of some cities in the West, where “everything was done to facilitate the building of factories to the neglect of cultural relics and townscape, and the laboring people were deprived of the space for leisure and rest.” He continued, “As a result of a disorganized, ill-planned development over the past century, the four basic functions are now in a state of mutual interference and none can be fully performed... In China, this state of affairs is now a reality in large industrial and commercial cities like Shanghai, Hankou and Guangzhou.” Liang Sicheng laid down 15 goals to be attained through proper city planning. These include building of “the kind of housing structures simple while congenial to live in, in places close to sites of outdoor activities, with green spots all round, where there is plenty of sunshine and fresh air... Workplaces should not be too far from homes... Structures (in a city) should be tastefully harmonious in architectural style... Large structures for public use such as department-stores, museums and theaters should be located in easily accessible places, with tasteful façades and sufficient parking space... Hazards resulting from use of automobiles should be warded off as far as possible.” He proposed use of four “basic forms” in devising Beijing’s city layout — zoning, neighborhoods, a network of radial ring roads, and urban centers independent of one another with the size of the area and population for each under proper control. “Zoning,” he explained, “means division of the city into different functional zones — industrial, administrative, residential and recreational... Urban centers shall not be expanded indiscriminately. An ideal urban center should have its population limited to somewhere between 50,000 and 60,000. When its population exceeds that limit, a new urban center should be built somewhere three or four kilometers away from it. Industrial, commercial and residential buildings must on no account be allowed in between two urban centers. The space should be reserved for cropland or green spots. This is what we mean by ‘organic decentralization,’ which enables residents to enjoy nature without having to travel too far.


10/15/2010 4:50:42 PM

90

BEIJING RECORD

In an air raid, targets in small, scattered areas will be safer than targets concentrated in one large area.” Liang Sicheng also had ideas about development of Beijing as a part of an economic region. “The world has become smaller thanks to use of modern means of communication,” he wrote. “No city can develop solely on its own. In many ways a city is linked to its neighboring cities, even to cities farther away. In development planning, Tianjin, Tangshan, Zhangjiakou and Shijiazhuang are indispensable for Beiping. Coal produced in Tangshan and the imports and exports handled in Tianjin, for example, definitely affect Beiping’s planning. In planning the development of a city, the geographic, social and economic conditions of its neighboring cities and the rural areas surrounding it must be taken into account.” Liang Sicheng’s rethinking of the industrialization process in the West, his ideas about division of a city into different functional zones, about “controlled urban centers” and about the Greater Beijing region comprising Beijing, Tianjin and parts of Hebei Province — these were to become important subjects of study for China’s city planners over the decades to come. In a letter to Mayor Nie Rongzhen on September 19, 1949, four days after the Soviet experts arrived in Beiping, Liang Sicheng criticized those government organs for having their office buildings built in total disregard of Beiping’s city planning, and called for a “pro-prudent” approach toward starting of Beiping’s reconstruction. Liang Sicheng also informed the mayor of what he had done to help recruit people needed in Beiping’s reconstruction. He proposed that Chen Zhangxiang, alias Charlie Chen, be appointed director of the Planning Department of the Beiping City Construction Bureau. “Mr. Chen studied city planning in Britain under the guidance of some famous professors,” he said. “People of his caliber Liang Sicheng’s letter of September 19, 1949 to are rare in China.” Beiping Mayor Nie Rongzen


10/15/2010 4:50:43 PM

FA Reading

Chapter 3


10/15/2010 4:50:43 PM

Chapter Three The “Liang-Chen Proposal”

“Charlie Chen” “Charlie Chen,” Chen Zhanxiang’s English name, was known to many Britons during the early post-World War II years. It is still a prestigious name in the international architectural and city planning communities. Nevertheless, for a long time in the past, those outside China who were interested in Charlie Chen had only a book to count on for bits of information about him. The book, titled Prisoners of Liberation — Four Years in a Chinese Communist Prison, was co-authored by American citizens Adele and Allyn Rickett, who were in Beijing from the late 1940s to the early 1950s collecting information about ongoing developments in the thinking of the Chinese intelligentsia. They were jailed in 1951 on charges of espionage. Adele Rickett met Chen Zhanxiang on December 23, 1950 by chance. He gave an account of how he was confused by Chen’s feverish support for the Communists and attitude toward the Korean War: A few days later, on December 23, I met Charlie Chen at a wedding reception. He was an architect with one of the government’s planning commissions, and his precise Oxford accent seemed completely out of keeping with his dirty, padded blue uniform and run-down boots. He appeared extremely friendly and willing to talk, so after the reception I invited him to Peking Club for dinner and drink. There was a small dance going on that evening and, after tossing off several martinis and wolfing down the club’s best pheasant dinner, he made himself the life of the party by dancing with all the embassy women there. As the club’s steam heat, drinks, and dancing began to make themselves felt, he tossed his padded jacket aside, revealing several layers of flannel pajamas and woolen underwear. “It’s a little cooler than this in the Planning Commission dormitory,” he said with a grin. “In fact, we have no heat at all there now.” “How do you stand it?” I asked sympathetically. “I should think it would be impossible to do any work at all under such conditions.”


10/15/2010 4:50:44 PM

FA Reading

The “Liang-Chen Proposal”

93

“Well, one gets used to it, though it certainly isn’t like the old days. But, you know, there is something about it — really doing constructive work for a change. When I was in Nanking (Nanjing) before liberation all I did was to sit around in a big office and draw up occasional plans which I knew never had a chance of developing into anything. Now, for the first time since I returned to China, I can see my drawings being transformed into reality.” “How much chance do you think there will be for any continued building with this war going on?” “That remains to be seen. They’re certainly keeping me busy enough at present,” was his answer. I then began hammering away on the old line that, by going into Korea, China was merely pulling Russian chestnut out of the fire. By now Chen had begun to feel all those martinis a little and, with a flushed face, he said, “My friend, I was in Shanghai when it was liberated. I had seen armies marching up and down China for over thirty years and that was the first time I ever saw troops move through an area without so much as damaging a stalk of grain or taking as much as a stick of wood. I don’t know anything about your international politics but I know this, when our government says it is a people’s government I believe it and I support it, because only a people’s government and a people’s army could do the things I saw them do in Shanghai and since. And when our government says we must go into Korea to defend our own land I believe it, and you can jolly well take your Russian chestnuts and state ...” With an embarrassed glance at Dell he stopped talking for a moment. Then, leaping to his feet, he bowed from the waist with exaggerated politeness. “May I have the next dance?” When these changes came to affect even my closest friends, people whom I had considered absolutely loyal to the idea I represented, I began to feel the world must 1 have gone mad. On June 13, 1916, Chen Zhanxiang was born into a Shanghai merchant’s family from Fenghua County, Zhejiang Province.

Chen Zhanxiang as a student studying in Britain in 1938 (by courtesy of Chen Yanqing)

1 Prisoners of Liberation — Four Years in a Chinese Communist Prison by Allyn and Adele Rickett was originally published by Cameron Associates, Inc., in 1957, Anchor press/Doubleday Garden City, New York, 1973.


10/15/2010 4:50:44 PM

94

BEIJING RECORD

The office mansion of the Shanghai City Government designed by Dong Dayou (1899–1973) in the early 1930s inspired Chen so much that he decided to go for architectural designing. The building at the city’s Jiangwan District features a distinct Chinese architectural style. At the sight of the building, he recalled in his late years, “I, as a Chinese, was filled with pride, and instantly I decided to follow Mr. Dong’s road and be an engineer 2 so that I can build various structures.” In 1935, Chen Zhanxiang proved to be the best candidate for the entrance examination of the Shanghai-based Lester School and Henry Lester Institute of Technical Education. In 1938, he went to study at the Architecture School of the University of Liverpool, UK. Before departure, he packed a copy of Liang Sicheng’s Ch’ing (Qing) Structural Regulations into his suitcase. Shortly after his first semester began at the University of Liverpool, Chen Zhanxiang gave a talk on China’s War of Resistance to members of a prestigious non-government organization at Chester, a historic town not far from Liverpool. This was the first public speech he had ever delivered, and to his surprise, it was well received. In Liverpool, Chen Zhanxiang spoke on the same subject at a string of gatherings held by the Round Table, Rotary Club, Lady Crif’s Aid to China Fund and other non-governmental organizations. Nevertheless, he knew little about how the war was being fought in China until he got acquainted with Xiao Qian (1910–1999), the correspondent of Ta Kung Pao in Europe, who helped him keep up with developments of the situation in China. From British Communist Party members among his schoolmates, he got a copy of Red Star over China, an account of the Chinese Communists when they were guerrillas still obscure to Westerners, written by American writer and journalist Edgar Snow (1905–1972). From the book Chen Zhanxiang learned that back in his motherland, a small, poorly equipped army was fighting shoulder to shoulder with the entire Chinese people against the Japanese. From that time on, Red Star over China became a major source of information for his talks on China and its War of Resistance. He stayed in Britain for eight years, during which he gave more than 500 talks to hundreds of thousands of people — British workers, miners, soldiers, housewives and students, as well as soldiers of anti-Fascist allies who were in Britain. Chen Zhanxiang had barely begun speaking in the U.S. Embassy in London one morning when news came that the Japanese had surrendered. People in the audience went wild in excitement, carrying the speaker all the way to a nearby square to join the jubilant masses. 2 Autobiography of Chen Zhanxiang (unpublished), by courtesy of Chen Yanqing.


10/15/2010 4:50:44 PM

FA Reading


95

By giving talks and participating in discussions, Chen Zhanxiang acquired a perfect command of the English language. On recommendation of his fellow students, he ran for the 1942–1943 chairmanship of the Students’ Union at his school and won. He was, in fact, the first foreign student to chair the Students’ Union at the Architecture School of Liverpool University. In 1943, Chen Zhanxiang finished his five-year study at the Architecture School of the University of Liverpool. While studying for a master degree in city design at the same school, he designed the city’s Chinatown encompassing Nelson Street and Great George Square, where members of the city’s Chinese community had often met. Chen Zhanxiang’s design, dedicated to Chinese sailors who had given their lives to the anti-Fascist war, was meant to help the local Chinese improve their livelihood. In 1944, the Times of London published a lengthy report about Liverpool’s Chinatown, describing it as a “gem” inlaid on the city’s façade. The United Press released a story about Chen Zhanxiang’s success in defending his MA paper. Being in Britain, Chen had found it difficult to systematically study Chinese architecture and town planning until he met with Dr. Joseph Needham (1900–1995), author of the monumental Science and Civilization in China, when he visited Cambridge during the summer vacation of 1942. Dr. Needham advised him not to blindly follow the Western ways of studying Chinese architecture and should instead examine it in the context of the Chinese culture. For inspiration, he suggested that Chen Zhanxiang should study the Complete Collection of Graphs and Writings of Ancient and Modern Times (Gu Jin Tu Shu Ji Cheng) by Chen Menglei (1650–1741) of the 3 Qing Dynasty. Chen Zhanxiang spent the whole summer vacation at Cambridge University, giving himself wholly to study of the Complete Collection of Graphs and Writings of Ancient and Modern Times and Liang Sicheng’s Ch’ing Structural Regulations. By doing so, he started his studies of ancient China’s architectural theories. While in Britain, Chen Zhanxiang published several papers on Chinese architecture. Under the guidance of Sir Nicholas Pevsner (1902–1983), an English architectural historian and editor of the Architecture Review, he wrote the Chinese Architectural Theory for the Review’s China special issue published in July 1947. Also published in the issue were two other papers he had written, Feng-Shui and Recent Architecture in China. The same year he 3 Autobiography of Chen Zhanxiang (unpublished), by courtesy of Chen Yanqing.


10/15/2010 4:50:44 PM

96

BEIJING RECORD

published Some Ancient Chinese Concepts of Town and Country in the Town Planning Review of the University of Liverpool. As a student of the University of Liverpool, Chen Zhanxiang was fortunate enough to be taught by Professor William Graham Holford (1907– 1975), a colleague of Professor Patrick Abercrombie (1879–1957), the man who redesigned London after it was devastated by Nazi bombardment in World War II. For his academic achievements, Professor Holford was honored posthumously by having a memorial tablet erected in his honor in the basement of St. Paul’s Cathedral, London. For Chen Zhanxiang, Professor William Holford was a father-like figure. Professor Holford often invited Chen Zhanxiang to afternoon teas or stay with him in his home. The young Chinese student was thus able to meet with numerous academic VIPs and as a result, his English became increasingly refined. He learned from his teacher that legislation on city planning — the “Zoning Ordinance” — was the prerequisite for successful execution of any plan for the development of a city. That prompted him to enter the University College London for a Ph.D in city planning legislation under the supervision of Professor Patrick Abercrombie. That came toward the end of 1944, after he got a master degree from the University of Liverpool and received a scholarship provided by the British Council. Shortly after the War ended, something unexpected happened to Chen Zhanxiang. The World Democratic Youth Congress was held in London from October 31 to November 11, 1945. More than 600 delegates from 63 countries attended the Congress, for discussion of the following: (1) Youths’ responsibility in the struggle for freedom and in transformation of the world; (2) Youths’ demands in the post-War era; and (3) Establishment of the World Federation of Democratic Youth (WFDY). To show respect for China, a victor of the just-ended anti-Fascist war, Chinese was used as one 4 of the working languages, along with English, French, Russia and Spanish. The 25-member Chinese delegation comprised mostly Chinese students who had finished their studies in Britain. For his popularity, Chen Zhanxiang was made head of the delegation. The Communist Party of China 5 was represented by Chen Jiakang and Liu Ningyi within the delegation. When studying in Liverpool, Chen Zhanxiang was persuaded by the Chinese consul into joining the Kuomintang, for which he was to pay a heavy price. Awaiting him were frustrations in life while serving New China, 4 World Youth Congress to Open Tomorrow in London, Chongqing-based Central Daily, Page 3, October 29, 1945. 5 Chen Jiakang (1913–1970) was to become a vice-foreign minister of New China and Liu Ningyi (1907–1994), a chief international liaison officer of the Party — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:50:45 PM

FA Reading


97

even though he changed sides and joined the pro-Communist Kuomintang 6 Revolutionary Committee. Something unpleasant happened the day before the Congress closed. Here is an account given by Chen Yuqing, Chen Zhanxiang’s daughter, in an interview with the author on April 8, 2001: It was decided that the Congress would from then on be an annual event, hence the need to choose a permanent body through election to handle its day-to-day affairs. China was to have one seat in the WFDY Executive Council. This touched off a desperate fight between the Kuomintang and Communists, something my father was reluctant to see. The struggle centered on who was to take the seat, my father, a Kuomintang member, or Chen Jiakang, a Communist. Agonized, my father rushed onto the rostrum and snatched the megaphone in his hand, shouting: “It’s a shame for us to quarrel over the seat, now that we have won the War after eight long years of fighting. Put aside our patriotic sentiments. Just for one thing: Chen Jiakang and I have the same family name and so we are brothers. So why can’t I let him take the seat? I have read Red Star over China and I trust the Communists! Now I declare I am to give up my candidacy for the election!” He was warmly applauded. Back in the hotel that evening, Chen Zhanxiang received a death threat from Kang Ze (1904–1967), head of the Kuomintang secret service who was then on a study tour of Europe. At a reception the following day, Chen Zhanxiang met the Congress chairman, a Russian. Seeing that Chen Zhanxiang was in bad mood, the Russian stepped forward and asked him what had happened. Chen told him about the struggle for the seat in the WFDY Executive Council. On hearing what had happened, the Russian made a decision without delay, declaring: “The Kuomintang and CPC both contributed a lot to the anti-Fascist war and both deserve representation on the Executive Council. Charlie Chen is now not only a member of the Council but also one of its vice-chairmen!” “Vice-Chairman” Chen Zhanxiang was back to his old job after the Congress. He assisted Professor Patrick Abercrombie in completing the regional planning for three cities in southern England. By then, invitation had come from Tan Bingxun, director of the Beiping City Public Works Bureau, asking him to go back and help in Beiping’s city planning. In 1946, Charlie Chen left for China, with consent of Professor Patrick Abercrombie.

6 Eulogy of Mr. Chen Zhanxiang prepared by a group of the China Academic of Urban Planning & Design in April 2001.


10/15/2010 4:50:45 PM

98

BEIJING RECORD

Back at home in the south, “Vice-Chairman” Chen was received by Chiang Kai-shek and Soong Mei-ling (1897–2003), China’s “first lady.” According to Chen Yuqing, he told his family after the meeting that he was “disappointed” with the meeting. “Chiang Kai-shek is uncultured and not charismatic at all. Soong Mei-ling? Well, her English is OK.” The civil war had broken out, and Chen Zhanxiang found it difficult to go to Beiping as planned. He was made chief engineer of the Construction Bureau of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kuomintang government and worked concurrently as a professor at the Nanjing-based Central University, teaching town planning. As such, he supervised over the planning for the administration center of the Kuomintang government that was situated on 7 the ruins of the Ming Dynasty’s palace complex in Nanjing. Later, he was temporarily transferred to the Shanghai City Construction Bureau. As acting head of a group charged with Shanghai’s city planning, he proposed in 1947 development of the New Pudong Area. To promote the development of China’s construction industry, he set up, jointly with four other architects, the Wulian Institute of Architecture and Planning during his stay in Shanghai. He also designed a fishing harbor for the Shanghai Fisheries Administration and its cold-storage. One year after he came back home, Chen Zhanxiang gave up all confidence in the Kuomintang government, which he decided was utterly corrupt. “I was despaired during the three years before liberation,” he was to write. “I was then staying in the south, having no hope of accomplish8 ing anything I had planned to do.” By early May 1949, the Communist-led People’s Liberation Army (PLA), having taken Nanjing, capital of the Kuomintang government, had Chen Zhanxiang’s residence in Shanghai in the late besieged Shanghai. Knowing little 1940s (photo by Wang Jun, August 2001)

7 Nanjing was the capital of the Ming Dynasty from 1368 to 1420 — Tr. 8 Chen Zhanxiang: In Memory of Professor Liang Sicheng, in A Collection of Papers in Commemoration of the 85th Anniversary of Mr. Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition), Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1996.


10/15/2010 4:50:46 PM

FA Reading


99

about the Communists, for a time Chen Zhanxiang was unable to decide what to do, to leave with the Kuomintang regime for Taiwan or to stay and work with the new government. After much hesitation he decided to leave. He got the luggage ready, sent his books to Taiwan by mail and booked the air tickets for himself and his family. But in the end, he changed the idea. Then came May 26, when Kuomintang troops began to withdraw. Looking from inside of his residence on Hengshan Road, he saw Kuomintang soldiers, now fleeing in panic, looting and robbing. Rain began falling at midnight when PLA troops were entering the city. The night was quiet, so quiet that people inside their homes only heard the sound of the soldiers’ footfalls. Dawn broke, and looking through the window, Chen Zhanxiang saw PLA soldiers, in groups of three, sitting back to back on the sidewalks. They had spent the rainy night in the open. His heart stirred and Chen asked his wife to cook some beef soup. He went out with the soup in a cooker, trying to offer it to soldiers outside. But he came back with the soup still hot in the cooker, for the soldiers declined the offer with thanks. Unable to suppress his emotion, Chen Zhanxiang burst into tears the moment he found himself upstairs. “This party has been so successful in building so disciplined an army,” he told his family. “Is there reason for me 9 to think that it will be unable to manage the country’s reconstruction?” He tore the air tickets into pieces.

Planning for New Urban Center “Shanghai was liberated in May 1949, enabling me to see a bright future for my country. I wrote for the first time to Mr. Liang Sicheng, telling him about myself and my willingness to join him in planning the development of our new capital. Mr. Liang replied soon, inviting me to come to Beiping.” In October 1949, Cheng Zhanxiang arrived in Beijing. Thirty-seven years later, he still cherished fond memories of his first meeting with Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin. “Instantly we became bosom friends,” he recalled. “One can’t be more fortunate to have a friend keenly appreciative of one’s 10 aspirations. I was fortunate enough to have friends of that kind.” Chen Zhanxiang, then 33, spoke Mandarin with a strong Ningbo accent. Friends often joked about him, saying that his English was much more

9 The author learned the story from Chen Zhanxiang’s daughter, Chen Yuqing, in an interview with her on April 8, 2001. 10 Chen Zhanxiang : In Memory of Professor Liang Sicheng, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986.


10/15/2010 4:50:46 PM

100

BEIJING RECORD

fluent than his Chinese, and that he always preferred coffee to Chinese tea. But few know that this seemingly “Westernized” young architect cherished a deep love for China’s architectural culture. Liang Sicheng hosted a dinner to welcome Chen Zhanxiang. He had heard that after eight years’ stay in Britain, Chen Zhanxiang became unaccustomed to Chinese food. On hearing the “rumor” over the table, Chen Zhanxiang laughed. “I had to live on potatoes during those eight long years in Britain,” he said. “So what food do 11 I dislike?” Chen Zhanxiang and his wife Tao Lijun in 1952, in front of their residence at Heng’ertiao “We stayed with the Liangs in their Hutong, Xidan, Beijing (by courtesy of Chen home before we were able to find a place Yanqing) to settle after our arrival in Beijing,” Chen Yuqing, Chen Zhanxiang’s daughter, told the author in an interview on April 8, 2001. “We were very happy, indeed very happy. The Liangs had afternoon tea arranged every day, over which the hosts and their guests — my father 12 and Uncle Jin Yuelin — always talked joyously. All of them spoke English, and I was too young to know what they were talking about. When I grew up I asked my father about that. He said they were ‘putting on plays’ — Shakespeare’s plays! And they took turns to play roles in different plays — you played the role of Romeo and he (or she), the role of Juliet, and the following day you may play the role of Othello! Jin Yuelin often wore a wig like a British judge. I was curious about the wig and often wanted to touch it.” Not long after he arrived in Beijing, Chen Zhanxiang was appointed director of the Planning Department of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission. The appointment was made by the Administrative Council of the Central People’s Government, and was published in Page 3 of the People’s Daily of April 30, 1950. He was concurrently professor of Qinghua University, teaching city planning. Even in the south, Chen Zhanxiang never stopped planning his mission in New China’s capital city. After arrival in Beijing, he found that Liang Sicheng shared many of his ideas on city planning, which he had developed on the basis of his own experiences in studying and working in Britain. 11 The story was told by Lin Zhu in an interview with the author on January 26, 2002. 12 Jin Yuelin (1896–1984) was a prominent philosopher and educator of contemporary China — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:50:47 PM

FA Reading


101

In 1944, the year Chen Zhanxiang began his Ph.D studies, his supervisor Professor Patrick Abercrombie was heading a team of the Town and Country Planning Department of the University College London in trying to blaze a new trail for town and country planning while inheriting and carrying forward Britain’s architectural tradition. The victory of the anti-Fascist war was already in sight, and the royal government of the UK had begun making preparations for reconstruction of the country. The County of London Plan had been completed jointly by Professor Abercrombie and J. H. Forshaw, chief architect of London. Then Abercrombie worked out an even greater plan for London’s reconstruction, the Greater London Plan, which featured an overall arrangement for the spatial order of a metropolis sphere with London as the center. The Greater London Plan, the world’s first major attempt to combine town planning with regional planning, has exerted a far-reaching influence on town and country planning across the world. By the time World War I ended, the multitude and complexity of the problems caused by the Industrial Revolution to Western cities had been fully revealed — sharp increases in urban population, acute shortage of housing, slums, unemployment, traffic congestions and moreover, deteriorating environmental conditions due to concentration of industrial enterprises in cities. Redevelopment of cities deep in crisis had become a task of paramount importance. Earlier still, toward the end of the 19th century, such problems had already become shocking enough — for example, the alarming conditions of slums and the deaths of people in the tens of thousands following the breakout of every epidemic. Experts in public hygiene were the first to pinpoint the root cause of such problems. Basing himself on investigation into conditions of slums in London, Friedrich Engels (1820–1895) described such problems as “agonies of capitalism on its deathbed.” The crisis worsened due to World War II. Population densities in cities kept growing. Economic activities became increasingly intensified, causing cities to constantly expand and eventually to exceed the limit of their capacities. The Greater London Plan was meant for the “organic decentralization” of the city’s urban functions, calling for the construction of a series of satellite towns, or “new towns,” in or around the city’s Outer Country Ring. This was to address the housing needs of a growing urban population by attracting industry out of central London. Jobs would be available there, thus able to correct the defects of the “garden city” concept under which satellite towns were just “dormitory towns.”


10/15/2010 4:50:47 PM

102

BEIJING RECORD

In an interview with the author on March 2, 1994, Chen Zhanxiang compared a city to a container. “You can’t put everything into it to the neglect of its ‘storage capacity,’” he said. “Otherwise it will break up. Because of this, some of the city’s urban functions must be performed elsewhere, in suburban areas, meaning that places around the city center must share the burden of the city center. This is the experience of London in city planning. Planners chose a dozen or so places around London for development of satellite towns. London has been run by a dozen successive city councils but no change has been made to the plan. Now London has a string of new towns round it. The population of central London has dropped from 12 million to somewhere between seven and eight million.” “There was also planning for Cambridge,” he continued. “Cambridge is an ancient town. How should it be developed after the War? On the proposal of planners, new buildings were built outside it. The starting point was to keep Cambridge’s character as a university town of international importance. Had things been built in the town, the universities there, all with a history of several hundred years, would have been adversely affected and the entire townscape would have been ruined.” “It is my teacher, Professor William Holford who did the Cambridge planning, which I think epitomizes my idea of not letting a city be filled with everything and of letting some things be done elsewhere,” he told the author. “At that time (in the early 1950s), Beijing had enough open space, for example in Changping and other suburban counties. Why is it that everything was squeezed into the walled city? Things built there (after 1949) must be removed from it!” Holford visited the Soviet Union in the 1930s and back home, he published a book entitled God’s Plan, describing the socialist country as “planners’ paradise.” Chen Zhanxiang never read that book but heard about it from his teacher on many occasions. For him, the most unforgettable thing about the Soviet Union was that under socialism, the state ownership of land and the overriding power of the state ensured implementation of all plans. For this reason, Chen Zhanxiang, like many other students, had good opinions of socialism. “Yearning for socialism was a social trend at that time, a phenomenon that could probably be attributed to the rise of the modernist architectural movement,” Chen Zhanxiang once said. “This was true especially to us students majoring in planning even though we knew little about socialism.” Likewise, the “planners’ paradise” aroused Liang Sicheng’s attention. In 1944, Professor Nikolai Nikolaevich Voronin of the Soviet Union had an English translation of his book Reconstruction of the Liberated Areas


10/15/2010 4:50:47 PM

FA Reading


103

of the Soviet Union published in London. Interested, Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin set about translating it into Chinese. In the Translators’ Remarks in their Chinese translation published in May 1952 by the Longmen United Bookstore, they praised the “highly organized, well-planned way of the Soviet Union in construction and all other work.” In the Preface they wrote in July 1951 to a Chinese translation of the Athens Charter, which was produced by the International Congress of Modern Architecture (CIAM) in 1933, Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin provided deep insight into what they saw as “superiorities” of the socialist system practiced by the Soviet Union. In their opinion, “private ownership of land under capitalism has impeded any attempt to improve cities’ shapes,” leading to a “vicious cycle” in which “cities, like wild shrubs, grew and expand without restriction, in an unplanned way.” They noted, “Cities are suffering a range of maladies under the capitalist political and economic systems,” and “only under socialism, under the new people’s democratic system” can “these maladies be remedied.” We may safely say it is a sincere yearning for socialism that prompted Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang to come together as city planners, beside their mutual love of Beijing, the ancient Chinese capital, and their understanding of each other’s academic thinking. Once in Beijing, Chen Zhanxiang lost no time in joining Liang Sicheng to plan a new urban center in the city. “Before I came,” Chen Zhanxiang recalled, “Liang had already developed the basic ideas for Beijing’s city planning. He wanted to develop a new urban center on the basis of what the Japanese took pains to do in the Wukesong area in the city’s western suburbs (about 10.5 kilometers from Tiananmen). I fully agreed with him on the guiding principle he devised, which called for preserving Beijing in its entirety. Meanwhile, I made some suggestions to help improve his initial plans.” “While building a new urban area outside the walled city,” he continued, “the Japanese aggressors totally ignored the redevelopment of old Beijing. I stood for relocating the planned new urban center outside the Fuxingmen Gate while extending Chang’an Avenue westward, from its west end to Gongzhufen. The administration center (of the Central People’s Government) should be located at Sanlihe (about 5.5 kilometers from Tiananmen). Beyond it there should be green spots and parks to be developed on the basis of Diaoyutai (scenic area) and the August 1 Lake, similar to the Sanhai water body that lies beyond the Forbidden City. I also


10/15/2010 4:50:47 PM

104

BEIJING RECORD

wanted to include the Lotus Pond (to the southwest of Sanlihe) in plans for 13 the building of the administration center.” These suggestions won Liang Sicheng’s approval, but would touch off a heated debate.

Debate with Soviet Advisors Chaired by Mayor Nie Rongzhen, a work conference was held on Beijing’s city planning in November 1949 in the office building of the Beijing Municipal Government. Liang Sicheng, Chen Zhanxiang and other Chinese experts were present, along with government officials and Soviet advisors 14 working in New China’s capital city. M.â•›G. Barannikov , a Soviet expert, delivered a report on planning for Beijing’s redevelopment. Also at this meeting, the Soviet expert group submitted to the municipal authorities The Proposals on Improving Beijing’s Municipal Administration. “Beijing does not have large industrial enterprises,” Barannikov said in his report. “But, as New China’s national capital, it should be a large industrial city as well, not only a city of culture, science and art. The working class in Beijing now accounts for only four percent of the local population. In contrast, the figure is 25 percent for Moscow. That means Beijing is a

1.

7.

2. 6. 3.

5.

4.

1. University area 2. Residential area 3. Industrial area 4. Residential area 5. Area reserved for planning 6. Residential area 7. Recreation district Barannikov’s plan for Beijing’s urban development (Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998) 13 Chen Zhanxiang : In Memory of Professor Liang Sicheng, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986. 14 М-Г-Баранников in Russian — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:50:48 PM

FA Reading


105

consumption city, where most residents are merchants, not laboring people, hence the need for work to industrialize the city.” On the question of government office buildings, Barannikov proposed building of an administration district with Tiananmen Square as the center. “It’ll be good for us to begin by transforming one avenue or one square, for example, Tiananmen Square in the heart of the city,” he said. “The square has become all the more important as a venue for the military parade and the mass demonstration during the ceremony to inaugurate the People’s Republic of China. Because of this, Tiananmen Square should be made the center of the city. By doing so, the directions of the main roads can be determined. This can in no way be changed by any planner.” He specified: “The first cluster of office buildings should be located south of the East Chang’an Avenue, most preferably on the open space from Dongdan to Gong’an Street. It will be most ideal for us to have the second cluster of office buildings constructed to the right of Tiananmen, along Gong’an Street immediately beyond the square, where most structures are one-story buildings of little value that are being used by the Ministry of Public Security. The third cluster of office buildings should be built in the area to the left of Tiananmen, from Xipishi to Fuyoujie Street, where the 15 West Chang’an Avenue cuts through.”

Government office buildings

Existing streets

Sidewalk trees

Water surface

Roadways

Sidewalks

Plan of Soviet experts for distribution of government office buildings along the avenue from Dongdan to Fuyoujie, passing Tiananmen Square (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)

15 Soviet Expert Barannikov’s Report on Beijing’s Development, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:50:49 PM

106

BEIJING RECORD

In The Proposals on Improving Beijing’s Municipal Administration, the Soviet expert group elaborated on Barannikov’s proposal for having office buildings of the various government organs constructed in the core area of old Beijing. Meanwhile, they refuted plans for development of the expected new urban center on the city’s suburbs, alleging that such plans were “uneconomical,” amounting to an attempt to “repudiate the rebuilding and improvement of the existing city.” The Proposals stated: “Where the office buildings should be built is important to the development of Beijing and to efforts to accelerate its rebuilding. There is the proposal that these be built in the so-called ‘new urban area’ five or six kilometers to the west of the city which the Japanese had begun developing. This proposal calls for having all the structures in the administration district built in the ‘new urban area,’ on assumption that construction there would be cost-effective and that government employees would live near where they work. In our opinion, buildings for administrative purposes should be built within the existing city. That would be truly economical, and would bring about a quick resolution to problems with the distribution of the various government organs while facilitating the effort to beautify urban Beijing.” The Proposals stressed the economic reason for having the expected administration district located within the old city. “From an economic

Photo shows Chen Zhanxiang (second from right, front row), director of the Planning Department of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, with a Soviet expert (fourth from right, front row) (by courtesy of Chen Yanqing)


10/15/2010 4:50:49 PM

FA Reading


107

point of view, to have the administration district built outside the city is wrong. Soviet experiences in city design and planning prove that the cost of building residential and administration structures should account for no more than 50–60 percent of the total cost for the rebuilding of a modern city. Somewhere between 40 and 50 percent of the total cost for building a modern city is meant for construction of cultural facilities and facilities needed in people’s life (shops, restaurants, schools, hospitals, cinemas, theaters, bathhouses, etc.) and for public utilities (waterworks and sewer, power supply and telephone systems, roads, bridges, parks, green spots, water conservation projects, etc.). Demolition of old residential buildings and relocation of their occupiers would account for no more than 25–30 percent of the cost of building new housing structures. This is true to Moscow, where even residential structures of certain value have been demolished. Cultural facilities and public utilities necessary for people’s life are already available in old Beijing, but everything will have to be started anew in the ‘new urban area’ outside the city.” The Proposal cited what had been done to Moscow to justify the Soviet advisors’ argument. “When the rebuilding of Moscow was being discussed,” it said, “there were people who proposed that a new capital be built outside Moscow, instead of having the existing city rebuilt. The Presidium of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union rejected the proposal. As a result, we have rebuilt Moscow with desired results. Plans for Beijing’s rebuilding and revamping can be abandoned only when there is the prevalent understanding that Beijing does not have any structure of 16 historical or architectural value.” These words may have taken Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang by surprise. By proposing the building of a new urban center outside the city, they had always meant to have the ancient city of Beijing preserved in its entirety, but exactly on this question were they accused of “negating” Beijing’s historical and architectural value, of even attempting to “abandon” the city! At this meeting, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang ran into a heated debate with the Soviet experts. “That was the first time I attended a meeting of that kind,” Chen Zhanxiang recalled 40 years later. “I was naïve and I knew none of the leaders present at the meeting. Those Soviet experts, I thought, were here for a mission of friendship and the meeting was just meant for discussion of 16 Excerpts of The Proposals on Improving Beijing’s Municipal Administration by the Soviet expert group, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:50:49 PM

108

BEIJING RECORD 17

their proposals. But silence prevailed after P.â•›V. Abramov , head of the Soviet expert group, spoke on their proposals. So I spoke on my views, without hesitation. I told them that building of an administration center in the heart of Beijing can only increase the pressure on the city, and that Beijing and its surrounding areas should be considered as an integral whole in planning the city’s rebuilding. So I pressed our Soviet friends to tell us their views on relations between town and countryside. I told them I disagreed to ideas of focusing the reconstruction effort on the center of Beijing. Neither did I agree to Abramov’s explanation. He said that the question about the contradictions between town and countryside was too complicated to be answered right now and that an answer to the question could be found in the future, in the course of socialist construction. To speak the truth, I based myself on my own understanding of the British town and country planning theories, which may not be perfect at that time. Nevertheless, I believed that my ideas would be conducive to protection of Beijing as an ancient city. I knew that the Greater London Plan was meant to protect the ancient city of 18 London while an attempt to ensure a decrease in its population densities.” Neither did Liang Sicheng keep silent. We may know how fierce the debate was by looking back what Abramov said in response to his remarks: Professor Liang has aired some interesting opinions. Now I would like to give my comments on them. Professor Liang said that the question of where to have Beijing’s central area built, within the city or in the new urban area (his proposal), is yet to be decided, and therefore it is still early to plan the city’s zoning. But Secretary Peng Zhen of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee has told us that he discussed this question with Chairman Mao. He also said that Chairman Mao told him to keep important government organs in the city and have less important government organs based in the new urban area. In our opinion, this is the right decision, which will lead to economical results. What will happen if the administration district is located outside the city? That would mean you’ve got to build office structures for those government organs, along with residential buildings for government functionaries and their families. That’s exactly what your design is meant for. But can you achieve the purpose by doing things this way?

17 П-В-Абрамов in Russian — Tr. 18 Professor Chen Zhanxiang on City Planning, in City Planning magazine, 1st issue of 1991.


10/15/2010 4:50:49 PM

FA Reading


109

Let’s assume engineer Chen and engineer Qi both work for the government. Engineer Qi has an apartment in the city but Engineer Chen is a new comer and he doesn’t have an apartment in the city. Your proposal amounts to a call for building two apartments for both men, instead of building just one in the city. By proposing that the core of the city be located outside the city, you’re saying that the 1.3 million people living in the city would be useless to the government. So which will be more economical, to build new buildings in the city or to build them outside? … We have had similar proposals, calling for preservation of old Moscow as a “museum” while building a “new Moscow” outside it. We rejected such proposals. We have rebuilt Moscow and the results are not bad. Sooner or later you’ll have to demolish those old residential buildings. When all the rickshaw boys are in factories, what vehicle will take you through those hutong lanes and alleys? Beijing is a good city and there is no reason to abandon it. But it may take decades to make the entire city look as beautiful and magnificent as the Forbidden City and those parks. Because of this, we are firm on our 19 stand on the question of the administration center. Abramov conveyed an important message: Mao Zedong stood for having the government organs based in the city. According to the Soviet advisor, development of the new urban area amounted to calling the 1.3 million people living in the city “useless to the government.” This and other Soviet advisors based themselves on the 1931 planning for Moscow. When visiting the Soviet Union as a member of a delegation from the Chinese Academy of Sciences in 1953, Liang Sicheng 20 was given an account of the plan by Koekoero, vice-president of the Academy of Architecture of the USSR. He said: “Contesting designs for the 1931 international bidding for a Moscow urban master plan fell into two categories — those for having the old Moscow razed for a complete change of the city, and those for keeping its character as a ‘museum’ while building a ‘new Moscow’ on the city’s outskirts. Comrade Stalin called both ‘unrealistic illusions of the petty bourgeoisie.’ Guided by the correct principle he devised for planning, we formulated a master plan for the rebuilding of Moscow. The master plan was based on prospects of the city’s

19 Excerpts of Abramov’s Remarks at the November 1949 Meeting on Beijing’s City Planning, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995. 20 Full name not available


10/15/2010 4:50:49 PM

110

BEIJING RECORD

development and development of the architectural style of its buildings. It called for development on the basis of what was in existence while taking 21 into full account of the city’s development potential.” Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang were to find themselves lonely and helpless. Shortly after the meeting, on December 19, 1949, Cao Yanxing, director, and Zhao Pengfei, deputy director, of the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau, declared they would “fully endorse the opinions of the Soviet experts.” Here is what they said in Opinions on Plans for Beijing’s Development in the Future: “If the existing urban area is abandoned and if an administration center is built on the city’s suburbs, a host of office buildings will have to be built along with a system of public utilities. As a result, the construction cost will have to be increased greatly. Besides, only after everything is ready can the administration center be put to use. (According to experiences of the Soviet Union, office and housing structures account for about half of the cost of rebuilding a city, and public utilities, for the other half. In comparison, the cost of having existing structures demolished for construction of new buildings accounts for no more than 20–30 percent of the total cost of rebuilding the city.) As we have limited time and funds at our disposal, the landscaping of the administration district — parks, lakes, monumental buildings, etc. — will be inferior to that of the existing urban area where everything has long been built. Due to a range of restrictions, including the limited human, financial and material resources at our disposal, we can’t build a new administration center and improve the existing urban area simultaneously; and if we do, the existing urban area will be deserted… We believe that the proposals of the Soviet experts are rational. These proposals were worked out by taking into full account of what is already available in the city and also by giving due attention to both the practical needs and the current conditions, for the purpose of making our capital city new. In comparison, proposals for building an administration center on the city’s suburbs just reflect the subjective wish (of those who have made them) and fail to take a due consideration of the current conditions, and therefore 22 cannot be adopted.”

21 Liang Sicheng: Report on the Civil Engineering Aspect of What the Delegation Learned by Visiting the Soviet Union (unpublished), 1953, supplied by Lin Zhu. 22 Cao Yanxing and Zhao Pengfei: Opinions on Plans for Beijing’s Development in the Future, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:50:50 PM

FA Reading


111

Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District After the meeting, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang keenly felt the need to present their ideas in writing to make their views better understood. “I discussed the matter with Liang, and we shared each other’s ideas. After much discussion I began drafting our joint proposal and he began writing about matters on which we had reached consensus. That was how we jointly produced the Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government,” Chen Zhanxiang recalled in an interview with the author on March 2, 1994. In February 1950, the famous “Liang-Chen Proposal” came into being. Liang Sicheng had it printed on his own expenses and sent copies of it to the concerned government leaders.

Cover and first page of the Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government in Liang Sicheng’s private collection (by courtesy of Lin Zhu)

On Chen Zhanxiang’s suggestion, Liang Sicheng revised his original idea of having the central administration district developed at Wukesong (10.5 kilometers from Tiananmen), on the basis of what the Japanese had done there. Instead, he and Chen Zhanxiang proposed a site to the east of Wukesong, also in the city’s western suburbs but closer to old Beijing. The “Liang-Chen Proposal” called for “developing the area east of Gongzhufen (7.5 kilometers from Tiananmen) and west of the Temple of the Moon (Yuetan), where work should be done in a planned way to choose a site with sufficient open space to be home to the various government organs, to serve


10/15/2010 4:50:51 PM


7

Cultural sites

City wall

District boundaries

Existing road

47

41 42

40

35

34

33

27

48

45

28

21

43

11

20

26

19

25

Main road

17

16

18

4

2

36

10

8

46

9

51

44

29

22

37

30

23

12

49

50

38

31

24

13

3

39

32

14

5

52

15

65

54

66

60

59

72

78

73

71

67

61

55

A sketch map of the government organs in the proposed central administration district outside Old Beijing and its relation to Old Beijing (Source: “Liang-Chen Proposal,” Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, Vol. IV, 1986)

6

1

53

68

77

7 4

82

69

79

62

57

56

75

80

63

58

64

76

81

70

112 BEIJING RECORD

10/15/2010 4:50:53 PM

FA Reading

The “Liang-Chen Proposal” (The left part of the sketch) 1-9. Spaces reserved for expansion of the administration district 10. People’s Revolutionary Military Commission 11. Ministry of Foreign Affairs 12. Ministry of Culture 13. Chinese Academy of Sciences 14. General Administration of Publication 15. Temple of the Moon 16. Ministry of Forestry 17. Ministry of Agriculture 18. Ministry of Water Conservancy 19. Ministry of Communications 20. Ministry of Railways 21. People’s Supervisory Committee 22. Culture and Education Commission 23. Ministry of Education 24. Ministry of Health 25. Ministry of Heavy Industries 26. Ministry of Labor 27. Ministry of Posts and Telecommunication 28. Financial and Economic Commission 29. Political and Law Committee 30. Judicial Commission 31. Ministry of Internal Affairs 32. Nationalities Commission 33. Ministry of Textile Industry 34. Ministry of Light Industry 35. Ministry of Food Industry 36. Administrative Council 37. Supreme People’s Court 38. Ministry of Justice 39. Ministry of Public Security 40. Ministry of Fuel Industry 41. Ministry of Trade 42. Ministry of Finance 43. Overseas Chinese Affairs Commission 44. Supreme People’s Procuratorate 45. National People’s Congress 46. Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference 47. People’s Bank of China 48. General Administration of Customs 49. Baiyun Temple 50. Tianning Temple 51. General Bus Station 52. No. 11 Residential Zone (No. 4 suburban residential zone) 7.283 sq. km. 28,381 households Population: 121,258 16,700 persons/sq. km. (Right part of the sketch) 53. No. 5 residential zone in the city 4.895 sq. km. 23,699 households Population: 107,845 22,000 persons/sq. km. 54. No. 4 residential zone in the city 5.56 sq. km. 33,372 households Population: 149,376 26,900/sq. km. 55. Beihai (North Sea)


113

56. No. 6 residential zone in the city 7.597 sq. km 16,513 households Population: 77,896 10,140 persons/sq. km. 57. Jingshan Park 58. No. 3 residential zone in the city 6.197 sq. km. 34,800 households Population: 159,195 25,600 persons/sq. km. 59. Xisi area 60. Xisi business district 61. Zhonghai (Middle Sea) 62. Forbidden City 63. Wangfujing Business Street 64. No. 1 residential zone in the city 5.278 sq. km. 33,096 households Population: 157,980 30,000/sq. km. 65. No. 2 residential zone in the city 3.933 sq. km. 22,303 households Population: 105,335 28,000/sq. km. 66. Xidan business district 67. Nanhai (South Sea) 68. Zhongshan Park 69. Imperial Ancestral Temple 70. Dongdan 71. Xinhuamen Gate 72. Xijiaominxiang 73. Financial and Business District 74. Jianguo Market 75. Dongjiaominxiang Embassy District 76. Dongdan Square 77. Qianmen Gate 78. No. 9 residential zone (No. 2 suburban residential zone) 2.274 sq. km. 20,982 households Population: 98,706 43,400 persons/sq. km. 79. Qianmen Business District 80. No. 8 residential zone (No. 5 suburban residential zone) 1.569 sq. km. 14,210 households Population: 66,428 42,300 persons/sq. km. 81. No. 10 residential zone (No. 3 suburban residential zone) 6.719 sq. km. 25,305 households Population: 105,762 15,700 persons/sq. km. 82. No. 12 residential zone (No. 5 suburban residential zone) 7.580 sq. km. 29,442 households Population: 121,228 16,000/sq. km.

10/15/2010 4:50:54 PM

114

BEIJING RECORD

as the capital’s administration district.” The Proposal was based on the fact that “there is an acute shortage of open space within the wall city while the ‘new urban area’ developed under Japanese occupation is too far away from the city and devoid of necessary infrastructure facilities, hence unsuitable 23 for use as home to the envisaged administration center.” The 25,000-character “Liang-Chen Proposal” consists of three parts with eight appendices. The first part is titled Reasons for a Quick Decision on the Building of the Administration District, and the second part, Reasons for Developing the Western Suburbs as the New Urban Center. The third part states: “The administration district in the western suburbs may be developed step by step in keeping with the current financial conditions. But that will be more rational and economical than demolition of old structures (for construction space) in the existing urban area.” To highlight their eagerness, Liang and Chen used eight adverbial modifiers all beginning with “in order to” in the last sentence in their joint proposal: We believe that the proposed urban center in the western suburbs suits Beijing’s current conditions. We are raising this proposal in order to resolve the problems facing Beijing, so that it will achieve a balanced development and have all its needs satisfied, in order to rationally distribute the various government organs for efficiency, in order to shorten the distance of between homes and workplaces for government functionaries, in order to forestall a situation in which large numbers of residents have to be resettled in a short time, in order to preserve the cultural sites and monumental buildings in the city, in order to reduce the population densities of urban Beijing which are already high, in order to keep the traffic volume normal in the city over the years to come, and in order to build a new capital city with an artistic demeanor while congenial to live in. In the first part of their proposal, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang noted that the building of an administration district would have an overall bearing on the city’s development and therefore was the most important part in any city planning for Beijing. They urged the authorities to be “prudent” in making a decision on the matter: The building of office structures for use by so elaborate an administrative system of the government is the most important aspect of Beijing’s reconstruction. Calculated on a per capita basis, on the basis of the minimum

23 Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang: Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government, Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986.


10/15/2010 4:50:54 PM

FA Reading


115

amount of space each government functionary needs for work, these office structures will together occupy an area larger than the Imperial City within old Beijing. Moreover, the area occupied by housing structures needed by government functionaries will be three times as large. The location of the administration district determines the orientation of Beijing’s development and should be taken as representing the guiding principle for Beijing’s city planning even in the future. It is therefore the most important factor in the current planning (for Beijing). To be precise, where the countless structures needed by this elaborate, modern administrative system of the government are to be built constitutes the basis of the principle for Beijing’s zoning and the development of Beijing’s road system. Work and service zones, the population densities, the distance between homes and workplaces — these factors form the basis on which the various administration organs are to be distributed and therefore must be properly planned. Otherwise, blunders will occur, leading to problems unable to be solved over a protracted period in the future. Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang stressed that on no account must damage be done to the ancient capital. They noted that a range of factors merit due consideration in deciding the location of the central administration district, including communication, demolition of old housing buildings and resettlement of their occupiers and above all, the life and work of the entire local population. A host of thorny problems, they warned, would crop up if the guiding principle for city planning was wrong: In this ancient capital city of Beijing, numerous ancient structures are historic monuments. These structures are beautiful in appearance and brook no damage. The order they epitomize and the cultural environment in which they exist constitute a salient feature of this magnificent ancient capital that must be preserved. On no account must this feature of Beijing be ruined by structures out of keeping with the city’s cultural environment. For this reason, a proper policy must be decided, meaning that there should be a resolve to expand the city’s open space for construction of structures needed by the new government for work and of structures needed by its working population including residential estates, apartment and dormitory buildings. This policy is based on the principle of increasing the open space for construction with a view to achieving an overall improvement of the city through decentralization, readjustment and zoning so that the heritage sites and their surroundings can be preserved. The other policy is based on the principle of putting to use the bulk of the existing space currently available in urban Beijing, on massive demolition


10/15/2010 4:50:54 PM


3

4

15

5

14

10

8

12

11

9

Sketch map of the basic work and residential zones in relation to Old Beijing (Source: “Liang-Chen Proposal,” in Vol. IV of Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, 1986)

1

2

6

7

13

45

18

44

17

42

35

27

26

22

43

40

34

41

25

21

16

46

37

36

29

28

33

23

19

54

30

56

31

24

39

38

32

55

52

47

53

20

51

49

48 50

116 BEIJING RECORD

10/15/2010 4:50:57 PM

FA Reading


117

1. Workers’ residential zone 2. Factories 3. Mentougou 4. Factories 5. Shijingshan residential zone 6. Recreation and convalescing zone 7. Qinglongqiao 8. Residential zone 9. Cadres’ residential zone 10. Residential zone 11. Workers’ residential zone 12. Wanping 13. Industrial zone 14. Changxindian 15. to Hankou 16. to Nankou 17. Qinghe 18. School zone 19. Schools’ residential zone 20. Experimental farming zone 21. Cadres’ residential estates 22. Residential zone 23. Residential zone 24. Residential zone 25. Residential or administration zone 26. Space reserved for expansion 27. Administration district 28. Residential zone 29. Residential zone 30. Forbidden City 31. Residential zone 32. Workers’ residential zone 33. Shopping zone 34. Business district 35. Railway station 36. Shopping zone 37. Residential zone 38. Handicraft shops 39. Workers’ residential zone 40. Warehouses 41. Fengtai 42. Rolling stock plant 43. Residential zone 44. Residential zone 45. to Tianjin 46. Workers’ residential zone 47. Warehouses 48. Industrial zone 49. Industrial zone 50. to Tongzhou 51. Farmland 52. Industrial Zone 53. Workers’ residential zone 54. Green spots 55. Workers’ residential zone 56. Daxing


10/15/2010 4:50:57 PM

118

BEIJING RECORD

of old structures and on a resolve to complete the city’s reconstruction in just a few years. Under that principle, some 900,000 of the 1.3 million residents in Beijing will be moved out of the city, leaving 400,000 to stay where they now live, so that government functionaries and people serving their needs, to be 400,000 in total, will be able to move in. The combined figure, 800,000, suggests that all the administrative work will be done in the old city and that most residents, in principle, will have to be resettled elsewhere. To achieve the purpose, work will begin right now to construct a myriad of multistorey office buildings, at the current stage by using the open space found in scenic spots and cultural sites and along the main streets. (The principle fails to give due consideration to the elaborate details involved in resettlement of residents and the need to build new housing for them. Also neglected is where to put up an expected sudden inflow of government functionaries and the resultant change in Beijing’s appearance.) … If the guiding principle is wrong, problems will keep cropping up and will be difficult to resolve. To sum up, the life, work and travels of Beijing residents, one million strong, will be adversely affected. In the second part of the Proposal, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang listed 11 requirements that the envisaged central administration district should meet. The district should be designed in such a way as to keep the artistic value of China’s city planning. In shape and style, structures to be built there should “combine the characteristics of the Chinese tradition and the creative spirit of the current times.” The district should have sufficient open spaces for expansion. It should be planned in such a way as to forestall harassment of the people and waste of government money through massive demolition. Extra difficulties in building the water and power supply facilities there should also be forestalled. Residential zones should be close to work zones in the district, in order to ease the traffic burden. Work should be done to ensure a balanced development of the entire city. Vehicle flows in the district should be under effective control. In shape, the central administration district should be in keeping with the old city. Cultural monuments in the district should be well protected. The Proposal stated: Balanced development is what a city must spare no effort to achieve. Illplanned, disordered and unlimited expansion of cities under capitalism in the 19th century resulted in excess concentration of the population and industrial and commercial activities in cities and also in antagonism between the town and countryside. Overcrowded “city centers” and housing buildings, slums and traffic congestions — we must take note of the warnings of the maladies (the Western) cities came to suffer… If


10/15/2010 4:50:57 PM

FA Reading


119

the government sets itself up in a city, the city’s population is bound to shoot up, thus boosting the business of goods and service suppliers. As a result, business areas already prosperous will become even more so and residential areas, once quiet, will become as noisy and crowded as the busiest downtown streets. A sharp increase in population, aggravated by excess concentration of population, was the cause of the dilemmas many industrial cities have been confronted with. Plans have been made in recent years to correct the mistakes made in London’s city planning, a job that will need 50 years and a huge amount of material and human resources to complete. Now that planning has just begun for our capital city, must we repeat the same mistakes? Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang criticized the Soviet advisors’ proposal for building office structures on the Dongjiaominxiang playground and along Chang’an Avenue. To do things the way the Soviet advisors called for, they insisted, “will lead to a repetition of the mistakes made in European cities by building large-sized structures along streets or close to cities’ main arteries of communication.” Even if construction was allowed on both sides of Chang’an Avenue, they noted, “the office buildings there will account for only one fifth of the total needed by the government, and there will still be the need to find places for construction of the rest.” They said, “Suppose countless office mansions of the government form snake-like long lines flanking the avenue or round a huge square. In both cases the different government organs will stand side by side along this major roadway. The vehicle flow in the area will increase irrationally, and parking will also be a problem. This is in fact a basic traffic problem found on the streets in Europe. Imitation of the townscape characteristic of European cities amounts to a repudiation of our principle that calls for keeping Beijing’s original appearance intact. Order and harmony that are characteristics of China’s traditional architectural art will be totally abandoned due to the changes in the city’s shape and road system. Moreover, right below the office mansions will be the noisy, dusty roads and this will be detrimental to the efficiency of the government organs and also to the health of their employees.” Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang warned: “If construction of buildings continues along roads in the city, leading to too high a population density, traffic congestion and other problems are bound to be difficult to address, the decision in favor of such construction should be held as the root cause of the resultant damage to the shape of Beijing. It is indeed a great pity that if plans for appropriately increasing the city’s construction space are given up just because some open space is readily available for immediate use (in the city). We have concluded that no problems can be resolved


10/15/2010 4:50:57 PM

120

BEIJING RECORD

Liang-Chen Proposal: The New Administration District in Relation to Old Beijing (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

and instead, more problems will crop up if plans for a new administration district are misunderstood as calling for construction of office buildings in the city. One-sided actions of this kind definitely do not represent a scientific approach toward city planning, and will only impede planning in a scientific way.” The Soviet advisors stood for building an administration district in the city where cultural and service facilities were readily available, asserting that this way of doing things would be economical. Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang refuted their view, noting that large numbers of residents will have to be moved out if the envisaged administration district is located in the old city. “The government will definitely have the responsibility for building roads and service facilities in places where these people are resettled. That means the government will have to build a new urban area on the city’s suburbs, which will be as costly (as building the administration district there).” Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang held that to build an administration center in the city “will not only be difficult.” Such an administration center, they argued, are bound to be problematic: 1. Beijing’s urban population is bound to increase, though the population densities are already high enough and decentralization of the population is now a must. How to resolve this conflict?


10/15/2010 4:50:59 PM

FA Reading


121

2. If the needed office buildings are built in areas where there are housing buildings, housing buildings with 130,000 rooms will have to be demolished and 182,000 people to be resettled, according to our calculation based on the average size of the living space currently available to each resident. Even if the numbers are cut by half, the size of the displaced people will still be huge. So what is to be done with them? 3. If modern, high-rise structures are built in the city’s core area which is of cultural interest, the city’s shape and appearance will be changed. Doing things that way runs diametrically in counter against the principle for preservation of cultural relics. 4. If extra buildings are constructed along the main roads, traffic will instantly increase in volume and therefore become more complicated to manage. Traffic chaos is bound to occur as so many vehicles are entering and passing through at the same time, hence the unavoidability of accidents. Situations of this sort must be prevented through proper city planning and design. 5. The most serious traffic problem — additional pressure on traffic and waste of time and energy of commuters — is bound to crop up due to the increased distances from this government organ to that, from work zones to residential zones, and from the city center to the suburban areas. Figures in this respect will be alarming, and ways of addressing the problem would be unconceivable. Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang noted that to build a central administration district in the old city, new housing structures would have to be built. For that purpose, existing structures would have to be demolished for space and their occupiers would have to be resettled, followed by work to clear the sites of debris and prepare them for building the new structures’ foundations. In the process, “the jobs of many people would be affected, especially owners of the small, neighborhood stores, which have depended on ‘regular customers’ — neighbors — for survival. After resettlement elsewhere, it would take them a long time to get adapted to the new areas. In short, people would be harassed and government money, wasted.” But what could be expected from this way of doing things that “harasses the people and wastes government money”? Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang answered: The newly-built administration district in the city will still be in disarray, not in conformity to requirements of our times… Commuting will be


10/15/2010 4:50:59 PM

122

BEIJING RECORD

problematic as government organs and housing of their functionaries are set apart, not properly linked and concentrated. Besides, there will be no space in reserve for possible expansion of the administration district. This lopsided way of doing things will resolve none of the existing problems. Instead, it will only create new problems. As no due consideration is given to traffic, the distance between homes and workplaces will give rise to the greatest of all problems. Let’s assume that the administration district is located in the city. That means there will be no room for housing structures needed by government employees, which would need huge space for construction. So government employees will have to be put up in suburban areas, a long distance away from where they work. Then somewhere between 70,000 and 80,000 people — maybe up to 150,000 — will have to commute between their homes and workplaces twice a day, during the morning and evening rush hours. There will be a host of problems if that becomes a reality — just for one thing: how to ensure the supply of vehicles to carry the commuters back and forth? Meanwhile, downtown areas such as Dongdan, Wangfujing and other shopping streets are already busy enough and they will become even busier, making development of the entire city imbalanced. Streets will become overcrowded due to excess concentration of people and vehicles, and parking will be a problem in many places. When things become so bad that traffic can no longer be handled on Beijing’s main streets, people would resort to things like subways for remedy. So this way of planning is not economical. It is wasteful. It will make us suffer all the pains major cities in Europe and the United States have been suffering. From this line of argument, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang proposed that the administration center be set up in the western suburban area from Sanlihe beyond the Temple of the Moon to Gongzhufen. They held that their plan would lead to “an all-round resolution of problems” possibly to arise in the city’s protection and redevelopment. Doing things their way, they insisted, would “save the people lots of time and human and material resources and would be conducive to “efforts to develop Beijing into a progressive capital city while ensuring preservation of its cultural monuments.” Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang noted that their proposal was based on the principle for comprehensive planning of a “greater urban Beijing.” It was meant to help “decentralize old Beijing’s urban population while promoting its reconstruction.” It was an arrangement that gave “due consideration to both the old and the new” while “forestalling problems (possibly to arise) with the new administration district itself.” Within the new administration district, they argued, “there must be sufficient housing


10/15/2010 4:50:59 PM

FA Reading


123

space, so that traffic can be handled in an economical way and that the dependence on mechanized means of communication can be reduced.” Meanwhile, “sufficient open space would be available for expansion (of the administration district) in the future.” Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang also argued that shifting urban functions to areas beyond the old city would be the fundamental, the most natural way of reducing old Beijing’s population densities: To decentralize the population, the most important thing for us to do is to use economic policies to create new jobs of various kinds, so that many people will be willing to move to where new undertakings are being developed. This means places designated for development of new undertakings must be beyond those areas where the population densities are already high. Only in this way can (old Beijing’s) population densities be reduced. We must keep in mind that it won’t do for us to develop suburban housing areas in isolation from where jobs are available. Serious traffic problems will crop up instantly if things are done that way. Due attention must be paid to workers’ time and energy, and to the financial and material resources used by the people on their means of communication. Development of work zones along with residential zones in their service is the most natural way of decentralizing the urban population, reducing the city’s population densities and resolving the traffic problems. If the opposite is done, that is, if new facilities are built in the old urban area to create jobs, greater pressure will bear upon the already overstretched public transport system. The population densities of the old urban area will increase further, as understandably most workers will choose to stay in the already overcrowded residential zones in order to be close to their workplaces. Problems will crop up instantly if things are done this way, and there will be even more problems in ten to 15 years from now, when industrialization gains ground and the population is even larger. Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang used a poetic language to describe the axis that was to run through the central administration district built in keeping with their proposal: “This axis,” they wrote, “will give birth to a new core area of a ‘larger urban Beijing,’ which will be magnificent while suiting the practical needs of the city and its people. The administration center we are proposing will be linked with the old city in the east, with Haidian, the Fragrant Hills and other scenic and university areas in the west, and with Fengtai Railway Station, a hub of communication, in the south. Our proposal is based on the geographic conditions of the site we have chosen


10/15/2010 4:50:59 PM

124

BEIJING RECORD

for the administration district, and nothing farfetched will be involved in its building.” In the third part of the Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang compared the cost of building the administration district in the city and the cost of building it outside, which they classified into seven categories and four, respectively. “Currently,” they noted, “the area between Sanlihe and Gongzhufen is a scarcely populated farming area, where few villages are found. Construction space will be readily available there after the Land Reform. Besides, only a small sum of money will be needed to buy up local peasants’ homes (to be demolished for construction space). In comparison, to build government office buildings inside the city will be troublesome and time-consuming, and the cost will be much greater.” Examining the diagrammatic sketch used as an appendix to their joint proposal, we find that the architects also designed a business district in the south of the administration district they proposed. Though there is no description of the business district in writing, we can easily visualize what Beijing would have looked like had things been done in keeping with their proposal. The city would have had three core areas closely linked with one another while having different urban functions to perform. The walled old Beijing would have served as the core cultural area. The administration district to its west would have been good enough to serve as New China’s political center. The business district in its south would have been developed into a modern metropolis. Sufficient housing would have been available in all the three core areas, hence the minimized inter-area traffic. In other words, the root cause of traffic congestions would have been forestalled. Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang said in their joint proposal that on the basis of an overall plan for building a “larger urban Beijing,” they would proceed to work out a master plan for development of the “Greater Beijing” to be submitted to the government for examination. Obviously, they were following the example set by Patrick Abercrombie, who masterminded the Greater London Plan after completing his County of London Plan. However, plans for development of a “greater Beijing” were to be shelved due to a myriad of factors.


10/15/2010 4:50:59 PM

FA Reading

Chapter 4


10/15/2010 4:51:00 PM

Chapter Four Controversy on “Liang-Chen Proposal”

Opponents to “Liang-Chen Proposal” On April 10, 1950, Liang Sicheng wrote to Premier Zhou Enlai, asking him to read the Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government, or the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” Liang Sicheng also asked Premier Zhou Enlai spare him some time so that he could explain what the proposal was all about. The letter reads: To Mr. Zhou Enlai Dear Premier: Shortly after you came back from the Soviet Union, I sent you, via the Beijing Municipal People’s Government, a copy of the Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government that I and Chen Zhanxiang had prepared, hoping that you would take some time out from your tight schedule to read it. In that Proposal, we asked the government to be quick in making a decision on the location of the central administration district. We believe that this is the prerequisite for Beijing’s city planning, and that nothing can be done pending such a decision. As government organs and enterprises are eager to find sites for construction of buildings, two phenomena have emerged. On the one hand, some construction plans are now shelved in the absence of an overall planning for the city’s redevelopment, which are to be executed after proper sites are found. On the other hand, buildings are being constructed willfully, in disregard of the fact that planning is yet to be done for the entire city. This state of affairs is likely to make locations of government organs and enterprises totally inappropriate, thus adversely affecting not only government work but also the zoning and development of the city. The Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, which has begun working even though its establishment is yet to be approved by the Administrative Council of the Central People’s Government, has incurred censure and been urged to hurry up. Take for example the People’s Daily, the Xinhua


10/15/2010 4:51:00 PM

FA Reading

Controversy on “Liang-Chen Proposal”

127

Printing House, and those flourmills and brick kilns, which are facing difficulties due to an inability to find proper sites for construction of the structures they need. We keenly feel that the making of a decision on the location of the central administration district brooks no delay. (We just mean that a decision should be made on it in the first place. We do not mean that construction should start there right now.) I hope the government will make a decision as soon as possible. Some 100 copies of our joint proposal have been sent to leaders of the Central People’s Government, the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee and the Beijing Municipal People’s Government. I hope you’ll spare some time with me so that I can explain it to you while seeking your instruction if any. Along with the proposal there are a dozen diagrammatic sketches, which I will explain to you when we meet. If leaders meet to discuss our proposal, I hope you’ll allow me to be present as a guest. To sum up, Beijing’s reconstruction is being held back because of indecision on the location of the central administrative district. A decision must be made without delay. That’s why I am taking the liberty to write to you and make this humble request. I am ready to respond to your call for a meeting, at any time to the best of your convenience. With salute from sincerely yours Liang Sicheng 1

P.S. My telephone number: 4-2736 – 2739 – ex. 32

Ten days after the letter was sent, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang found themselves facing two powerful opponents, Zhu Zhaoxue, an engineer, and Zhao Dongri, an architect, both of whom worked with the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau. On April 20, Zhu and Zhao reaffirmed their support for developing the expected central administration district within the walled city. They had the following to state in an article titled Opinions on Beijing’s Construction Planning: “The old city of Beijing is a piece of historical heritage dating from some 1,000 years ago, a trove of wealth and art. Magnificent as such while fitted with modern infrastructure facilities, it meets the basic requirements the capital city of the people’s democratic republic should meet. For this

1 Letter to Premier Zhou Enlai, Collected Works of Liang Sicheng, 1st edition, Vol. V, China Construction Industry Publishing House, April 2001.


10/15/2010 4:51:01 PM

128

BEIJING RECORD

Proposal of Zhu Zhaoxue and Zhao Dongri on Beijing’s zoning (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)

reason, the old city of Beijing should be developed into the core of the national capital. Planning the capital’s redevelopment this way is a natural choice as it is rational while able to generate more economical results and is conducive to protection of the cultural monuments unique to the Chinese nation. It is true that the population densities within the old city are already high, but the problem can definitely be resolved as increasing numbers of workers are expected to shift to jobs available in suburban areas and more and more unemployed people to take jobs there. As the population in the city decreases, there will be no problem for us to demolish those structures too old for repairs and those without any cultural value, and this will leave more than sufficient space for construction of office structures. Meanwhile, the old city will become increasingly prosperous and in no way will it


10/15/2010 4:51:01 PM

FA Reading


129

decline. Other urban functional zones should be developed round the old city, with a system of roads linking the different parts of the city. This will forestall a concentration of traffic in the old city and damage to cultural monuments there.” Zhu and Zhao specified: “The administration district should be located in the core area of the city, covering an area with the wall linking Xuanwumen, Hepingmen and Qianmen gates as its southern border, extending to Jiangguomen Gate in the east and the Fuxingmen Gate in the west, through the East-West Chang’an Avenue. It lies to the south of the Forbidden City, in between Nanhai (the South Sea) and Zhongshan Park. It will be six square kilometers in area, large enough for a working population of 150,000. This way of planning the administration district can, first of all, forestall a situation in which cultural and scenic sites are mixed up with or surrounded by modern structures. Meanwhile, the features of ancient structures to the north of Tiananmen and the old city’s townscape will be kept. Second, the various administrative organs will be close to one another. Third, lying in the heart of the city, the administration district will enjoy easy access to the residential areas surrounding it. Fourth, the existing infrastructure can be used readily. This will cut the cost of construction by 25–50 percent (according to experiences of the Soviet Union in urban construction). Fifth, the CPC Central Committee and the Central Administrative Council shall be temporarily headquartered in areas round Zhongnanhai. In the future, their headquarters may be set up in Tiananmen Square or in the area on the right side of the square. This area, which is close to the Imperial Ancestral Temple (Tai Miao), the South Sea, Zhongshan Park and other cultural and scenic sites, shall serve as the national administration center. The administration center of the Beijing Municipal Government shall be built outside Hepingmen gate, in an area facing the Forbidden City in due north. Economic and financial organs of the government shall be based in the east part of the administration district. The west part of the district, already complete with infrastructure facilities, shall be reserved for judicial and education organs. So Tiananmen Square shall be the heart of the district, surrounded by both the national and local government organs. Work should be done to develop one more axis for the city which, starting at the east border of the city and ending at Babaoshan in 2 the west, will be as remarkable as the existing south-north axis.” 2 Opinions of Zhu Zhaoxue and Zhao Dongri on Planning for the Capital’s Reconstruction, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:51:01 PM

130

BEIJING RECORD

Proposal of Zhu Zhaoxue and Zhao Dongri for Beijing’s redevelopment (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)

Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang did not refute Zhu and Zhao in writing because in their joint proposal, the “Liang-Chen Proposal,” they had already commented on proposals for having the central administration district in the old city. Forty years later, Zhao Dongri still stuck to his stand for having the administration center built in the city. “Even today when China has attained a certain level of economic development, financial resources remain limited for repairs of those ancient structures now designated for preservation in accordance with law,” he said. “Some of them are decaying due to neglect. When Beijing was liberated, the combined floor space of Beijing’s traditional structures was 17 million square meters. In light of the conditions then, it would be unrealistic to have all those traditional structures preserved while carrying out massive construction for a new capital on the western suburbs. 3 That would be beyond the capability of any human being.” In an interview with the author on March 2, 1994, Chen Zhanxiang spoke on the central issue in the debate: “They raised a hue and cry about Tiananmen, arguing that Tiananmen could on no account be abandoned (as the heart of the administration district) because Chairman Mao had proclaimed the birth of the People’s Republic on the Tiananmen Rostrum. In my opinion, Tiananmen was irrelevant to the administration district. At 3 Zhao Dongri: On the Townscape of the Old Capital City and its Modernization, in Architecture Journal, December 1990.


10/15/2010 4:51:02 PM

FA Reading


131

The Tiananmen Rostrum, with the flanking reviewing platforms under construction in 1954. (by courtesy of Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design)

that time, Tiananmen Square was the only square in town and naturally, it was the venue for mass activities. It was good to use the square as a venue of ceremonies, but an administration district located elsewhere would not affect its importance as such.” Not long after the debate broke out, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang were criticized by some people for “acting defiantly against the Soviet experts,” for “opposing” the “leaning-on-one side” policy. The sharpest of all criticisms called their joint proposal an “attempt to negate the importance of Tiananmen as the national political center, which the entire Chinese 4 people love.” Such criticisms, however, awoke Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang to a realization that they had overlooked the redevelopment of old Beijing’s core area while concentrating on plans for an administration center in Beijing’s western suburbs. So they began working on a plan for the redevelopment of the Imperial City with Tiananmen as center, which they wanted to use as a supplement to the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” “This supplementary plan,” Chen Zhanxiang recalled, “was centered on the redevelopment of the area round the Sanhai in the city, which is linked with the city’s south-north axis that runs through Tiananmen Square in the south, crossing the East-West Chang’an Avenue. We hoped to make Beihai

4 Chen Zhanxiang: In Memory of Professor Liang Sicheng, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986.


10/15/2010 4:51:03 PM

132

BEIJING RECORD

Park, an imperial garden, suit the city’s needs for improvement. But Liang never made it public because the ‘Liang-Chen Proposal’ was being criticized. The text of the supplementary plan and its blueprints may have been lost, but I am certain that we did them, because I drew some of the diagrammatic sketches for it.” “The supplementary plan included our initial idea about how to rearrange the Golden Turtle-Jade Rainbow Bridge (Jin’ao-Yudong Qiao) below the Circular City (Tuan Cheng) in the southwest corner of Beihai Park, for which we produced a design with every detail duly taken into account. In keeping with our views on the redevelopment of old Beijing, the bridge was seen as the key link between the Sanhai area and the Jingshan Hill (that overlooks the Forbidden City in due north) and Dagaoxuan Hall, the Imperial Taoist Temple (to the northwest of the north gate of the Forbidden City). The ancient Golden Turtle-Jade Rainbow Bridge was overloaded with traffic. So we proposed that a new bridge be built to its south, that the two archways on the old bridge be moved to the area in between the heads of the old and new bridges and that the two bridges serve as the up and down traffic routes, respectively. We also called for expanding the square in front of Beihai Park for splitting the vehicle flows, having the east border of the square linked to Dagaoxuan Hall and retaining the two pavilions in front of the temple. According to our plan, the red wall in front of the Jingshan Hill should be turned into a long corridor with artistically carved windows, through which visitors may have a good view of the Forbidden City in their 5 front and the Jingshan Hill behind.” Though ill, Liang Sicheng, in high spirit, spent a whole night coloring a long scroll drawn to visualize his idea. “Dawn broke, and Liang, bending 6 over the scroll, was still working. He beamed when he did the last touch.” On October 27, 1950, Liang Sicheng, still ill, wrote to municipal leaders Peng Zhen, Nie Rongzhen, Zhang Youyu, Wu Han and Xue Zizheng, again appealing for a decision on the location of the central administration district so as to bring an end to disorder in the city’s reconstruction. “Two of the three basic functional zones in Beijing, the university zone and industrial zone, have had their locations decided by and large,” he said. “But a decision is yet to be made on the location of the Administration District of the Central People’s Government. As a result, work of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Committee has almost come to a halt. Over the past year, we have had numerous requests from government organs inquiring about the 5 Chen Zhanxiang: In Memory of Professor Liang Sicheng, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986. 6 Same as footnote 5.


10/15/2010 4:51:03 PM

FA Reading


133

expected administration district, in most cases either asking us for space for construction of office buildings or for advices on where to have office buildings constructed. We have been unable to reply because a decision is yet to be made on the location of the administration district. Unable to have their needs met, government organs are now doing things their own ways, having started or about to start construction of office buildings where they are currently based. If this state of affairs is allowed to continue, the ongoing construction will likely clash with plans to be worked out (for the city’s redevelopment). If that occurs, the newly constructed buildings will either have to be demolished or to be accepted as a fait accompli. In both cases, implementation of the city’s development plans will be impeded. At any rate, it is our people who will pay for the losses thus incurred. For the reasons cited above, we are trying hard to see a decision made as quickly as 7 possible on the location of the administration district.” The decision-makers, however, had already decided where the expected administration district would be located. In an interview with the author on August 20, 1999, Ma Ju, Peng Zhen’s secretary, said: “Nie Rongzhen was quite pleased when reading the first proposal made by Soviet experts on Beijing’s city planning. He then sent it to Chairman Mao. Chairman Mao said: ‘Do it accordingly.’ That’s how the guiding principle was set for Beijing’s city planning, under which Beijing was to expand with the old city as the core.”

City Walls: Preservation vs. Demolition When Liang Sicheng was rushing here and there to promote the “LiangChen Proposal,” a debate was arising as to whether Beijing’s city walls, built and rebuilt some 500 years ago during the Ming Dynasty, should be preserved or torn down.

Zhengyangmen Arrow Tower of 1915 (by courtesy of the Library of the Qinghua University School of Architecture)

7 Liang Sicheng: Letter to Comrade Peng Zhen, Mayor Nie Rongzhen, Vice-Mayors Zhang and Wu and Secretary General Xue of the Municipal Government, October 27, 1950 (by courtesy of Lin Zhu).


10/15/2010 4:51:03 PM

134

BEIJING RECORD

Demolition of city walls was by no means rare in contemporary China, as those ancient structures were seen by some as a hurdle to the development of Chinese cities. From 1912 to 1914, Shanghai’s city walls were torn down to facilitate building of roads, an act acclaimed as “having 8 effectively eliminated a barrier to efforts of the city for economic prosperity.” Shortly after he came home in 1928, Zhang Wu, a Ph.D. trained in the West, proposed that Beijing’s city walls be demolished to improve the city’s road 9 system. During the Liberation War (1946–1949), the wall surrounding a city or town would be demolished almost immediately after it fell to the Communists. Here is a typical case in point reported by the People’s Daily: After Dongming Town in Shandong Province, East China, was liberated, some 20,000 people organized themselves into shock brigades for the task of demolishing the wall surrounding the town, and they finished the job in just three days. “The jubilant masses kept shouting: We are no longer 10 ‘jailed’!” A similar story took place at Qixian Town in Henan Province, central China. Also according to the People’s Daily, “Answering a call of the (Communist-led) democratic government … some 20,000 people took part in voluntary labor to demolish the pillboxes left over by the Kuomintang troops and also the wall surrounding the town. Happily, they said they would use bricks and stones salvaged from the demolished pillboxes to build housing and they would grow crops on the demolished city wall and 11 the filled moat.” Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang called for preserving Beijing’s city walls. They stated in their joint proposal: “The city walls are artistic, historical ornaments on the city’s façade … an excellent park can be built on the flat tops of the walls, where people may relax by taking strolls or doing reading, or enjoy themselves in coolness in summer or over sights of the city. This is in fact a part of the local tradition. Openings may be dug through the walls 12 when necessary, to facilitate traffic into the city and out of it.”â•› But cries got increasingly loud for demolishing the city walls, forcing Liang Sicheng to fight back in defense of his stand for preserving them. Despite his poor health, he wrote an article titled On the Discussion on Whether to Have Beijing’s City Walls Preserved or Torn Down, which was 8 Tang Zhenchang: The History of Shanghai, 1st edition, Shanghai People’s Publishing House, October 1989. 9 General History of Beijing, Vol. 9, 1st edition, China Bookstore, October 1994. 10 Dongming Town after Liberation, the People’s Daily, Page 2, June 15, 1946. 11 Scenes of Liberated Qixian Town, the People’s Daily, Page 2, September 1, 1946. 12 Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang: Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government, Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986.


10/15/2010 4:51:04 PM

FA Reading


135

Guang’anmen Arrow Tower during the Republic of China period (by courtesy of the Library of the Qinghua University School of Architecture)

published in the May 7, 1950 issue of the Xin Jianshe (New Construction) magazine. In the article, he gave a systematic explanation to his view on Beijing’s city walls. “In no way will the city walls impede Beijing’s development,” he wrote. “Preservation of the city walls will be conducive, not detrimental, to efforts to develop Beijing into a modern city.” Further from an explanation to why the city walls should be preserved, Liang Sicheng elaborated on the principles of “zoning” and “controlled expansion” advanced in the “Liang-Chen Proposal” for Beijing’s city planning. “Planning for the development of


A close-up side view of Xizhimen Gate Tower (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1950)

10/15/2010 4:51:05 PM

136

BEIJING RECORD

a modern city,” he wrote, “should be done in such a way as to be conducive to the physical and mental health of the residents, hence the need for us to forestall an excess concentration of the population. To achieve the purpose, the city should be divided into different zones separated by green belts. This way of doing things is meant to ensure that residents will enjoy the convenience of working where they live, and that regular and necessary travels will be within reasonable distances, with the public transport system good enough to provide safe and easily accessible services. Moreover, rural landscapes will be near the residential zones, making it possible for residents to enjoy life in nature. Zoning will also facilitate government administration. Beijing’s population will exceed 4 million in 20 years from now, hence it is a must to use this zoning method to plan the city’s development. That means the ancient city walls are already there for a task given to them by modern times, the task of separating the zones located on either side of them.” Liang Sicheng proposed that the city walls be developed into a “continuous park,” which would be “unique” across the world. The moat that surrounded the walls, he said, “is ideal for rowing and angling and people may do skating on it when it is frozen in winter.” “Raised flower beds and lawns may be built on the flat tops of the walls, which are at least ten meters wide. The park, fitted with garden seats and beautiful with lilacs, roses and other flowers, will be large enough to allow in hundreds of thousands of visitors at a time. In summer evenings, people may come for coolness and leisure. Once atop the walls in bright, clear autumn days, one will have a good view of the entire city and sceneries far beyond — the rolling hills in the northwest, the vast expanse of flatland in the southeast, etc. By being so close to nature, people would become even more broadminded. Moreover, the corner arrow towers on the walls may be used as exhibition halls, reading rooms or teashops… These ancient walls are waiting for the performance of a new task, the task of serving the people by providing them with relief from the fatigue of work, of broadening their minds and enriching their life with our nation’s cultural heritage along with natural sceneries.” Yongdingmen Gate Tower, photo by Luo Zhewen, 1952


10/15/2010 4:51:06 PM

FA Reading


137

Liang Sicheng waged a tit-for-tat struggle against his opponents, refuting their views one by one. People who stood for demolition of the city walls alleged that those ancient structures would be barriers to traffic. In reply, Liang Sicheng said: The problem will be gone with a few new entrance and exit openings dug through the walls at the right locations. Moreover, effective control of vehicle flows is a requirement of key importance for planning modern road A sketch showing Liang Sicheng’s idea systems. On no account must vehicle flows on developing a hub of communicabe allowed to “flood” the city. Instead, road tion with Xizhimen as center (Drawn by Wang Menghui on the basis of a systems should be designed in such a way as talk given by Zheng Xiaoxie, in Collectto allow vehicles converge onto a few main ed Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996) roads while ensuring unimpeded communication between the different functional zones. The city walls can be readily used for control of vehicle flows. His opponents insisted that these walls, built by China’s feudal rulers to secure their powers, are no longer useful today and must therefore be torn down. Liang Sicheng commented: This view is naïve, full of ignorance. Wasn’t the Forbidden City once meant exclusively for emperors? Today it is the Palace Museum that belongs to the entire people. Remember: it was on Tiananmen (the main gate of the Forbidden City) that Chairman Mao proclaimed the birth of the People’s Republic of China! Never must we forget it is our laboring people who built these monumental structures. These structures are now rightful property of the people even though once they served the needs of emperors and were meant exclusively for their use. They are monuments to our nation’s history. The city walls, too, are historic monuments built by dint of hard work of our laboring people in the hundreds of thousands. The walls were built against certain historical background, during different periods of history and for different purposes. They are cultural heritage created in the course of Beijing’s physical development. Just for one thing: their contour, which resembles the Chinese character “凸”, stands as material evidence to some of the changes that took place in the city in the course of its development. Objects created by the laboring people during different periods of history


10/15/2010 4:51:06 PM

138

BEIJING RECORD

Arrow tower on the southeast corner on the wall surrounding Beijing’s Inner City (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

highlight Beijing’s growth and cultural achievements. We need to keep this in mind: all the ancient production techniques and all the ancient art artifacts must be attributed to the laboring people, even though in China’s history the birth of a new dynasty simply meant replacement of one emperor by another. This understanding definitely applies to ancient public works meant to facilitate the life and work of city people. … As engineering projects, Beijing’s city walls resulted from creative labor, testifying to the magnitude and the success of the collective labor involved in their building. The walls surrounding the city of Beijing were originally used as defense fortifications. Seen from an artistic perspective, however, they are superb, magnificent artworks in terms of their physical appearance and cultural connotation. The walls are simple in structure, but their imposing shape testifies to technological creations made by our people through collective labor, through their attempts to meet certain practical needs, to which they contributed their sweat and blood along with their wisdom. The walls are not heaps of bricks. They are monumental structures and artworks with a profound cultural connotation, and they are good enough to crystallize a creative boldness. Their magnificence, the profoundness of their cultural connotation and moreover, the changes that took place in them — all these are symbolic of the history they shared with the people of Beijing, something invariably to invoke revelry. The wall that surrounds the city of Smolensk of the Soviet Union, seven kilometers in circumference, is known as the “necklace of Russia.” It was largely destroyed during World War II, and the entire Soviet people


10/15/2010 4:51:07 PM

FA Reading


139

Zhengyangmen Gate Tower (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

took pains to rebuild it. Beijing’s city walls fully deserve the honor of being called “China’s necklace.” They are not only our own national treasures, but also a part of the cultural heritage belonging to the human race. Now that we have come to own so valuable a piece of historical heritage, how can we destroy it? Those for demolition of the walls asked people to consider the “positive” aspect of their proposal. Couldn’t the bricks salvaged be used for construction of new buildings? Doesn’t this “positive” aspect merit consideration? Here is how Liang Sicheng fought back: My refutation will be even stronger in this regard. It is true that reusable bricks can be salvaged from demolished walls, and that their sheer number won’t be small relative to the amount of bricks needed in Beijing’s reconstruction. But the layer of bricks on the surface of the walls is just about one meter thick, and the body of the walls is filled with a concrete of lime and earth. Rammed into the body of the walls some three or four or even five or six centuries ago, the concrete is now as hard as rock. If the walls are demolished, there will be 11 million tons of such concrete to be disposed of, according to some rough estimates. Let’s assume that one train with 20 cargo cars is dispatched every day to transport it away from the city. That means it would take 83 years to have the job done! May I ask how huge the quantity of truly useful cargo the train would carry instead during those 83 long years! Moreover, the


10/15/2010 4:51:08 PM

140

BEIJING RECORD

An extruding part of Beijing’s Inner City wall (photo by Wang Jun, September 2002)

concrete is too hard for plants while too poor in quality to be reused for construction of structures and roads. It is utterly useless. Explosives may have to be used for demolition of the city walls because the concrete is too hard to be broken up by using conventional tools. When that happens, our people will have to endure the deafening sound of explosion day after day for years in a row. Problems are not just limited to this point. The concrete from demolished cities walls, 11 million tons in quantity, would be a dozen times as large as the Jingshan Hill in volume. Where to build this “mountain” even if the concrete can be broken up and shipped away? Those for demolition of the city walls, it seems, may have never spent time thinking about the problems their proposal is bound to give rise, and maybe they are simply ignorant of the fact that the walls are filled with a concrete of rammed lime and earth. Let’s drop our debate for the time being and assume that Beijing’s city walls are of the same quality as the walls surrounding small county towns, and that bricks salvaged from demolished walls are used for building sewage pipes and the moats be filled with earth so that highways could be built on them. Well, can that way of doing things be truly cost-effective, amounting to “killing two birds with one stone”? People for preserving the city walls will definitely give this answer: Dear friends, thank you for being so keen to Beijing’s development, but there is plenty of open space around the walled city of Beijing. So is there the need to use so much human labor, to employ a task force the size of one army corps or two, to secure the space for a ring road? The same amount of human labor can instead be used to accomplish things much


10/15/2010 4:51:09 PM

FA Reading


141

A section of Beijing’s Inner City wall still seen today (photo by Wang Jun, September 2002)

more beneficial to the people. Our brick-making industry is bound to boom as we keep growing in strength in construction. So it is unnecessary to obtain bricks your way. If things are done your way, a huge amount of human resources will be wasted. Besides, a national treasure, I mean the city walls along with the moat, will be ruined. Beijing is magnificent in part because of the walls left over from ancient times. The moat is indispensable to Beijing’s public hygiene. The debate shouldn’t end without a consensus. The fact is that all sensible participants in the debate have concluded that on no account must the city walls be torn down. The walls, they agree, must instead be preserved and repaired. The walls, along with the moat, must be properly used under sound planning, so as to continue to exist as monumental structures, as something not only of cultural value but also capable of playing a big role in modern life. Seeing the city walls, unique in structure, simple while magnificent in shape, we will love Beijing even more dearly and cherish our national spirit more profoundly. This “battle cry” for protection of Beijing’s city walls, however, failed to prevent such monumental structures from being torn down. Beginning 1952, the wall surrounding Beijing’s Outer City was demolished section by section, either by organized voluntary labor contributed by Beijing residents or by work units who were urged to do so to facilitate construction of their own office buildings. At a national conference on financial and economic work on August 12, 1953, Mao Zedong said: “Decisions on


10/15/2010 4:51:11 PM

142

BEIJING RECORD

big matters such as the demolition of the city walls were made by the Party 13 Central Committee and executed by the government.” Liang Sicheng broke down for working on the “Liang-Chen Proposal” and for having to fight an exhausting battle to protect Beijing’s city walls. The lung disease he had been suffering got worse and his conditions were so 14 bad that he became bedridden, too weak to raise even a pen.

In Defense of Old Beijing After recovery from illness, Liang Sicheng published a lengthy article titled The Architectural Tradition and Heritage of Our Great Motherland in two installments in the People’s Daily on February 19 and 21 of 1951. It was in fact a popular science reading about the basics of ancient Chinese architecture and city building. Again, he appealed for “attention to and protection of our fine architectural tradition, so as to promote today’s effort to create things new by carrying it forward.” “Among the cultures that have survived to this day,” he wrote, “The Chinese culture is the oldest, the most sustaining, except the culture of our neighbor, India, which is roughly as old. Our architectural system is also the oldest and the most sustaining.” He noted that the so-called “post and beam construction,” also known as “skeleton structuring,” constitutes the most salient feature of the Chinese architecture, which not only allows built structures to fully perform the designed functions but also highlights the unique beauty of Chinese architecture in a natural way. The method allows flexible arrangement of the construction space while making built structures suit the varying natural conditions in different regions. Moreover, it fits modern construction techniques well. Once again Liang Sicheng called for “utmost effort” to protect the old Beijing, whose “magnificence finds no match across the world”: The city of Beijing as we see today furnishes the best example of the dialectics followed in its development. In pattern, the south-north axis, which is seven kilometers long, constitutes a salient feature of the city. Sitting astride this axis are numerous large, historic monuments. Overlooking the city from atop the Jingshan Hill, one gets a full view of the axis, which runs straight into the city through Yongdingmen Gate in the south of the Outer City, and stretches due north through the Forbidden

13 Mao Zedong: Oppose Bourgeois Ideas within the Party, Selected Works of Mao Zedong, 1st edition, Vol. V, the People’s Publishing House, April 1997. 14 Liang Sicheng: Letter to Comrade Peng Zhen, Mayor Nie Rongzhen, Vice-Mayors Zhang and Wu and Secretary General Xue of the Municipal Government, October 27, 1950 (by courtesy of Lin Zhu).


10/15/2010 4:51:11 PM

FA Reading


143

City until it reaches the Bell and Drum Towers in the north. No other city in the world has so imposing a pattern, with so neat an arrangement of the built spaces. Neither is there another city so splendid with those golden glazed tiles, those beautifully painted timber structures, those palaces and temples organized into a harmonious whole. The Forbidden City, with a hundred palace halls inside, is the most brilliant architectural masterpiece not to be found anywhere else. Also unique are its zoning and the order of its streets, which are so perfectly arranged. The city’s green spots include those palace gardens slightly slanting to the west of the axis, the public entertainment area of the Shichahai lake area in the north, and the Jingshan Hill which, covered by cypress and pine trees, faces the Forbidden City in due south. Few cities have so many gardens that match one another in color and architectural style. Beijing was definitely the best-planned city in ancient times. Even today, it cannot be planned better by using the most advanced planning theories. In April, Liang Sicheng published one more article — one more popular reading, this time in the Xin Guancha (New Observation) magazine. Titled Beijing — the Best Example of City Planning, the article gave an account of how the site was chosen for a city to be known as Beijing, how the city was rebuilt four times over the past millennium, how the local water bodies were related to the city’s development, the spatial layout of the city, the characteristics of the city’s axis, and the city’s road system. “Thanks to a remarkable arrangement of its built spaces,” Liang Sicheng wrote, “Beijing epitomizes the traditional architectural methods of the Chinese nation and its wisdom and boldness as manifested through city planning... The city showcases the brilliant achievements of our nation in its endeavor to adapt itself to nature, to bring nature under control and change it. As an architectural masterpiece, the city has no match in this world... This (Beijing) is a great national heritage, the most valued treasure of our people — is there anyone who doubts this?” Liang Sicheng gave a detailed description of the aesthetic impact old Beijing was able to generate: Let’s start with the Gate of Ever Lasting Stability (Yongdingmen) in the extreme south of Beijing. The city’s axis runs due north through the gate, and on either side of it stand two largely symmetrical clusters of structures, the Temple of Heaven and the Altar of the God of Agriculture. Through the middle of a straight street with buildings on either side, the axis continues extending due north, reaching the towering Sun-Facing Gate (Zhengyangmen), the first major structure sitting astride on it. In front of the Sun-Facing Gate there is a huge archway and a bridge,


10/15/2010 4:51:11 PM

144

BEIJING RECORD

Sketch drawn by Liang Sicheng, showing the development of Beijing’s shape and pattern (Source: Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, Vol. IV, 1986)

which were as if guarding the entrance of the Inner City. This is just the beginning of our story about Beijing’s axis. From the Sun-Facing Gate, 15 the axis extends further north, to Zhonghuamen Gate , and then from Zhonghuamen Gate to Tiananmen, the main gate of the Imperial City, through the middle of the Thousand-Step Corridor (Qianbulang), the Imperial Road. The length of the Thousand-Step Corridor and the width of the square both match perfectly with the size of the key structures to the south and north of the square, showcasing a boldest arrangement of construction spaces.”Once forbidden, the square has been seized back by the people! From the middle of Tiananmen, the axis continues extending north, through a series of palace gates and courtyards, through palace halls magnificent with roofs of golden glazed tiles shining under the blue sky. Then the south half of the axis ends in the middle of the ridge of the Hall of Supreme Harmony (Tai He Dian). From that point on, the axis continues extending north to reach the Gate of Divine Prowess (Shenwumen), the north gate of the Forbidden City. Structures along this section of the axis are less imposing but, abruptly, and so abruptly, the Jingshan Hill is there, standing due north, facing the Gate of Divine Prowess. The hill serves as a foil to the Forbidden City, and the pavilion atop the hill lies

15 Initially built in the early 15th century during the reign of the Ming Dynasty’s Emperor Yongle (1403–1424), the structure was demolished in 1959 when a greening project was carried out in the square — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:51:13 PM

FA Reading


145

exactly in the middle of the north section of the axis. The ancient capital’s main structures — the Gate of Earthly Peace (Di’anmen), the Forbidden City, and the Bell and Drum Towers — all sit astride the axis. When reaching the Bell Tower, the axis has a perfect, well planned ending. At this point, the axis ceases to extend further north. Towering to its east and west on the city wall are two gate towers, the gate towers of Andingmen (Gate of Stability) and Deshengmen (the Gate of Moral Victory). No other city in the world features so great a boldness in overall arrangement of built structures in so vast a construction space! Liang Sicheng argued that with regard to protection of this ancient capital, attention must be paid to the city in its entirety, not only to individual structures in it: With regard to protection of monumental buildings, we must take good care of not only individual halls, palaces and towers, but also the structures in their surrounding areas and their environment. On no account must we be indifferent or tolerant toward damage, whether direct or indirect, caused by an ill-planned environment that leads to structures mismatching their surroundings. Imperialist aggression gave rise to numerous imitations — good or poor — of the so-called “modern” buildings,

Sketch drawn by Liang Sicheng, showing the public park he hoped to be built on the flat tops of Beijing’s city walls (Source: Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, Vol. IV, 1986)


10/15/2010 4:51:15 PM

146

BEIJING RECORD

those high-rise structures or “skyscrapers” now found in a jumble in some of our cities. As a result, these cities are losing their original demeanor. With our awareness of environment benumbed, we have either become used to this kind of irregularity or just feel helpless at the sight of our traditional structures, beautiful as they are, sandwiched in between things that do not match them in architectural style. This kind of blunders must be forestalled in rebuilding of our cities. There must be sound planning for reconstruction, so that there won’t be any ugly, ill-planned structures. Once again, Liang Sicheng appealed for preserving Beijing’s city walls, and he drew a sketch to visualize the “continuous public park” he hoped would be built on the flat tops of the city walls: There are vast open spaces on the flat tops of the walls, where flowers may be grown, park seats provided and pavilions built at regular intervals. Once atop the wall or in one of the corner towers, visitors may overlook the moat below and the vast expanses of flatland beyond, or enjoy the sight of the Forbidden City and the Western Hills when looking into the distance. This pubic park will be most special — a “continuous” public park 39.75 kilometers in circumference that surrounds the city! “Beijing must be modernized but its cultural character must be kept and most of its monumental structures must be preserved,” he insisted. “We must follow the principle of giving due consideration to both the ancient and the modern so that ancient and the modern can complement each other.”

Public park built in September 2002 beyond a surviving section of the Ming Dynasty wall (photo by Wang Jun on October 15, 2002)


10/15/2010 4:51:18 PM

FA Reading


147

To justify his stand, Liang Sicheng cited architectural theories of the Soviet Union and the country’s practices in construction, in particular the reconstruction of Novgorod, an ancient city reputed as the “museum of Russia.” Under plans worked out under Alexei Shchusev, academician of the Academy of Architecture of the USSR, ancient town planning principles were followed to keep the original character of the city while modern facilities were built to improve it. Gardens were built in the vicinity of ancient structure and some ancient complexes were designated for preservation as national treasures. The authorities rejected proposals for construction of buildings seen as “vulgar” in style. Meanwhile, new projects in “Napoleonic style,” the city’s predominant architectural style, were accepted. Liang Sicheng concluded: “How to build Beijing into the ‘museum of China’? Let us learn from the City of Novgorod, from Alexei Shchusev.” Not long after the articles were published, the “Liang-Chen Proposal” was rejected, though not publicly. The Dongjiaominxiang playground was chosen as a site for construction of government office buildings, despite Liang Sicheng’s persistent call for turning it into a public park. On August 15, 1951, Liang Sicheng wrote to Premier Zhou Enlai, asking him to “spare a little time for making a special instruction to us or the concerned central government departments, so that 16 the erroneous decision can be corrected before it is too late.”

Office complex of the former Ministry of Fuel Industry built on the Dongjiaominxiao playground (photo by Wang Jun on October 15, 2002)

16 Liang Sicheng: Letter to Premier Zhou Enlai on Planning for Chang’an Avenue, in Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986.


10/15/2010 4:51:20 PM

148

BEIJING RECORD

The letter failed to result in what Liang Sicheng hoped to see. In a short time, office buildings began springing up there, to be used by the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Fuel Industry, the Ministry of Textile Industry and the Ministry of Foreign Trade. Massive construction within the city was now certain. Liang Sicheng was confused, and in confusion he was to criticize the paramount leader, Chairman Mao, for ignorance of architecture, according to Wang Jiqi, former secretary general of the Architectural Society of China: Liang Sicheng said: Chairman Mao knows how to handle political and economic affairs but he is not in a position to supervise over construction because he knows nothing about architecture. In reply, Peng Zhen told Liang Sicheng the following: At the beginning, we too felt that the layman cannot lead the professional. But thinking about this question again and again we have concluded that only the layman can be in a position to lead the professional. If your logic is right, Chairman Mao would be a “layman” in military affairs because he is neither a tank man nor a foot 17 soldier. Mei Lanfang can only play female roles and he cannot play male roles. But he is competent as president of the Academy of Traditional Chinese Opera. No person can be a professional in everything, but a 18 person can be a leader provided he is capable of making sound policies.

“Death” of Liang-Chen Proposal “The leaders made no reply to the proposal Liang Sicheng and I jointly made,” Chen Zhanxiang recalled in an interview with the author on March 2, 1994. “Meanwhile, work was already being done in accordance with plans worked out by the Soviet experts. Before long, construction began along East Chang’an Avenue on the office buildings of the ministries of textile industry, fuel industry, foreign trade and public security.” Nevertheless, city planning was yet to be officially done and as a result, construction was in a sort of jumble. Ongoing construction projects were scattered, occupying the bulk of the open space available within the walled city. Construction of office structures outpaced construction of infrastructure facilities, and housing construction fell short of the increase in population. Due to disorganization, buildings were often constructed in places to be 19 opened for laying pipes. 17 Mei Lanfang (1894–1961) was a recognized master performing artist of Beijing Opera, China’s “national opera” — Tr. 18 Xia Lu and Shen Yang: An Interview with Wang Jiqi on February 2, 1983, by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture. 19 Dong Guangqi: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, May 1998.


10/15/2010 4:51:20 PM

FA Reading


149

In the spring of 1952, Xue Zizheng, secretary general of the Beijing Municipal Government and concurrently deputy head of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, asked the Commission to work out a master urban plan for Beijing. Since there was no consensus on Beijing’s city planning, he said, two plans may be produced to be submitted to the Beijing Municipal Party Committee simultaneously for examination. So Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong, alias Leon Hoa, were asked to head two teams charged with producing their respective plans. Nevertheless, the guiding principle was the same for both, that is, the administration center must be located in the city. Hua Lanhong was born in Beijing in 1912 as son of Hua Nangui. At 16, he went to study in France. After graduating from Ecole Speciale des Travaux Publics, his father’s Alma Mater, in 1936, he was admitted into the Architecture Department of the Paris-based Académie des Beaux-Arts. With a degree in architectural engineering, he opened an architect’s firm in Marseilles, where he designed some 50 projects including a veterinarian hospital in suburban Paris, one of a few modernist structures in France at that time. In 1951, Hua Lanhong, who had joined the Communist Party of France, abandoned his property and returned home with his family. On Liang Sicheng’s proposal, he was made second chief architect of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission. Among the Commission’s staff members, Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong were quite exceptional in that both were “Westernized.” Chen spoke English better than Chinese and Hua, a fluent speaker of French. Hua was half Polish. Like his father, he married a woman of Polish origin when studying in Paris. Both Chen and Hua were strong in character. They were good friends though they often argued on academic matters. Hua stood for having the

The veterinarian hospital designed by Hua Lanhong


10/15/2010 4:51:21 PM

150

BEIJING RECORD

city walls demolished, though it is not clear whether this was attributed to his father’s influence or his personal liking of modernist architecture. The two men fell out when it came to Beijing’s city planning. “Yes, we were good friends but we quarreled sometimes,” Chen Zhanxiang recalled in the interview with the author on March 2, 1994. “He said the city walls should be torn down and I was strongly in favor of having them preserved. No master plan could be produced without a decision on the fate of the city walls. I told him that on no account must the walls be torn down. Since neither of us was to give in, it was decided that we would produce two separate plans, he to work out Plan A and I, Plan B.” In Plan A, Hua Lanhong proposed quite a lot of changes to the shape of old Beijing. According to the plan, there shall be two boulevards in the southeast and southwest of the Inner City to extend into the Outer City, meeting Zhengyangmen (the Sun-Facing Gate) at Zhengyangmen Street. There shall also be two other boulevards respectively in the northeast and northwest of the Inner City to extend into Xinjiekou and Beixinqiao areas. Meanwhile, the main railway line should be extended into the city center through a tunnel, but the existing main railway station beyond Qianmen Gate should continue to be used. In Plan B, Chen Zhanxiang called for preserving the chessboard pattern of roads characteristic of old Beijing. The designed boulevards should cross with the city’s ring road, not to extend into the walled city. No railway line

Beijing urban master plan (Plan A) (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)


10/15/2010 4:51:28 PM

FA Reading


151

Beijing urban master plan (Plan B) (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

should be extended into the city. A new main railway station should be built outside the walled city, beyond Yongdingmen, the Gate of Eternal Stability. The fate of the city walls was discussed in both plans. There were four alternatives in both: to be preserved in their entirety, to be torn down totally, to be torn down partially, and to be torn down but with the gate towers preserved. According to Plan A, sites of the various government organs shall be “appropriately scattered” in the city. In comparison, Plan B called for developing an administration center in the area bordering the Ping’anli, 20 Dongsi Shitiao, Caishikou and Ciqikou streets in the city. It is obvious that Chen Zhanxiang had reluctantly withdrawn from his previous stand for developing the administration center outside the city, in the city’s western suburbs. Recalling his experiences during that period, Chen Zhanxiang still keenly felt the pressure brought to bear upon him. “The leaders knew that I had been arguing with Hua Lanhong on the fate of the city walls, and they sent people to investigate. Then a meeting was held,

20 Dong Guangqi: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, May 1998.


10/15/2010 4:51:29 PM

152

BEIJING RECORD

and I was told that the question of the city walls was actually a question of ‘class feelings.’ Frightening, wasn’t it? I found myself totally isolated. After the meeting, all the three persons who had worked with me changed sides. So my team was disbanded.” In June 1999, 22 years after his settlement in Paris, Hua Lanhong, 87, came back to Beijing to attend the Twentieth World Congress of Architects. The author met him for an interview on June 22, and it seemed that he still stuck to his stand on the fate of Beijing’s city walls. “The ‘Liang-Chen Proposal,’” he said, “epitomized Liang’s stand for keeping the ancient city of Beijing wholly intact, for keeping it as historical city, as a ‘history museum.’ In his opinion, it wouldn’t do to have all the central government organs based in the city, and therefore he proposed development of a new urban center in the city’s western suburbs as home to the administration center. I didn’t agree with him. I differed from Soviet experts on many question. But I did agree with them on one question: Beijing has a remarkable, intricate pattern and new construction projects should be located along its axis.” The call in Plan A for decentralization of the government office buildings may be attributed to Hua Lanhong’s experiences in Paris. “At that time,” he told the author, “I thought it was unnecessary for government organs to concentrate in one area or along a main road. This idea of mine may have stemmed from what I had seen in Paris, where sites of government organs are quite scattered, this ministry located here and that ministry there. I thought if the various government organs are located in different areas, an excess concentration of traffic (in the city center) could be avoided. Moreover, each area would be home to at least one government organ and there would be at least one sizable building there. So Beijing’s townscape would be improved.” “My father stood for having all the city walls torn down,” he continued. “In contrast, Liang Sicheng wanted to have the city walls wholly preserved. I stood for partial demolition of the city walls. To facilitate traffic flows, what needed to be done was no more than having a few entrance and exit openings dug through the walls. Problem was with the form of the city. The walls actually separated the city from areas outside it, areas having been designated for development. Meanwhile, it would be unwise if the walls were torn down completely due to their overall shape.” Hua Lanhong understood the stand of Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang as one of calling for “keeping the ancient city wholly intact.” This understanding is still shared by many Chinese architects. The judgment is based on Liang Sicheng’s comparison of old Beijing to the “museum of China,” which was misunderstood as calling for “keeping


10/15/2010 4:51:29 PM

FA Reading


153

21

old Beijing wholly intact as the ‘museum of China.’â•›” â•‡ Critics of the “LiangChen Proposal” said, “A new, modern urban area existing side by side with old Beijing virtually in ruins — this is simply unimaginable. With an area of no more than 62 square kilometers, the old city is just a small castle, and 22 it is impossible to keep it wholly intact as a museum or a cultural zone.” Years after he was retired, Chen Gan, a colleague of Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang at the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, remained critical of the stand taken by the two architects. In his opinion, the call for keeping Beijing as a museum of architectural art “sounded good,” but was “utterly unworkable.” He said, “Just for one thing: the huge amount of garbage to be disposed of would make this ‘museum’ a ‘mirage.’” In the early 1950s, Chen Gan said, there were garbage dunes the size of small hills at the south side of the East-West Chang’an Avenue which, seen from afar, could be mistaken as a part of the city wall. “Were Liang’s proposal accepted, efforts would have been concentrated on building a new urban area and at the same time, the old city would have been kept as an enclosed hall for exhibiting ancient buildings. Yes, those ancient buildings are beautiful, but could we, the Chinese, have felt proud of them when overlooking them from atop those garbage hills or by standing on streets flooded with dirty 23 water?” Architects Wu Liangyong and Liu Xiaoshi spoke in defense of Liang Sicheng’s stand for preservation of the ancient city in its entirety. “On the question of old Beijing’s reconstruction, he (Liang Sicheng) did not mean to keep everything in the old city intact, even those small stone tablets on walls of courtyards (supposedly able to ward off evil spirits). He said not everything would merit protection. While meant to suit the new needs, he insisted, reconstruction should be designed in such a way as to ensure maximum protection of the city’s historical, invaluable outlook. He argued that on no account must the city be changed beyond recognition and lose 24 its immeasurably great historical value.” Never was Liang Sicheng so rigid in thinking as to stand for keeping even Beijing’s garbage dunes. The fact is that he spoke highly of Beijing’s 21 A Draft Summary of Beijing’s City Construction (excerpts), in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995. 22 Beijing Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1st edition compiled and published by the Editorial Board of the History of Beijing, April 1986. 23 Collected Works of Chen Gan — Thoughts on Beijing’s Development compiled by the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Designing, 1996. 24 Wu Liangyong and Liu Xiaoshi: Preface to Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, in Vol. I of Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, December 1982.


10/15/2010 4:51:29 PM

154

BEIJING RECORD

success in getting rid of the garbage left over from the old times. In Urban Construction of the People’s Capital published by the Popular Science Readings Publishing House in December 1952, he marveled at the achievements the new government had made since 1949 in improving the city’s public hygiene and transport. The garbage dunes were all gone, he noted, and also gone were those days when hutong lanes and alleys were muddy in rainy days and were so dusty in fine days as to be popularly known as “incense burners.” Moreover, flooding of local rivers and lakes had been brought under control. “What has been done in Beijing’s reconstruction is unprecedented,” he wrote. “But this is just the beginning of an endeavor to build an even better future for Beijing.” In an article published in the People’s Daily on July 14, 1957, he had the following to say: “Just in the first year after liberation, 349,000 tons of garbage left over from the Ming and Qing dynasties was transported out of Beijing, along with 610,000 tons of human excrement. Such achievements, though small relative to other achievements, are indeed miraculous, good 25 enough to merit our admiration.”â•› 26 Lin Zhu, widow of Liang Sicheng from his second marriage , still remembers how Liang Sicheng defended his stand for preserving the ancient capital city: Sicheng once told me: They (his critics) said that by comparing Beijing to a museum, I meant to have Beijing kept like an antique. That was not true. The fact was that in working out the Proposal on the Location of the Central Administrative District of the Central People’s Government, both Chen Zhanxiang and I took full account of Beijing’s status as the national capital, as a city to be redeveloped. I was criticized for basing my thinking of city planning on protection of the old city, not on its development. Ancient Beijing is unique in the world, and its city planning must of course be based on its protection. Our planning, as a matter of fact, was meant to promote Beijing’s redevelopment. Planning will be unnecessary if development is not duly considered. In advocating protection of this ancient city, I definitely did not mean that nothing in it should be changed. Places like the slum area of Longxugou must be changed. But why must the two towers standing side by side in Twin-Pagoda Qingshou Temple on West Chang’an Avenue be torn town? Remember: the towers were built during the Jin Dynasty (1115–1234)! Why not preserve the towers and turn the area into a small park? It won’t be late to have them

25 Liang Sicheng: Why I love Our Party So Dearly, Page 2, the People’s Daily of July 14, 1957. 26 Lin Huiyin died in 1955. Lin Zhu married Liang Sicheng on June 17, 1962 — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:51:30 PM

FA Reading


155

demolished when the park proves to be unable to produce the desired effect. The road in front of the Red Square of Moscow has a curve so that an ancient building not far away can be protected. This way of doing 27 things is meant to respect history. Despite all the effort made by Liang Sicheng for self-defense, the “LiangChen Proposal” was seen as a synonym of “conservatism,” of “stereotyped thinking.” Ironically, Plan A, which was worked out by Hua Lanhong, was misinterpreted almost the same way as Chen Zhanxiang’s Plan B, though the two plans were vastly different. Both plans were submitted to the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau and the various district Party committees for comments. A vast majority of the officials stood for having the city walls torn down. Keep the Forbidden City intact and the city’s cultural heritage would be sufficiently protected — that was their logic. These officials also proposed that the various working departments of the central government be located along the loop line linking the Caishikou, Xinjiekou, Beixinqiao and Suanshikou areas in old Beijing. In their opinion, the site of the central government and the CPC Central Committee should meanwhile be expanded to include the area south of Tiananmen, leaving the Forbidden City behind, where 28 buildings high enough to overshadow the Forbidden City should be built. In August 1953, Liang Sicheng was invited to brief deputies to the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress on the two master plans. What he said indicated that he had somehow compromised the stand he had always taken. He had come to recognize, though reluctantly, construction of government office buildings near Tiananmen Square as a fait accompli and had also accepted the policy of “enabling city construction to serve the needs of production.” The architect had ceased to insist that most buildings to be constructed in the city must not be higher than two or three storeys. He suggested instead that some four- or five-storey buildings may be built and that in some isolated cases, buildings with a dozen or even more storeys could be allowed. Nevertheless, he continued to insist that construction must be guided by “overall planning and design.” “A large city can be compared to a large

27 Lin Zhu, Architect Liang Sicheng, 1st edition, Tianjin Science and Technology Press, July 1996. 28 Opinions of the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau and the Party Committees of the Urban Districts on the Two Master Urban Plans for Beijing, July 17, 1953; quoted by Gao Yilan and Wang Menghui in Liang Sicheng’s Thinking on Protection of Ancient Cities and City Planning, Issues 1–5 of 1991 of the World Architecture magazine.


10/15/2010 4:51:30 PM

156

BEIJING RECORD

‘factory,’” he said. “Poor planning will adversely affect ‘production’ and the 29 ‘workers’ health.” In short, Liang Sicheng had to be realistic. The “Liang-Chen Proposal” called for developing a new axis for the city centered in the anticipated administration district on the western suburbs. Now that development of the administration district in the city was certain, he had to propose instead that the existing axis be retained and developed so that the shape of the city would be least affected. Speaking to the “people’s deputies,” he specified that the axis be extended to Nanyuan, the South Imperial Hunting Ground, 11.5 kilometers due south of Tiananmen. He also called for building a railway station somewhere outside Yongdingmen special for passenger trains. “This railway station will be Beijing’s axis shown in the 1953 Beijing Urban used by incoming and departing imMaster Plan portant guests and delegations,” he (Source: In Praise of the Axis by Li Zhun, 1995) said. “After alighting trains at the station or planes at the Nanyuan Airport, they may drive directly to Tiananmen Square along a straight south-north road. As a result, the existing southnorth axis will receive even more prominence and therefore become even 30 greater.” This proposal was later included into a master urban plan worked out by Soviet experts. It was to become a principle for Beijing’s city planning, which has been upheld until now, seen as “of key importance in efforts to keep the original shape of the city while striving for developing its original 31 planning concept.” Neither Plan A nor Plan B was able to win understanding and support from the authorities. Some leaders saw both plans as “not in keeping with 29 Liang Sicheng: Initial Opinions on Planning for the Capital’s Construction, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 30 Same as footnote 29. 31 Li Zhun: In Praise of the Axis — Old Stories about Beijing’s City Planning, Beijing Planning and Construction magazine, 3rd issue, 1995.


10/15/2010 4:51:30 PM

FA Reading


157

the Party’s idea on Beijing’s renovation and expansion,” as “containing views sharply differing from ours on major questions of principle, such as what should be done with the city walls and ancient buildings, the distribution 32 of industries and the width of roads.” Both plans were rejected in the end. In June 1953, before Liang Sicheng spoke to the “people’s deputies,” the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee set up a planning team comprising exclusively of Party members so that Beijing’s city planning would be handled by the Party directly. The team, which worked under the guidance of some Soviet advisors, made revisions to Plan A and Plan B and then produced its own master plan for the capital city. From then on, Liang Sicheng, Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong were all excluded from the work to plan Beijing’s development. The team used Changguanlou (Hall of Heart-Cheering View) in the Beijing Zoo as its office, and was therefore popularly known as the “Changguanlou Team.” In November, this “Changguanlou Team” submitted to the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee the Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing, which was then sent to the CPC Central Committee for examination along with a report of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee. The report had the following to state: Back in 1949, the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission began working to plan the city’s redevelopment. In the process Comrade P. V. Abramov, Comrade M. G. Barannikov and other Soviet experts contributed a lot of valuable suggestions. They also criticized erroneous ideas that called for “repudiating the old city as the basis (of Beijing’s redevelopment) while building a new Beijing in the city’s western suburbs” and for “forbidding construction of high-rise buildings in the city.” Over the past years, the Commission has done a lot of preparatory work to formulate an urban master plan for Beijing. After repeated discussion, it produced two draft plans in spring of this year. Nevertheless, some technical personnel of the Commission stuck to views different from ours on questions related to renovation and expansion of the capital city, in particular on what should be done with the city’s walls and ancient buildings, on which no consensus could be reached despite repeated discussion. In order to accelerate the formulation of a draft plan to meet the urgent needs of the capital city’s construction, and also to forestall unnecessary disputes in the process, in late June of this year we set up a special group comprising some veteran cadres and some young technical 32 Gao Yilan and Wang Menghui: Liang Sicheng’s Thinking on Protection of Ancient Cities and City Planning, Issues 1–5 of 1991 of the World Architecture magazine.


10/15/2010 4:51:31 PM

158

BEIJING RECORD

personnel who are Party members, so that the question of Beijing’s city planning can be studied within the Party. Leading Party members at the various bureaus of the Municipal Government were all involved in the job. On the basis of the two draft plans previously proposed by the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, the group has produced this Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing, which 33 is the third revised draft. The Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing was the first of its kind ever submitted to the central authorities by the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee. Let’s see how the ancient city of Beijing was judged: Beijing is renowned as our country’s capital city. In terms of city planning and architectural art, it crystallizes the achievements made by the great Chinese nation in history and the wisdom of our laboring people. It is magnificent in shape and pattern, featuring a neatly arranged symmetrical order and an explicitly designed axis. At the same time, it showcases the low productivity of the feudal times and the limitations of feudalism. The city developed amid class antagonism. It was constructed in accordance with the will of the feudal rulers and was designed to serve their needs. Palace structures and imperial temples are the most important buildings in the city, with the Forbidden City forming the core of the city, and the city is surrounded by walls one within another. These testify to the egoism of those feudal emperors, to their intention to safeguard their feudal rule and fortify themselves against peasant uprisings. Site of leading central organs

Location of the administration center in the Beijing Urban Master Plan of 1953 (Source: On the Anticipated Administration Center by Li Zhun, 1995)

As regards the anticipated central administration district, the Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing explicitly stated that

33 Zheng Tianxiang: Several Questions Regarding the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing, Records of Travel, 1st edition, Beijing Publishing House, August 1994.


10/15/2010 4:51:31 PM

FA Reading


159

it should be located in the core area of the old city: Beijing is capital of our great motherland. Because of this, it is a must for us to designate the core area of the city as home to the leading organs of the Party Central Committee, to serve not only as center of the entire city of Beijing but also as the national center loved by the entire Chinese people. This core area should be expanded to the Xinjiekou-CaishikouSuanshikou-Beixinqiao loop line, large enough to be home to major leading organs of the central and Beijing municipal governments. (Not all leading organs will be located there. Besides, this area should be fitted with infrastructure facilities, schools and residential estates that are deemed necessary.) Tiananmen Square should also be expanded, to where the Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate are located. (The square is 11 hectares large, and through expansion, it will be two or three times larger.) High-rise buildings should be constructed round the square to suit the area’s status as the country’s administration center. The Zhongnanhai area should be expanded westward, to reach the West Huangchenggen (the west section of the wall surrounding the Imperial City), so that it will be good enough as home to the major central organs. The need for Beijing to go for industrialization was stressed in the Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing: Our capital city should serve as the national political, economic and cultural center. It is especially important for us to develop it into a powerful industrial base and a national center for scientific and technological development. The greatest weakness of Beijing lies in the fact that its industrial foundation is too weak. This is not commensurate with its status as the national capital and is detrimental to its socialist construction and socialist transformation. Besides, industrial departments of the central government may find it difficult to learn useful experiences right in Beijing. So in planning the capital city’s development, we have attached paramount importance to industrial development, in order that urban construction in the city will serve the needs of the city’s industrialization. How to transform the old city of Beijing? The master plan called for “doing away with the restrictions and barriers that stem from the old pattern of the city”: The capital city must be transformed and expanded by proceeding from its foundation built in history. On the one hand, the city’s strong points must be retained and developed. On the other, it is necessary for us to do


10/15/2010 4:51:31 PM

160

BEIJING RECORD

Plan for development of Beijing’s suburban areas (revised in 1954) (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

away with the restrictions and barriers that stem from the old pattern of the city. Things that hold back the city’s development and do not suit the needs of the people must be changed and even demolished, so that Beijing will become a socialist city suiting the collective way of living… We must take a critical approach toward structures left over from ancient times. Repudiating them indiscriminately is definitely incorrect, but extremely wrong are views and practices in favor of having them all preserved and of letting them hold back the city’s development. Currently, such views and 34 practices constitute the main tendency. On the fate of the city walls, the master plan stated: “There has been much controversy on whether to preserve the city walls and also on what should be done with other ancient structures. For this reason, no specific plans have been made for matters in this regard.” The debate that had been going on for three years on the location of the central administration center of the Central People’s Government and the

34 Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:51:33 PM

FA Reading


161

orientation of Beijing’s redevelopment was thus brought to an end. Thus the “Liang-Chen Proposal” ended up in a “natural death.” Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang were unhappy about being excluded from the work to plan Beijing’s redevelopment. So was Hua Lanhong, who had mixed feelings nonetheless. On May 29, 1954, Xue Zizheng, secretary general of the Beijing Municipal Government, chaired a meeting of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission. Liang, Chen and Hua spoke at the meeting, all angry. Here is an account of what happened during the meeting, which the author worked out by piecing together bits of information found in Liang Sicheng’s notebooks: Chen Zhanxiang said he was now at a loss with what to do with planning. He said he talked much but did little “due to influence of bourgeois thinking.” He and Hua held different views on architecture, but they were quite cooperative in doing things. For example, their cooperation ensured success of a construction project at Yuetan Nanjie Street. Over the past few years, Chen continued, he followed a “decentralization principle” in planning, but that was necessary under the prevalent conditions then. Chen said that housing construction must be meant to satisfy the needs of ordinary citizens and officials must be counted as ordinary citizens. Sound planning must be made before open spaces were allocated for construction. Chen criticized the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, saying that the committee had concentrated on some small things to the neglect of truly important things. The committee had formulated a plan on its own, but it should have made the principles and tasks (for planning) clearer so that implementation of the plan would be easier. Hua Lanhong spoke immediately after Chen. The main problem with the planning, he said, was that the guiding principles were not clear enough. He said there should have been a clear distinction between the immediate needs and what would be needed in the future. “Even the revolution has had to proceed in stages by taking into full account the specific conditions prevalent during each stage.” Take for example the number of years set for fulfillment of a plan. In the Soviet Union, he said, plans were to be fulfilled in 15 to 20 years. Our planning should be relatively flexible, to be fulfilled over the next 20 to 30 years. But the deadline was set at 20 years in the first draft plan last year, and again 20 years in the second draft plan (this year). How was the 20-year deadline decided? That needed to be explained. Another example was the orchard outside Fuxingmen Gate, which we thought would be needless (when the area was developed into a part of urban Beijing). Secretary General Xue did not agree with us on this question,


10/15/2010 4:51:33 PM

162

BEIJING RECORD

Beijing Urban Master Plan in sketch (revised in 1954) (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

but he did not give us an explanation. That meant the guiding principle remained unclear for our work. After we worked out Plan A and Plan B, we produced a third plan and submitted it to Secretary General Xue, but so far we have had no news about what happened to it. Many important building couldn’t be constructed right now. Moreover, what was seen as good today may be seen as not good tomorrow. It was therefore necessary to specify the standards for the quality of construction projects. In terms of the depth of planning and the relations between planning and construction, Plan A and Plan B both represented a first step taken toward the right direction. Both were submitted to the Beijing Municipal Party Committee, but the Party Committee seemed to have ceased to take them as the basis for its own planning. With regard to the question of architectural art, how to handle the relationship between political leadership and artistic creation? Yes, it wouldn’t do to alienate artistic creation from the leaders’ intention. Leaders represent at least a portion of the population, but they could have their own likes and dislikes. “I don’t know much about ‘collective creation’ (advocated by the Party). That’s why I think leaders’ instructions are often too particular and it would be better to let architects revise the plans themselves. I do think that our work is glorious and great but I have failed to show sufficient enthusiasm in it.”


10/15/2010 4:51:34 PM

FA Reading


163

Xue Zizheng made an explanation, saying that under the current circumstances, “things would have to be done even if everybody knows that would be wasteful.” From now on, he said, work of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission would be strengthened and city planning and design would be streamlined. He disclosed that the planning commission and the construction bureau were to be merged into the Capital Construction Commission and that a planning department would be set up under the Municipal Party Committee to coordinate the city’s overall design and planning. Liang Sicheng also spoke. He said he had a lot to complain about letting planning be done within the Party. He said he had no idea of the Party’s policies and neither did he know who was leading his work. Moreover, he knew little about Beijing’s economic construction. “That is the greatest difficulty in my work,” he said. So to do his job he had to depend on “hearsay” about what was happening. “I hope instructions from the leadership will be precise because until today, I have had no idea of how planning should be done.” He said, “Examination of plans (by the Party) amounts to ‘letting the dog (instead of the cat) catch the mouse’ and therefore no problem can be resolved.” Within the Commission, he continued, his views were different from Xue’s. “The Commission is now no longer able to function.” Back in 1949, he said, he was full of enthusiasm but was quite subjective in thinking. He had no idea of the need to rely on the Party by reporting to the Party what he was doing and seeking instructions from it. “I fell ill in 1950, and was alienated from the realities. Since June 1953, I have had no role to play in planning, and so I have had to retire from the scene in such a difficult situation.” Liang Sicheng also said that the “Changguanlou Team” had alienated itself from the realities and the people. Huang Shihua of the Commission’s planning department hit the nail on the head when commenting on complaints of the three architects. Liang’s 1949 proposal for setting up the administration center outside the walled city clashed with what was proposed by Soviet advisors. “Does that affect Liang’s work?” he asked. Then Hua joined the Commission, bringing with him views different from Chen’s. That, Huang said, affected the Commission’s planning work. After each produced a plan, the Municipal Party Committee still had to do the planning by itself. “Was this because both Chen and Hua refused to compromise?” The three architects’ discontent continued to grow. It was to explode three years later, during the Party’s “rectification campaign” of 1957, which turned out to be disastrous for all of them.


10/15/2010 4:51:34 PM

164

BEIJING RECORD

“Where Have Those New Buildings Actually Been Built?” Even today, critics of the “Liang-Chen Proposal” still stick to their old stand, insisting that the plan was rejected because it was “not economically realistic.” Chen Gan, one of them, has had the following to say: “In 1949, the old City of Beiping generated no more than 380 million yuan in local economic output and a mere 190 million yuan in government revenue. More than 300,000 able-bodied people in the city were unemployed or semi-unemployed. There were scores of slum areas like Longxugou, where people were living in dire misery. Under such circumstances, it would have been economically unrealistic for the government to carry out massive construction on a vast expanse of empty land (in the city’s suburbs) simply for an administration center. Moreover, there would be a political price to pay — loss of popular support for the central government. In short, things 35 mustn’t have been done that way.” Development of events, however, belied arguments of this sort. The fact is that construction went on ceaselessly and on a big scale in the first few years after the city was made capital of the People’s Republic. Irregularities in construction were clearly stated in Liang Sicheng’s letters to Premier Zhou Enlai and Beijing Municipal leaders. Here is the question: where were the new buildings actually constructed, in or outside the walled city? A search into some of the old archives would provide us with an answer. Speaking at a meeting on North China’s urban construction in May 1954, Tong Zheng, director of the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau, was obviously distressed because many government organs were reluctant to “settle” within the city. “Two thirds of the buildings constructed since liberation are located in suburban areas,” he said. “Among these, the farthest are 16 kilometers from Tiananmen. This definitely runs counter to the principle for expanding and transforming the city, which calls for ‘doing things in a well-organized way, from near to distant, and from within (the city) to outside.’ It was difficult to put the principle into practice due to the realities then.” Tong Zheng said demolition of old housing buildings was the greatest of all difficulties facing the government. He said: “In 1952, the Administrative Council of the Central People’s Government expressly ordered that construction must on no account affect people’s life. But in Beijing, the built space ratio averages 46 percent and is as high as 70 percent in some places. So it is impossible not to affect people’s life when housing buildings are 35 Collected Works of Chen Gan — Thoughts on Beijing’s Development, compiled by the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning and Designing, 1996.


10/15/2010 4:51:34 PM

FA Reading


165

demolished for construction space. Moreover, (Party and government) units often prefer to have buildings constructed outside the city, feeling that it would be too troublesome and expensive to have them built in the city.” The official continued: “Units invariably want to have new building constructed in places with sufficient open spaces while suitably located and beautiful in scenery. Moreover, they all ask for readily usable spaces, so that they will be able to save the trouble of having housing buildings demolished and the land leveled. Take for example the Central Military Commission. Before construction of its office buildings began in 1953 outside Fuxingmen Gate, the Commission went so far as to ask for enough reserve space for possible expansion of its compound, including even possible expansion of the residential area for its staff. Due to this state of affairs, newly constructed buildings are scattered all over the city (rather than concentrated in an administration district)... At the end of 1953, only one third of the newly constructed buildings are located in the city, and most of these buildings are hidden deep in hutong lanes and alleys. People are now asking: Where have 36 these new buildings actually been constructed?” It is obvious that a lot of government units would rather have their office buildings constructed in the suburbs than in the walled city, daunted by prospects that if they had buildings constructed in the city where both the population densities and the built space ratio were high, they would have unmerous troubles to handle — demolition of housing buildings was just one of them. They knew construction would be more expensive and take a much longer time to complete. The same kind of comments was found in a report submitted to the CPC Central Committee by the State Planning Commission on the Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing prepared by the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee. “One of the difficulties in revamping old Beijing stems from demolition of housing buildings in the city and resettlement of their occupiers,” the report said. “The population densities and built space ratio are both too high in many places in the old city, and the housing buildings to be torn down and their occupiers to be resettled are therefore both huge in numbers. According to some rough estimates, somewhere between 180,000 and 200,000 square meters of housing will have to be demolished and 20,000–30,000 people resettled to make room for construction of a building seven storeys high and one million square meters in floor area. This not only prompts the need to build new 36 Management of Construction in Beijing around 1954, in Major Events of Party History, 1st edition, Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party History Soliciting Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995.


10/15/2010 4:51:35 PM

166

BEIJING RECORD

housing for those displaced people, but also gives rise to problems that affect the employment and life of many among them — for example those handicraftsmen and small traders — and the education of their children. As a result, we are now having some serious social problems to address. Due to some objective factors, there has been more expansion than renovation in 37 Beijing over the past few years.” At a meeting of the Standing Committee of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee on October 10, 1956, Peng Zhen, Beijing’s Party chief, admitted: “We have always called for a relative concentration of the newly constructed buildings, but they are actually scattered. There is reason for this state of affairs — I mean we have had certain difficulties. Existing housing buildings have to be torn down for construction spaces. It would be less difficult if 38 new buildings are constructed outside the city.” The same difficulties or problems were cited in a report submitted on June 23, 1958 by the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee to the CPC Central Committee on its draft master plan for Beijing’s urban construction. “In 1954,” the report said, “work began to revamp some key areas in the city — the West Chang’an Avenue, Chaoyangmen Street and the west part of Xuanwu District. It was coming to a halt in the second half of 1956 because too many old housing buildings have to be demolished and it is too difficult to have their occupiers resettled. In short, the job would be too costly. Some schools of higher learning and small- and medium-sized factories should have been built within the city. Problem is that too much demolition had to be done for construction space, compelling us to build them outside the city. (From 1952 to 1953, ten schools of higher learning, including the Beijing Institute of Iron and Steel Industry and the Beijing Institute of Mining Industry, were built in Beijing’s northwestern suburbs. These together occupy more than 600 hectares, 30 times the size of Zhongshan Park. Had these schools been built in town, housing buildings with around 180,000 rooms would have been demolished.) To minimize the demolition of old structures, buildings constructed in the city are mostly located in places with a relatively low built space ratios and poor infrastructure. That, however, 39 makes it impossible for new roads and residential estates to emerge.” 37 Report of the State Planning Commission to the CPC Central Committee about its Comments on the Draft Plan Prepared by the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee for Beijing’s Renovation and Expansion, October 16, 1954; in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995. 38 Peng Zhen: On Problems of Beijing City Planning, October 10, 1956, in Selected Works of Peng Zhen, 1st edition, People’s Publishing House, May 1991. 39 Report of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee to the CPC Central Committee on Beijing Urban Master Plan (draft), June 23, 1968; in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:51:35 PM

FA Reading


167

In 1962, the Beijing municipal authorities reviewed the city’s urban construction over the 13 years since 1949. Here is the reason given to justify the slow progress of the work to “revamp” old Beijing: “It is impossible for the revamping to proceed at a fast enough pace because a huge amount of old housing has to be demolished as nearly all the open spaces available in the city have been occupied. Besides, the government only has limited 40 financial resources at its disposal (for the task).” Critics of the “Liang-Chen Proposal” insisted that it would be economical to build the anticipated administration center within the city because infrastructure facilities were already there, “ready for use.” They seemed to have forgotten that old Beijing’s sewer system was already hundreds of years old, built and rebuilt during the Ming and Qing dynasties, and that the water and power supply systems were mostly left over from the early 20th century after China became a republic in 1911. Huge sums of money had to be spent on their renovation and rebuilding in order to make them truly usable. The fact is that underdeveloped infrastructure had become a big problem at a time when office buildings were rising one after another in the city. Let’s see how the problem was described by the municipal authorities in a 1962 report on Beijing’s urban construction since 1949: In the course of the city’s revamping, infrastructure development has failed to keep pace with construction of buildings. A most conspicuous problem is that high-rise buildings were often built before water pipes were laid, hence the tight supply of water in places where these buildings are located. High-rise buildings now flank the Chaoyangmennei and Zhushi streets — the office buildings of the ministries of metallurgical industry and culture and the Overseas Chinese Mansion, etc. Use of water has multiplied in those areas, but old water pipes only 100 millimeters in diameter are still used there. This has resulted in insufficient water supply pressure that affects the area from the north end of Wangfujing Street to Nanxiaojie Street, making it barely possible for tap water to reach the second floor of a building. For the same reason, around 3.5 million square meters of floor area of buildings in the city are short of water supply in the peak seasons of water consumption. Numerous places in downtown Beijing are waterlogged perennially. Traffic congestions frequently occur at many road crossings. Work has just begun to lay heat and gas pipes, and the currently available supply of heat and gas is far short of demand. Meanwhile, there are huge quantities of pipes and cables beneath downtown Beijing,

40 Dong Guanqi: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, May 1998.


10/15/2010 4:51:35 PM

168

BEIJING RECORD

totaling 1,750 kilometers in combined length at the end of 1961, four times the figure for 1949. In many places, pipes and cables are being laid beneath hutong lanes and alleys or pavements, which are often entangled and twisted due to the limited space for their laying. It is likely that a lot of such pipes and cables will have to be abandoned when these areas are redeveloped. Pipes and cables have been laid wherever it was possible to lay them, meaning that more housing buildings will have to be torn down 41 to make room for the laying of new pipes and cables. These problems, as a matter of fact, had already been foreseen in the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” Construction of office buildings in the city, the architects noted, would incur the following costs: 1. The cost of purchasing privately-owned properties; 2. The cost of moving residents from their old homes (such cost may be borne by residents themselves); 3. The cost of constructing new homes in the suburbs for people from demolished homes; These people may be encouraged to go in for cooperative construction of new homes for themselves (and in some cases, also homes for use by officials on a paid basis); 4. The cost of building roads and water supply and discharge systems and of laying pipes and cables for new residential zones on the suburbs; 5. The cost of having the purchased housing buildings demolished, the sites cleared for construction, and the debris carted away; 6. The cost of having the new office building built; 7. The cost of tree planting. Meanwhile, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang listed four categories of costs to be incurred by construction of an administration center outside the city, in the area bordering the Temple of the Moon in the east and Gongzhufen in the west. These are: 1. The cost of road building, building of the network of water supply and discharge, and laying of power supply cables; 2. The cost of having new office buildings constructed;

41 A Draft Summary of Beijing’s City Construction (excerpts), in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:51:35 PM

FA Reading


169

3. The cost of having a residential estate built for cadres to work in the administration center; and 4. The cost of tree planting. A simple comparison would suffice to show that to have the administration center built outside the city would be less costly than in the city. On the use of Beijing’s existing infrastructure facilities as called for by their critics, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang insisted that the city’s infrastructure would be improved if the administration center was built outside the city. “There will be no need to renovate and rebuild those old, ill-planned engineering projects that are far from able to suit the city’s needs.” They noted, “Power lines and cables in the city are already timeworn, and are not distributed scientifically. Water pipes are too small in diameter, hence the shortage of water in some areas, for example in the south of the city. The sewers, in particular, are now hardly usable. In view of all this, Beijing’s water, power and sewer networks will be significantly improved if things new are built in the administration center outside the

Land occupied by government office buildings in old Beijing (Source: A Few Questions of Principle concerning the Protection of Old Beijing by Zhang Zugun, 1982)


10/15/2010 4:51:36 PM

170

BEIJING RECORD

city, by using most scientific, most cost-effective techniques and in a well42 planned, well-organized way.” Even today, development of new urban areas outside old Beijing is less costly than redevelopment of old urban areas in the once walled city. In the ongoing drive to redevelop old residential areas in downtown Beijing, the money spent on appropriation of land, demolishing of homes and resettlement of displaced residents normally accounts for at least half of the total redevelopment cost. Of this, around 45 percent is spent on demolishing homes and resettling displaced residents. In comparison, the corresponding cost is limited to about 14 percent for development of new urban areas in 43 the city’s suburbs. Half a century has passed and the Tiananmen area has not been developed into an “administration district” as expected by the opponents of the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” Construction of office buildings on either side of the Chang’an Avenue for the various ministries and state commissions under the State Council are called for in all master urban plans produced by the Beijing municipal authorities. The fact, however, is that few such buildings are found there. Instead, quite a lot of monumental buildings are used as offices of China’s central organs. The CPPCC National Committee, for example, set up its headquarter in the former residence of Prince Shuncheng built in the late 17th century, and then had it demolished for “relocation” elsewhere. The former residence of prince Zheng, which is as old, is being used by the Ministry of Education. The Imperial Taoist Temple (Dagaoxuan Hall), which was built in the mid-16th century, is home to the General Affairs Office of the Central Military Commission. Offices of the central organs are scattered, in five disconnected areas — Erligou, Sanlihe, Liupukang, Jiuhaoyuan and Zhongnanhai. This state of affairs is exactly what Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang did their best to forestall. Even today, though Beijing has become much more powerful economically, “transformation” of it the way called for by opponents of the “LiangChen Proposal” would still be difficult, if not impossible. Back in the 1950s, the only thing the municipal government could afford to do was to launch a few small “model projects” like transformation of the Longxugou slum area to exhibit its achievements. “Maximum use” was the policy toward housing structures then readily available — mostly siheyuan courtyards built decades 42 Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang: Proposal on the Location of the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government, Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986. 43 Li Jian: The Key to Accelerating the Process of Commercializing Beijing’s Housing Lies in Regulating the Pricing of Housing and Standardizing the Methods of Price Control, August 28, 1997, by courtesy of the Beijing CPPCC Municipal Committee.


10/15/2010 4:51:36 PM

FA Reading


171

or even centuries before, but ironically, siheyuan courtyards were in fact doomed to extinct as leaders were eager to see a completely new, “modern” Beijing. Neither the government nor residents paid heed to maintenance and repairs of those old housing buildings. Due to neglect, more and more them became dilapidated and even dangerous. In 1958, citizens were deprived of the right to let privately-owned housing. This came as a continuation of the “socialist transformation campaign” kicked off in 1956. Under the new, socialist policy, lots of privately-owned housing were to be let by the government and the landlord was to have a 20–40 percent share of the rent over a ten-year period ending September 1966 when privately-owned housing became nationalized. As a result, siheyuan courtyards became increasingly crowded as more and more people were assigned to live in them. For extra living space, improvised onestorey buildings were built in such courtyards either by danwei (work units) or by tenants themselves. In the end, siheyuan courtyards, once neat and spacious, became the so-called dazayuan — shabby, overcrowded slum-like dwellings. In a downpour one day in 1974, buildings with 4,000 rooms in urban Beijing collapsed proving that dilapidated, dangerous housing had become a serious problem. According to historical archives, the walled city had 17 million square meters of various structures, including 11 million square meters of housing structures. Of this, 800,000 square meters — about five percent — were rated as dangerous, including 600,000–700,000 square meters of dangerous housing buildings. According to statistics provided by the city’s housing administration authorities, old Beijing had 21.42 million square meters of housing buildings in 1990, including 10.12 million square meters rated as dangerous to live in. That means nearly half of the housing buildings were 44 out of repair. It is clear that the Chinese capital wouldn’t have found itself in such an impasse had “transformation” of its old part been truly viable, able to reduce the cost of the reconstruction and be completed in a short time as asserted by opponents of the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” Many work units did their best to make things easier for themselves when having office buildings built in old Beijing. During the large-scale rebuilding of Beijing in the 1950s, huge numbers of people had their homes demolished and then were assigned simply-constructed, one-storey rooms in areas outside the Zuo’anmen and You’anmen gates, where they had to

44 Fang Ke: A Study of the Proper Ways for an Organic Upgrading of Housing Structures in Old Beijing, a paper for Ph.D of engineering of Qinghua University, December 1999.


10/15/2010 4:51:36 PM

172

BEIJING RECORD

make do by using communal water taps and toilets. It is not until some 30 years later, in the 1980s, did the government include these areas into its plans for improving the city’s overall living condition. In some places, work has just begun for implementation of such plans. “Far back in 1911,” Lin Zhu told the author in an interview on July 5, 1994, “city planning was completed for Canberra. The Australian government then did not have the money needed for its implementation, but it took steps to do things accordingly. The ‘Liang-Chen Proposal’ should have been implemented the same way.” “Haven’t those office buildings along Chang’an Avenue been built one by one? Aren’t there buildings still under construction in the same area?” she asked. “Rome wasn’t built in a day,” said Chen Zhanxiang, quoting this English idiom in an interview with the author on March 2, 1994.


10/15/2010 4:51:36 PM

FA Reading

Chapter 5


10/15/2010 4:51:37 PM

Chapter Five Controversy on Dawuding

Zhang Kaiji’s “Self-Criticisms” In 1952, construction of government office buildings began on a massive scale at Sanlihe area about two kilometers outside the walled city, the site Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang had proposed for the central administration center. Officially called the “Sanlihe Administration Center Project,” it was initially designed for buildings about ten times as large in floor space as what was to be actually built — around 90,000 square meters. The main building, located in the center of the area, was to be used by the National Planning Commission, and the buildings around it, by several ministries. Two construction design institutes were asked to submit planning proposals on the development of the Sanlihe area. In the end, the program by the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design was adopted on proposal of Soviet advisor A. S. Mochin, and Zhang Kaiji, chief architect of the Institute, was charged with overseeing the design. In many ways the Sanlihe Administration Center Project tallied with what was envisaged in the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” Even today, some insiders still think that had the initial plan for the Sanlihe project been implemented, there would have been sufficient office space for the various central government departments and that massive construction inside the walled city could have been avoided. Development of the Sanlihe Administration Center may have something to do with Mao Zedong’s strategy for the Korean War, the “War to Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea” as called by the Model of the main building at Sanlihe Administration Center Chinese. (by courtesy of Zhang Kaiji)


10/15/2010 4:51:37 PM

FA Reading

Controversy on Dawuding

175

Plan models showing the initially designed view of Sanlihe Administration Center (by courtesy of Zhang Kaiji)

After the Korean War broke out in October 1950, Mao Zedong ordered scattered construction of central government office buildings, saying that as a precaution against destruction by the enemy’s air raids, government buildings must be built here and there “the way the Heavenly Fairies spread 1 flowers while flying in the sky.” â•‡ In 1954, plans of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee for the city’s first-phase urban development were submitted to the CPC Central Committee for examination, calling for construction of office buildings for central government departments at Sanlihe and Baiwanzhuang in the city’s western suburbs, in addition to Chaoneidajie 2 and Xidanbeidajie streets in the city. Nevertheless, the principle of basing the central administration center in the city was in no way to be abandoned, and Tiananmen Square and the East-West Chang’an Avenue remained the main site for construction of government office buildings. While scattered distribution of central government organs was predominant, Sanlihe stood out as an exception. When debating with Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang on planning of New China’s capital city one day in November 1949, Soviet advisor P.â•›V. Abramov disclosed an important decision Mao Zedong had made: “To keep important government organs in the city and have less important government organs based in the new urban area (to be developed outside the walled 3 city).” â•‡ On order of the municipal authorities, Liang Sicheng delivered a report titled Initial Opinions on Planning for the Capital’s Construction to the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress in August 1953. According to the

1 According to an interview given to the author by Ma Ju on August 20, 1999. 2 Li Zhun: On the Anticipated Administration Center: A Re-discussion of Past Events in Beijing’s City Planning, Beijing City Planning and Construction journal, No. 4 issue of 1995. 3 Excerpts of Abramov’s Remarks at the December 1949 Meeting on Beijing’s City Planning, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:51:38 PM

176

BEIJING RECORD

report, “less important government organs shall be based in the new urban area in the western suburbs (of Beijing).” It is obvious that government buildings constructed at Sanlihe should have been used by “less important government organs.” But, believe it or not, the “Sanlihe Administration Center,” seen from the magnitude of its construction and the importance attached to it by the National Planning Commission, was in fact a most important project ever undertaken in New China since its birth. According to Zhang Kaiji in an interview with the author on July 30, 1998, construction of the “Sanlihe Administration Center” had the full support of Gao Gang (1905–1954), head of the National Planning Commission. It was also because of Gao Gang that construction of the project was brought to an end halfway. Gao Gang, a very senior Party person, was a vice-chairman of the People’s Republic. He was known as “king of Northeast China” for concurrently serving as chief of the Northeast China Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, chairman of the Northeast China People’s Government, and commander and political commissar of the PLA Northeast China Military Command. From August 1952 to early 1953, five local leaders were called to Beijing for top posts of the Party and government. Deng Xiaoping, first secretary of the CPC Southwest China Bureau, was made a vice-premier of the Central Government Administrative Council. Rao Shushi, first secretary of the CPC East China Bureau, was made head of the Organization Department of the CPC Central Committee. Deng Zihui, third secretary of the CPC Central South China Bureau, was appointed Rural Work Department of the CPC Central Committee, and Xi Zhongxun, second secretary of the CPC Northwest China Bureau, the Party’s propaganda chief. Gao Gang, the “king of Northeast China,” was made minister in charge of the National Planning Commission, New China’s “economic cabinet” as it was popularly known because in the government establishment, it was parallel to the Central Government Administrative Council headed by Premier Zhou Enlai. In other words, Gao Gang was given a higher position than the other four, prompting a saying popular for a time: “One takes the lead among the five 4 ‘horses’ running into Beijing.” Construction of the Sanlihe Administration Center started immediately after Gao Gang came. Chen Zhanxiang was involved in the project, busy with matters about allocation of construction spaces while worried about 4 Lin Yunhui: Gao Gang in Beijing, the Century Tide magazine, No. 8 issue, 1999.


10/15/2010 4:51:38 PM

FA Reading


177

The east-west elevation (draft) for the first-phase construction of Sanlihe Administration Center (by courtesy of Zhang Kaiji)

the fate of old Beijing: the Nationalities Palace and the Telegraphic Mansion, which now stand on West Chang’an Avenue, were being planned, and office buildings had mushroomed all over the walled city. The architect was to suffer during the witch-hunting “Anti-Rightists Campaign” of 1957 for his part in the Sanlihe project. He was accused of “underhandedly attempting to build an administration center at Sanlihe (in defiance of the Party’s decision to have the administration center built in the city.)” “He harbors a deep hatred for us because we have rejected his proposal (for building the administration center outside the city) and because we are working in real earnest to carry out the policy of concentrating on transforming the key 5 areas of the old city.” But not long after their arrival in Beijing, Gao Gang and Rao Shushi were purged for allegedly engaging in “activities aimed at splitting the Party.” This came in accordance with The Decision on Strengthening the Unity of the Party adopted on Mao Zedong’s proposal by the Fourth Plenum of the Seventh CPC Central Committee held February 6–10, 1954. One week after the meeting, on February 17, Gao Gang attempted suicide. Six months later, on August 17, 1954, he killed himself. On October 16, the National Planning Commission submitted a report to the CPC Central Committee on the Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing produced by the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, calling for halting the construction of government office buildings at Sanlihe. Meanwhile, the commission endorsed the principle proposed by the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee for locating the central administration district in the city, describing it as of “major and important political significance.” The report stated: “Government office and other public buildings should, mainly, be built in the city. Take for example

5 Architecture Journal, No. 9 issue, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:51:38 PM

178

BEIJING RECORD

construction of the office buildings for four industrial ministries and the National Planning Commission. These are being built outside the old city according to original plans and their construction has been partially completed. From now on, no more office buildings should be constructed in the suburbs and new buildings should be constructed in the city. In this way, Beijing’s appearance will change greatly in a few years. This is not only a matter of economy, but also of major political significance.” Commenting on what happened some 50 years ago from the perspective of city planning, Zhang Kaiji told the author: “People have come to realize that by rejecting the ‘Liang-Chen Proposal,’ Beijing missed an opportunity (for development in a right way). A second opportunity was also lost because of the cancellation of the Sanlihe Administration Center Project.” He continued: “The project was brought to a halt half way, when construction had been completed only on those buildings in the southwest corner of the Sanlihe area, buildings now used by the National Planning Commission and four industrial ministries, which have a combined floor space of some 90,000 square meters. I don’t want to comment on the design of those buildings. I just want to say that had construction continued in the area, an administration center would have emerged a long time ago, meaning that almost the entire government establishment would have had been based in this western suburban area. Had that happened, government organs would have had no need to build office buildings along the Chang’an Avenue.” For his role in the Sanlihe project, Zhang Kaiji was to “criticize” himself twice — first for having to “endorse” the so-called dawuding — large temple or palace-style concave curved roofs, and then for having to modify some dawuding designs. “Our Soviet advisors insisted that government office buildings be capped with dawuding,” he recalled in an article published in 2000. “The original designs of mine called for something much simpler, much smaller.” But he had to follow the way proposed by Soviet advisors who were actually dictating everyWest and North elevations of the government office buildings thing under the prevalent at Sanlihe Administration Center (by courtesy of Zhang Kaiji)


10/15/2010 4:51:39 PM

FA Reading


179

mentality of listening to whatever Soviet advisors said. “Dawuding became a reality because the Soviet advisors wanted them,” he continued. “Then, in 1955, dawuding came to be under attack during an ‘anti-waste’ campaign in China’s construction industry. The office buildings for the four industrial ministries and the National Planning Commission, which in some ways assume the traditional style, were destined to be major targets of the attack. By then construction had been completed on the two buildings flanking the main building. The main building was yet to be capped, and the glazed tiles needed for its dawuding rooftop had been transported to its top floor, ready for use. At any rate, I had to decide whether to build the dawuding rooftop in accordance with the original design or to modify the design. It so happened that I had just published an article in the People’s Daily, criticizing myself for ‘standing for stepping back to what is ancient.’ I had no other way out but to modify the design of the dawuding rooftop, to make the rooftop less extravagant, knowing that refusal to do so would prompted more accusation against me for being ‘double-faced.’ Actually I disliked the modification I did to the original design. It was the worst thing I had ever done. But before long, the ‘anti-waste’ camThe main Sanlihe building without a “big cap” or dawuding (by courtesy of Zhang Kaiji) paign was over and pretty soon, it was forgotten. Many comrades, including even Peng Zhen, were displeased at the sight of the Sanlihe main building without a ‘big cap’ on it. They criticized me for ‘failing to stick to the correct principle.’ Yes, I accepted the criticism but even if I stuck to that ‘correct principle,’ the ‘big cap,’ so to speak, would still be 6 doomed. Li Fuchun was the top supervisor of the Sanlihe project and was also charged with the task of directing the ‘anti-waste’ campaign. He had to ‘sacrifice’ the big rooftop for ‘righteousness.’” “To sum up,” Zhang Kaiji said, “I had to humiliate myself twice, first for ‘calling for restoration of the ancient’ and then for doing something just in the opposite — for ‘lack of overall consideration’ in work and ‘failure to 6 Li Fuchun (1900–1975), an early leader of the CPC, was then in charge of the country’s reconstruction — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:51:40 PM

180

BEIJING RECORD

uphold what is right.’ ‘Self-criticisms’ of this sort were indeed humiliating, 7 and pains in my heart were beyond description.”â•›

Tradition vs. Modernism There are only two types of housetops in modern architectural terminology, namely, “flattops” and “curved roofs.” There is no such word as dawuding, literally translated as “large roofs,” referring, with a derogative sense, to large temple or palace-style concave curved roofs condemned in the 1950s for allegedly causing “huge waste of the people’s money.” In 1955, Liang Sicheng was under fire for being the “chief exponent” of the “theory calling 8 for restoration of the ancient.”â•› As a result, the concocted word dawuding came to be used in China’s politically oriented textbooks. Liang Sicheng used to be a zealous admirer of modernist architecture. After New China came into being, however, it seemed he “suddenly” became a steadfast advocate of architecture in traditional Chinese style. Many people who knew his academic thinking were puzzled, feeling quite at a loss to understand why he changed his stand. As a student majoring in architecture at University of Pennsylvania from 1924 to 1927, Liang Sicheng received rigorous training in classic schools of architecture under the tutorship of Professor Paul P. Cret, a master architect of academism. It so happened that the 1920s saw a vigorous development of a modernist architectural movement in the West. Walter Gropius (1883–1969), a vehement exponent of architectural modernism, had by then become known across the world as founder of the modernist Bauhaus school. In 1923, Le Corbusier (1887–1965) had published his monumental Vers une Architecture, translated into English as Toward an Architecture and commonly known as Toward a New Architecture. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (1886–1969), one of the three greatest pioneers of modernist architecture along with Walter Gropius and Le Sketch of a modernist building drawn by Liang Sicheng as a piece Corbusier, had designed two of homework when he studied in the United States in the 1920s 7 Zhang Kaiji: On Office Buildings at Sanlihe, the Architecture Newspaper, Page 11, April 4, 2000. 8 Architecture Journal, No. 1 issue, 1955.


10/15/2010 4:51:40 PM

FA Reading


181

innovative steel-framed towers with glass screen walls. These developments aroused Liang Sicheng’s attention. The same curriculum was used at the Department of Architecture at China’s Northeastern University Liang Sicheng helped set up in 1928. Despite that, the architect had begun studying modernist architecture, which was clearly indicated in the Plans for the Development of Tianjin Special City he and Zhang Rui jointly produced in 1930. “In no way can excess use of China’s ancient structures suit the modern environment,” the Plans stated. “All modern creations designed to facilitate life are invariably put to worldwide application immediately after they are made. Roughly the same building materials are being used across the world, a result of easier access to transportation, prompting experts to call our times the ‘era of concrete and steel bars.’ Under such circumstances, architectural forms do not differ from country to country or from region to region, but structures do differ in shape due to the function each is designed to perform. A case in point is the reconstruction of Tokyo (after the 1923 earthquake), where all public buildings were designed in keeping with this understanding. These structures are magnificent yet simply constructed, free from unnecessary decorations, indicating that designers are now keen to the right proportion of each part in a structure. China has begun to industrialize and as a result, life in the country is becoming increasingly similar to that in other countries. Simple but good for practical use, this new type of new structures, we believe, can 9 suit China’s needs.”â•› Liang Sicheng affirmed the same view in the Preface to Reference Pictures for Architectural Design published in 1935. “Since after the European War,” he wrote, “there has been a sweeping change in architectural art. Gone is indiscriminate copying of classic architectural designs, and machinery and new materials are playing a leading role in our life. In today’s artistic creation, deliberate refusal to use machinery and new materials resulting from the development of science and technology amounts to deliberately clinging to things moribund, and products turned out this way are bound to be unreal, unable to embody the real value of the art that characterizes our time. The formulation ‘structures international in style’ may be vague in meaning, but it does highlight a desire to let architecture suit the needs of our time. Buildings of that caliber are becoming increasingly popular in Europe and the United States, epitomizing a pursuit of simply yet scientifically structured architectural works. A rationally designed façade constitutes the most salient feature of ‘structures international in style.’” 9 Liang Sicheng and Zheng Rui: Plans for the Development of Tianjin Special City, Beiyang Fine Art Printing House, 1930.


10/15/2010 4:51:41 PM

182

BEIJING RECORD

Beijing Union Hospital (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

The main building of the former Yanjing University, now in Beijing University campus (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

Liang Sicheng was critical of some structures designed by foreign architects in China, including the main buildings of the Union Hospital and Yanjing University in Beiping, Qilu University in Jinan, Jinling University in Nanjing, and West China University in Chengdu, which are distinguished by palace or temple-like curved roofs. The designers of such buildings, he noted, “had one thing in common: ignorance of the right proportion each component part assumes to a traditional Chinese structure in its entirety. They concentrated on imitating the appearance of China’s traditional buildings while paying no need to the structural similarities of, and


10/15/2010 4:51:43 PM

FA Reading


183

differences between, Chinese and Western buildings. That has resulted in Western structures capped by Chinese-style roofs. The upper and lower parts of such a building are entirely mismatched in style. It is Western, despite the glazed tiles on the rooftops that may give it a 10 ‘resemblance’ of Chinese art.” Liang Sicheng lost no time Memorial Tablet Pavilion in front of Sun Yat-sen Mausoleum in Nanjing (by courtesy of Library of Qinghua to put into practice his views on University School of Architecture) modernist architecture. Jointly with Lin Huiyin, he designed the Beijing University Geology Center in 1934 and the dormitory building for the school’s women students the following year, using techniques of modernist architecture. Both structures were to win high praises. “The two buildings are among the earliest modernist architectural works designed by Chinese architects. They feature a freedom from imitation of neither Baroque-style structures seen in the West nor China’s ancient structures, freedom from any trace of influence, even influence of l’art nouveau movement (New Art Movement). In designing, utmost attention was paid to the structure of the buildings and their practical use, highlighting the basic principles of the modernist school of architecture established in 11 the 1920s. Such structures were rare in China in the 1930s.”â•›

Elevation drawing of women student’s dormitory building of Beijing University. (by courtesy of Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture)

10 Reference Pictures for Architectural Design in Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (2), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, August 1984. 11 An Overall Review of Contemporary Chinese Architecture — Beijing, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, December 1993.


10/15/2010 4:51:44 PM

184

BEIJING RECORD

Dormitory building designed by Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin in 1935 for women students of Beijing University (by courtesy of Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture)

In an article published in 1944, Liang Sicheng again criticized those “palace-like” structures such as the Beiping Union Hospital. “’Palace-like’ buildings,” he wrote, “are out of keeping with the standards of modern art and science… They are results of an effort to scratch up the Western and Chinese architectural systems — largely the Western and Chinese architectural systems of ancient times, to be more precise. They are very much like works from the modernist ‘Period Architecture’ that once flourished in Europe and the United States. Such buildings are too costly to construct, and are therefore not suitable for China under the country’s 12 current economic situation.”â•› Liang Sicheng was to gain a better understanding of modernist architecture through meetings with Walter Gropius, Le Corbusier, Eliel Saarinen and other master architects. This came during his academic tour of the United States from 1946 to 1947. While singing the praise of modernist architecture, Liang Sicheng never forgot to explore ways of developing a new kind of architecture with Chinese characteristics. Liang Sicheng and Zhang Rui spoke highly of modernist architecture in the Plans for the Development of Tianjin Special City. Meanwhile, they expressed hope for the emergence of an architectural style suiting China’s specific conditions. “In China of today … emergence of a most ideal architectural style will be inevitable, resulting in structures that retain the original beauty of Chinese architecture while suiting the needs of 12 Liang Sicheng: Why Chinese Architecture Needs to be Studied, Selected Papers of the Institute for Research in Chinese Architecture, No. 1 issue, Vol. VII, October 1944.


10/15/2010 4:51:45 PM

FA Reading


185

modern life.” This idea was highlighted in their design for the administration center of the Tianjin Special City Government, whose main building was capped with a Chinese-style roof. In Liang’s opinion, the most important structure in the city should feature a national style. As Liang Sicheng discusses design of the United Nations building regards less important buildwith fellow advisors to the project ings, Liang Sicheng said that (Source: The Architectural Forum, June 1947) these “should, as far as possible, be modern in architectural style and structure.” Liang Sicheng was to make his view that seemed self-conflicting even clearer in two articles, Preface to Reference Pictures for Architectural Design and Why Chinese Architecture Needs to be Studied, which he published in 1935 and 1944, respectively. While critical of the Union Hospital and other “half Chinese, half foreign” buildings, he said in the Preface to Reference Pictures for Architectural Design that modernist and traditional Chinese buildings had a lot in common, most conspicuously in methods of framing for their construction. “Though different building materials are used for their construction,” he said, “the same basic principle is followed — a skeleton built first and then the walls... Every part of an ancient Chinese building bespeaks the intrinsic structure of the building, conforming to what modern designers stand for... This merits the attention of architects at a time when Chinese architecture is being improved and upgraded due to adoption of new building materials resulting from science development... I hope that with a clearly-defined aim in mind, they (Chinese architects) will work in unison to create a kind of new architecture for China.” In Why Chinese Architecture Needs to be Studied, the architect lashed those “palace-like” buildings. Meanwhile, he said such buildings “indicate a rise of the Chinese spirit, and are therefore of immeasurably great significance.” “Doubtlessly,” he wrote, “there will be widespread use in China of those modern techniques and materials that are used in the West… How to give full scope to the salient features of traditional Chinese architecture by using new techniques and materials, that is, how to ‘let the old tree give forth new branches’ — this question indeed merits study in real earnest.” In particular, Liang Sicheng reminded fellow Chinese architects of the need to be keen to “extract the unique Chinese elements contained in old


10/15/2010 4:51:45 PM

186

BEIJING RECORD

buildings.” These elements are a “part of our national art trove” and “must be used wisely.” “There is no need for us to ‘cut our feet to fit others’ shoes’ — to mechanically make our architecture suit what is European and American,” he continued. “Neither must Design sketch of the United Nations building, the world’s first we overstress the signifi- building with glass screen walls cance of Western architec- (Source: The Architectural Forum, June 1947) ture. We must create the kind of buildings good enough to suit our own needs.” He stressed that although modernist buildings were becoming popular worldwide, “countries and nations differ from one another in pursuit of modernism. Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, north European countries and Japan all boast buildings that are modern while in their respective national styles, designed to suit the specific environment and taste of each. With so rich, so colorful an artistic background, China naturally is in a position to develop modernist architecture in diverse directions. For a new China, construction and city planning will not only be pos13 sible, but will take the world by surprise with its achievements.”â•› Earlier still, in 1932, in Study of the Main Gate of Dule Temple in Jixian County, his first paper on ancient Chinese architecture, Liang Sicheng had the following to state: “A typical Chinese building… invariably has a timber skeleton built first and then the walls. It can be compared to the human body with flesh and skin covering the skeleton, with its various parts forming an integral whole.” It is obvious that Liang Sicheng based himself on modern theories of architecture in studying China’s traditional architecture. In his understanding, modernist buildings in China should never be concrete blocks. Instead, these should have Chinese characteristics, and should be good enough to highlight the demeanor of the Chinese culture. He noted in particular that like its modernist counterpart, a typical traditional Chinese building features a skeleton that “bespeaks its intrinsic structure.” Proceeding from this

13 Liang Sicheng: Why Chinese Architecture Needs to be Studied, Selected Papers of the Institute for Research in Chinese Architecture, No. 1 issue, Vol. VII, October 1944.


10/15/2010 4:51:46 PM

FA Reading


187

Design plan by Liang Sicheng and Zhang Rui in 1930 for Tianjin Special City Library (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)

understanding, Liang Sicheng held that modernist buildings with Chinese characteristics would be created as a matter of course. After the founding of the People’s Republic, Liang Sicheng read Mao Zedong’s On New Democracy, and he was impressed by Mao’s call for developing a “culture that is national, scientific and popular in character.” In a letter to Zhu De, commander-in-chief of the People’s Liberation Army, 14 on April 5, 1950, he said: “I am pleased that the Common Program points out the correct orientation for our work. From now on, buildings in China must be ‘national, scientific and popular in character.’ As a member of the

Design plan by Liang Sicheng and Zhang Rui in 1930 for Tianjin Special City Art Gallery (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)

14 The Common Program was adopted by the First Session of the CPPCC on September 29, 1949 and was to serve as New China’s provisional constitution until September 1954 — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:51:47 PM

188

BEIJING RECORD

Design plan by Liang Sicheng and Zhang Rui in 1930 for the main office building of Tianjin Special City Government (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)

Institute for Research in Chinese Architecture I have, over the past two decades, made extensive studies of Chinese architecture jointly with some of my colleagues. Defying grave difficulties, we traveled in north and southeast China before the Japanese invasion and in the southwest during the War of Resistance, covering more than 200 counties in 15 provinces. During our field work we surveyed, photographed and studied more than 2,000 structures — monumental buildings built during the Han, Tang and succeeding dynasties as well as traditional residential buildings. By doing so, I was trying to create a kind of architecture ‘national, scientific and popular 15 in character.’” The same view was stated in the “Liang-Chen Proposal” of 1952. “In so far as their structure is concerned, a typical Chinese building features a skeleton that is erected first, followed by building of the walls on which the door and window frames are installed. The curved rooftop is built the same way. This method of structuring allows the designer maximum freedom (to create)… and this is the greatest merit of this method. In the contemporary world, only in recent decades have reinforced concrete beams and steel bars been invented, prompting the use of the skeleton method in Europe and the United States. By replacing timber with new building materials and old techniques with new techniques, we are now able to gain a greater technical freedom in use of our traditional skeleton method. Use of this method, along with the methods for artistic treatment of various parts of a building, we will be able to create the kind of buildings suiting our needs in life and work while in keeping with our nation’s traditional aesthetic perception. We must strive for new (architectural) styles, styles that are national in character and good enough to meet the requirements of our times. On no account 15 Liang Sicheng: Letter to Commander-in-Chief Zhu De — on Building of Dormitories in Zhongnanhai, April 5, 1950; in Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986.


10/15/2010 4:51:49 PM

FA Reading


189

must we go for construction of formalist buildings, building purely ‘palace16 like’ or purely in ‘foreign-style.’” In Ancient Chinese Buildings Seen in Dunhuang Frescoes published in 1951, Liang Sicheng said: “Our traditional architecture is characterized by the skeleton structure and the kind of courtyards with individual buildings neatly arranged inside to form an integral whole. This allows flexible, clever arrangement of the architectural pattern to facilitate the artistic treatment.” In

Diagrammatic elevation of an ancient building according to Building Standards of the Song Dynasty (Source: History of Chinese Architecture, 1984)

Foguang Temple on Mount Wutai, Shanxi Province, a timber-frame structure built in Tang Dynasty discovered by Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin in 1937 (photo by Wang Jun, October 2001)



10/15/2010 4:51:51 PM

190

BEIJING RECORD

The Architectural Tradition and Heritage of Our Great Motherland, he described the skeleton structure characteristic of China’s traditional buildings as “good enough to prepare China for massive construction of buildings with steel skeleton and steel reinforced concrete structures.” Patriotic sentiments of the Chinese people soared because of the Korean War in the early 1950s. On proposal of Soviet advisors, a campaign was launched in China’s architectural community in 1952 to fight against “structuralism.” The campaign was actually directed against construction of modernist buildings “without national characteristics,” which were seen as a “reflection of the struggle between the bourgeois Esperantist tendency 17 and proletarian internationalism in architectural theory and thinking.”â•› Three years before, in September 1949, when Liang Sicheng met with Soviet advisors for the first time, he was told of the need to have buildings “national in form” like Beijing’s Xizhimen Gate. One Soviet advisor even showed him 18 a sketch of the Xizhimen Arrow Tower he had drawn. Despite advices offered by Soviet advisors, the “Liang-Chen Proposal” called for construction of modernist buildings in the proposed adminis19 tration center in Beijing’s western suburbs, suggesting that Liang Sicheng was cautious in action though he wanted to see an integration of China’s architectural tradition and architectural modernism. He would rather give preference to modernist buildings before he was absolutely sure that his views were correct. Meanwhile, he was open with regard to the architectural styles of structures he hoped to be built outside old Beijing. Then more Soviet advisors arrived, and all of them stressed the importance of buildings “national” in style and form. Encouraged, Liang Sicheng became bold enough to put into practice his idea for “creating new, Chinese-style architecture,” thinking that the “orientation” had become 20 clear. Support shown by those Soviet advisors for structures “national in form” can be attributed to Stalin’s theory of architecture. According to The Decision on the Master Plan for the Rebuilding of Moscow published in 1935 on Stalin’s order, the capital city of the former Soviet Union must develop “on the foundation formed in history,” by using “outstanding methods, classic and new, found in architectural art” for “expression of socialist contents in national forms.” This was followed by establishment of the Academy of Architecture on order of the Communist 17 Wang Jiqi: A Review of the Shanghai Architectural Art Symposium, Architecture Journal, No. 4 issue, 1980. 18 Liang Sicheng’s “confession” in writing during the “Cultural Revolution,” December 1, 1967, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 19 Same as footnote 18. 20 Same as footnote 19.


10/15/2010 4:51:51 PM

FA Reading


191

Party of the Soviet Union, which was charged with the task of bringing forth, through training, a “contingent of experts well versed in both MarxismLeninism and classic architecture” and capable of “dealing fatal blows to the various modernist schools of architecture.” The office mansion designed by Le Corbusier for the Ministry of Light Industry was condemned as a “scar on the face of Moscow.” Academic criticisms were eventually developed into a “class struggle,” in which modernist architecture was condemned as a “formalist art” allegedly used by the bourgeoisie to “deny history of its continuum” and “negate” the “class and national consciousness.” Likewise, “formalism” and “structuralism,” though purely forms of architectural art, were seen as “serving the needs of the bourgeoisie.” So the debate on architectural art forms culminated into a fierce “class struggle.” Keeping “class struggle” in mind, those Soviet experts, who had come to advise the Chinese on architectural designing, naturally hated “structuralism” and put the emphasis on structures “national in form.” One 21 of them, named Vilasov , went so far as to declare he was “angry at the 22 sight of Shanghai” because the city had too many Western-style buildings. Achepukov, advisor to Qinghua University Architecture Department, urged the students to work hard to be better prepared for construction of buildings national in form, saying: “You must love national forms (of architecture) as 23 much as you love your girlfriends.”â•› In practice, many government office buildings were capped with dawuding or “large roofs” on insistence of Soviet advisors. Meanwhile, it cannot be denied that academic views of substance can be found in the Soviet criticism of architectural modernism. Liang Sicheng was able to meet with Arkedy Mordvinov, president of the Academy of Architecture of the USSR, during a visit to the Soviet Union from February to May of 1953 as a member of a delegation from the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Mordvinov had the following to tell the Chinese architect: “If all housing buildings are boxes encased in glass, life would be boring and even painful... The culture of every nation assumes a national form... National forms are forms of national cultures that have come into being on the basis of the different national characters as manifested in languages and histories... Architects must be artists at the same time, and must be capable of producing the kind of architectural works good enough to highlight

21 Full name not available — Tr. 22 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, July 3, 1953, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 23 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, May 1953, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:51:52 PM

192

BEIJING RECORD

the greatness of the socialist construction. In handling aesthetic matters characteristic of the socialist era, we must make full use of the architectural 24 heritage of the various nations.” These views struck a responsive chord in Liang Sicheng’s heart. In another development, modernist architecture was to develop into postmodernist architecture characterized by a respect for the characteristics of regional cultures, which stemmed from a review of the defects inherent in modernist architecture itself. There is the must to note that to a fairly large extent, the call of the Soviet experts for “national forms of architecture” had the support of Chinese leaders. At a city planning conference in May 1950, Peng Zhen, Beijing’s Party chief, said that right now, it wouldn’t do to get rid of whatever is left over from old China as called for during the May Fourth Movement. Old theatrical works couldn’t be done away with because people still liked them. But these would become neither fish nor fowl if they were transformed right now, but would be improved gradually in the course of their transformation. This was also the case of traditional Chinese medicine and architecture. Adoption of national forms must be based on popular demand. “What we are pursuing now are things ‘basically national in form,’” he said. ViceMayor Wu Han said that the call of Soviet experts for things Chinese in form “merits our consideration.” The call, Peng Zhen said, conformed to the characters, habits and tastes of the Chinese people. Xue Zizheng, secretarygeneral of the Beijing Municipal Government, told the conference the Soviet 25 advisors thought that Shanghai “is not progressive.”â•› In 1952, Qian Junrui (1908–1985), minister of education, called for “reform of teaching” in a report he delivered at Qinghua University on instruction from Liu Shaoqi. “As we are inexperienced,” he said, “we may practice a little bit of ‘dogmatism’ at first and copy the Soviet pattern (of development) wholly.” Liang Sicheng visited the Soviet Union the following year. Here is his own account of what he learned: “When visiting architecture schools, I found they use the same teaching program, contents and methods and curriculum as architecture schools in capitalist countries. The only differences are that the schooling is one year or two longer, during which students are organized to undergo a sort of internship, and that faculty members are organized into teaching and research groups.

24 Liang Sicheng: Report on Visit to the Soviet Union by the Architecture and Civil Engineering Group in the Delegation of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (1953, unpublished), by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 25 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, May 1950, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:51:52 PM

FA Reading


193

Sketches drawn by Liang Sicheng on his notebook during his visit to the Soviet Union April–May 1953


10/15/2010 4:51:54 PM

194

BEIJING RECORD

Capitalist countries had, by the 1930s, begun to go all out for construction of modernist structures and in comparison, the Soviet Union of the 1950s 26 stood for structures ‘national in form.’”â•› Advices from Soviet experts greatly influenced Chinese architects and civil engineers due to support from the Chinese leadership and also to the soaring nationalistic sentiments of the Chinese people. At a faculty meeting held by Qinghua University Department of Architecture, some people 27 went so far as to proclaim: “â•›The (university’s) auditorium is bound to be demolished.” At first, Liang Sicheng was quite resentful of the Party’s call for learning from the Soviet Union. As he saw it, the call “testified to a slavish comprador philosophy (prevalent in old society), the only difference being that this 28 time, the Russians were the overlords.”â•› But he was to cool down upon discovery that he and those Soviet advisors had identical views on the question of “national forms.”

Qinghua University Auditorium (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

Liang Sicheng gave an account of what he had learned from Soviet advisors in an article published in the People’s Daily on December 23, 1952, which was titled Soviet Experts Help Us Take a Correct Approach toward Architectural Designing: 26 Liang Sicheng’s “confession” in writing during the “Cultural Revolution,” January 30, 1969, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 27 The Qinghua University Auditorium was built in 1913. This building of classic style was designed by American architect Henry K. Murphy. 28 Liang Sicheng’s “confession” in writing during the “Cultural Revolution,” December 3, 1967, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:51:55 PM

FA Reading


195

I have worked with several Soviet experts at two different posts. Among them, two have influenced me most. One is Comrade A. S. Mochin, an â•›â•›29 expert in city planning, who is a long-time colleague of Shchusev , member of the Academy of Architecture of the USSR. He is rich in knowledge and 30 experience. The other is Professor Achepukov , correspondent member of the Academy of Architecture of the USSR. Though it is not long since they came to China, they have made remarkable contributions to the country’s urban construction and development. They have helped me change my thinking in five aspects. First, and also the most important is realization that the task of architecture, as the great Stalin has put it, is one of “showing concern and care for the people.” Second, architecture must be definitely recognized as an art. Third, there is an ideological content in architecture and city planning. This understanding covers the fourth aspect — structures in a city, nay, in a region and even in a country, must be consistent in style. Last of all, which is extremely important, is the national character of buildings. Liang Sicheng had been hard at work to devise ways of realizing his long-cherished dream of integrating traditional Chinese architecture with modernist architecture. Also during this period, he developed the theory of “architectural linguistics” and the theory of “architectural translatability,” highlighting his exploration into the laws governing architectural composition through a comparison of traditional Chinese architectural elements with the architectural vocabulary of Renaissance. Unique as they are, the theories were to win widespread recognition by Chinese architectural community. We need to remember that in the West it was until the 1970s and 31 1980s did work begin to link architecture with linguistics and semiology. Liang Sicheng disclosed his theoretical exploration at a meeting on architectural designing held in Beijing on September 26, 1952. After hearing a report delivered by Mochin on national forms of architecture, Liang Sicheng, inspired, took the floor to speak specifically on dawuding, the kind of buildings to be condemned as “wearing a Western suit with a Chinese skull cap.” “Problem lies with the ‘suit,’ not the ‘cap,’” he said. “Only by knowing the laws governing architectural creations can architects gain freedom in making architectural creations... Perceptual cognition (of architecture) must be elevated to rational cognition.” To achieve the purpose, he noted, architects must study in real earnest what he called “architectural grammar.” 29 Full name not available — Tr. 30 Full name not available — Tr. 31 Wu Liangyong, Preface to Collected Works of Liang Sicheng, Selected Papers Dedicated to the 100th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, April 2001.


10/15/2010 4:51:56 PM

196

BEIJING RECORD

For architects to understand architectural structures and the process of architectural creation, he said, “study of the architectural vocabulary is a 32 must.” Back home after his 1953 visit to the Soviet Union, Liang Sicheng spoke at the founding ceremony for the Architectural Society of China. In a report titled On Study and Use of Socialist Realism and National Heritage in Developing Architectural Art, he described the “national form of architecture” as something political, as a question of “Party spirit” with a “class character.” Meanwhile, he elaborated on his theories of architectural linguistics and translatability. “The architecture of every nation, like the nation’s language and literature, is based on a form and a set of rules used and followed by the entire nation,” Liang Sicheng said. “Every nation has a national language with its vocabulary and grammar that are also national in nature. In so far as architecture is concerned, every nation has a set of methods for processing building materials and architectural components, with which structures are constructed by following a set of rules developed by the nation. This is how the architectural form unique to the nation has come into being... By following the grammatical rules of a language, writers can, through flexible combinations of words and expressions, produce writings diverse in style and content. Likewise, every nation can construct structures that are diverse in form and style, serve diverse purposes and denote diverse feelings through flexible use of building materials and components in accordance with the architectural rules developed by the nation on its own.” The architect concluded: “So long as one nation is able to construct buildings in its own national form, no other nation should be denied of the right to use its own architectural forms for construction.” He also spoke on his rethinking of his own criticisms of those “palace-like structures.” “In the past,” he said, “a new kind of buildings Chinese in form were called ‘palace-like structures’ in a derogatory sense, suggesting our neglect of the magnificent artistic achievements made by our nation in architecture. These achievements can be developed through construction of both ordinary and 33 ‘palace-like’ buildings.” Liang Sicheng was steadfast in his theoretical exploration. In The Architecture of Our Motherland published in 1954, he said: “Only when China fell prey to foreign aggression and was made a semi-colonial country

32 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, September 26, 1952, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 33 Liang Sicheng: On Study and Use of Socialist Realism and National Heritage in Developing Architectural Art, in New Construction magazine, February 1954.


10/15/2010 4:51:56 PM

FA Reading


197

were huge numbers of buildings in various foreign styles able to break into 34 our cities such as Shanghai and Tianjin.

“For the Second Best” Across China, dawuding structures “wearing a Western suit with a Chinese skull cap” mushroomed in the 1950s. It will be unfair to put the blame solely on Liang Sicheng unless the influence of Soviet advisors and the political pressure brought to bear upon Chinese architects are forgotten or ignored. During the Party’s “rectification campaign” of 1957, Zhang Kaiji had the following to say on the dawuding issue: For a fairly long time after liberation, any person daring to question any of the Soviet experiences or say that not all Western academic views were wrong would instantly be labeled as “taking the wrong class stand,” or “backward” and even “reactionary” in thinking. Under so great a pressure, many people dared not speak out the truth even though they knew something was wrong, and there were also people who had to make the best of what was wrong instead of trying to correct it. Architects were no exception. Take this person for example. Never was I in favor of dawuding rooftops, but after liberation, I designed a lot of structure with dawuding rooftops, for which I have had to make self-criticisms. I don’t feel hurt but I think it is regrettable that construction of those dawuding structures could have been avoided had I been given just a little support. None of my original designs called for dawuding rooftops. The structures I designed 35 were to be capped by dawuding on insistence of Soviet experts. Why is it that Liang Sicheng was criticized for advocating dawuding? Many comments and analyses have been made with regard to this question, but one important fact was overlooked, that is, after the “Liang-Chen Proposal” was rejected, the architect had to “put up with the second best” of what he thought was wrong. “â•›To put up with the second best” — this is the way Wang Dongcen, director of the Land Use Division under the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau described what Liang Sicheng was to do. In a report to the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee in December 1954, the official had the following to say:

34 Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986. 35 Architects Discuss Problems with Beijing’s Urban Construction at a Meeting Held by CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, Beijing Daily, Page 1, May 20, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:51:56 PM

198

BEIJING RECORD

Mr. Liang Sicheng has somewhat modified his views in recent years. For example, he has given up the call for preserving old Beijing so that it would serve as a “museum” while building a new urban area in the city’s western suburbs. As regards the height of new buildings, he no longer insists that these should be no more than two or three storeys high. Moreover, he has personally drawn a sketch of what he thinks is the idealist high-rise structure with a dawuding rooftop. He used to insist that everything left over from the past must be kept, not only those monumental structures but also insignificant things such as temples dedicated to local land 36 gods. Now he has come to recognize the need to have some old things torn down, including for example the east and west Dongjiaominxiang archways. He even agrees to have some of the “properties” owned by our “great-great-great grandfather” relocated, like the Music Pavilions (Xili Pavilions) in front of the Imperial Taoist Temple (Dagaoxuan Hall). Nevertheless, he has been compelled to make these changes largely by the current realities. The (expected) administration center, the number of storeys for new buildings, some of the ancient buildings that obstruct traffic — these and other things have forced him to modify his stand. But is there a fundamental change in his stand? No. He is actually trying to “put up with the second best.” He agrees to let the administration center be built near Tiananmen, but he insists that buildings to be constructed there should not be higher than Tiananmen Rostrum and must be capped by dawuding to match Tiananmen Rostrum in architectural style. As new buildings have to be higher than what he proposed, he is now taking pains 37 to see to it that these are capped by various sorts of Chinese-style roofs… Liang Sicheng’s choice of the “second best” did not come all of a sudden. At first, he proposed control of the height of the buildings to be constructed in the old city. After the proposal was rejected, he had to call for effort to ensure that new building in the old city would be “Chinese in shape.” The height of new buildings was debated for the first time at a meeting chaired by Mayor Nie Rongzhen on Beijing’s city planning in November 1949. M.â•›G. Barannikov, the Soviet advisor, proposed ways of rebuilding New China’s capital city at the meeting. Elaborating, other Soviet advisors said new buildings must be good enough to meet modern needs and must be in keeping with the current technical and other conditions. They said

36 In old times, such temples were found everywhere in cities, villages and neighborhoods. They were very small, many just one square meter or two in floor area and mostly in poor conditions. “Local land gods” were believed to be the lowest in ranking in the “divine hierarchy” — Tr. 37 Wang Dongcen’s manuscripts (unpublished), December 1954, by courtesy of Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture.


10/15/2010 4:51:56 PM

FA Reading


199

construction of buildings not higher than three storeys in the expected new urban area would be uneconomical, arguing that the lower the new buildings were, the higher would be the cost of construction and maintenance of the sewer, water and road systems. According to the first master plan for Moscow’s rebuilding, they noted, new buildings shall not be lower than six 38 or seven storeys. In the old archives accessed by the author for this book, there is no evidence to whether Liang Sicheng spoke at the meeting. Nevertheless, remarks of P. V. Abramov, head of the Soviet experts’ group, suffice to prove that Liang Sicheng was in favor of “buildings not higher than two or three storeys” and argued with Soviet experts on this issue. Here is Abramov’s comment on Liang Sicheng’s stand: As far as I can understand, Professor Liang is in favor of limiting the height of new buildings to just two or three storeys. But Soviet experiences and statistics prove that construction of buildings five storeys high will be most economical provided the cost of building infrastructure facilities is counted. The cost of construction, calculated on a per square meter basis, will be reduced to the minimum. Buildings eight or nine storeys high are the second best choice. I don’t see why it is necessary to limit the height of the buildings to be constructed around Tiananmen Square to no more than two or three storeys, and why these buildings cannot be higher, say five storeys high. A building 32 storeys high has been built near the Kremlin, but Kremlin has not become less magnificent because of it. For Beijing, why not build five or six structures that are 15 to 20 storeys high? Right now, nothing is attractive in Beijing after dark and (during daytime), the White Dagoba in Beihai Park and the Jingshan Hill are the only things high enough to be eye-catching. Why must a city be so flat? Who can say this makes the city beautiful? China’s old techniques are only good for building things like artificial hills that are higher than the city walls along with some structures atop them. I believe that new techniques will be available to the People’s China, with which very high buildings can be constructed to forever showcase achievements made by this people’s democracy. Comrade Stalin has said that the most economical way of living is found in cities where construction of the water, sewer, power supply and 39 heating systems is most cost-effective. 38 Digest of the Views on Beijing’s City Planning, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995. 39 Excerpts of Abramov’s Remarks at the November 1949 Meeting on Beijing’s City Planning, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:51:56 PM

200

BEIJING RECORD

Abramov’s comment on China’s ancient construction techniques stemmed from an utter ignorance of the country’s ancient architectural achievements. The fact is that numerous high-rise buildings were constructed in ancient China. According to historical records, sovereigns of the different dukedoms during the Spring-Autumn and Warring States periods (770–221 BC) fell over one another in building palaces, pavilions and arrow towers several dozen or even more than a hundred meters in height. On order of Emperor Wudi (158–87 BC) of the Han Dynasty, Jingganlou, a tower of more than 100 meters in height, was built to the north of his imperial palace complex in Chang’an — what is now Xi’an, capital city of Shaanxi Province. Equally magnificent, if not more, are a string of high-rise structures built under the reign of Empress Wu Zetian (624–705) of the Tang Dynasty. These included the Mingtang Palace, the main hall in her palace complex, which is believed to be about 90 meters in height and 93 meters in circumference. 84 meters in height, the Liaodi Tower of the North Song Dynasty (960–1127) in Dingzhou City, Hebei Province, has survived to this day. The wooden pagoda of the Liao Dynasty (916–1125) in Fogong Temple, Yingxian County, Shanxi Province, is 67.3 meters high. This, the only surviving wooden pagoda in China and the tallest surviving timber-frame structure in the world, was found by Liang Sicheng in 1933. The different wooden components are so perfectly fixed with one another that the tower, built in 1056, has survived several major earthquakes. It is true that sophisticated techniques are needed to build modern high-rise buildings, but it is not justifiable to assess a city’s development just by counting the number of high-rise buildings in the city. The wooden pagoda in Yingxian County, Shanxi It is true that relative to low buildProvince, built in 1056 during the Liao Dynasty (photo by Wang Jun, October 2001) ings, high-rise buildings economize the use of land for construction. Nevertheless, high-rise buildings have a range of intrinsic defects. People living in apartment towers, for example, often find it difficult to communicate with their neighbors, and subsequently, crimes such as burglary are encouraged.


10/15/2010 4:51:57 PM

FA Reading


201

Such buildings have to be fitted with lifts and other equipment to make life easier, hence the increased cost of their maintenance. Once on fire, loss of lives and property would be more likely. Such a living environment is definitely detrimental to health. According to Japanese medical experts, children living in apartment towers are inferior in physical and mental development to their counterparts living in lower residential buildings. Apartment towers are also hazardous to the health of senior citizens. Work is now under way in some European cities to demolish apartment towers. The call for “fewer apartment towers for the sake of the child and elderly” has become louder and louder in not a few countries. Ancient China had relatively few high-rise structures, a phenomenon attributed to various cultural factors. A debate broke out during the Han Dynasty on whether such structures should be favored. It was brought to an end when this Confucian understanding prevailed: high-rise buildings “disrupts the harmony of Heaven and Earth, and their construction therefore 40 should be discouraged.”â•› Liang Sicheng’s stand for “limiting the height of new buildings to two or three storeys” can be attributed to a comprehensive understanding of old Beijing as an organic whole. As the architect saw it, old Beijing, spacious and with well-proportioned structures, featured a unique townscape. Indeed it did. Rising from a “sea” of siheyuan courtyards within the walled city was a string of perfectly spaced landmark buildings — the Forbidden City, the pavilion atop the Jingshan Hill, the Bell and Drum Towers, the White Dagoba in Beihai Park, the White Dagoba in the Temple of Divine Responses (Miaoying Si), the Temple of Heaven and those gate towers. Liang Sicheng had no other way out but to propose control of the height of buildings to be constructed within the walled city, fearing that the Forbidden City and other monumental structures would be overshadowed by new, higher buildings round them. On how individual structures in a city are related to the city’s cultural environment, the “Liang-Chen Proposal” had the following to state: Individual structures in a city do not exist in isolation. They must match the cultural environment of their surroundings. Structures we are going to build are bound to differ in shape from ancient structures because they are meant to meet the needs of contemporary life and will be built by using a variety of new materials. If they are built along streets in town and around Tiananmen Square, Beijing will instantly lose its original shape 40 Collected Works of Luo Zhewen on Ancient Structures, 1st edition, Cultural Relics Publishing House, March 1998.


10/15/2010 4:51:57 PM

202

BEIJING RECORD

1.

2.

3.

6.

8.

9. 11.

4.

5.

16.

7.

10.

12.

13.

14.

15.

18.

19.

17.

20.

21. 23.

22.

24.

Heights of monumental structures in old Beijing (Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998) 1. Bell Tower 46.96m 2. Xizhimeng Gate Tower 35m 3. Drum Tower 45.14m 4. Fuchengmen Arrow Tower 30m 5. Fuchengmen Gate Tower 34.2m 6. Dagoba at Miaoying Si Temple 52.37m 7. Xisi Archway 13m 8. Beihai Park Dagoba 67m


9. Wanchun Pavilion atop Jingshan Hill 62m 10. Hall of Supreme Harmony 35.05m 11. Corner Tower 27.5m 12. Dongsi Archway 13m 13. Xidan Archway 13m 14. Tiananmen 34.14m 15. Dongdan Archway 13m 16. West Access Gate 11,2m

17. Inner City wall 10–11m 18. Zhengyangmen Gate Tower 42m 19. Chongwenmen Gate Tower 40m 20. Guang’anmen Gate Tower 26m 21. The five Archways at Qianmen 14m 22. Hall of Prayer for Good Harvest in Temple of Heaven 42.16m 23. Outer City Wall 7.8m 24. Yongdingmen Gate Tower 26m

10/15/2010 4:51:58 PM

FA Reading


203

3.

1.

2.

9. 4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

10.

Section view of old Beijing’s axis (Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998) 1. Bell Tower 46.96m 2. Drum Tower 45.14m 3. Wanchun Pavilion atop Jingshan Hill 62m 4. Corner Tower 27.5m 5. Hall of Supreme Harmony 35.05m

6. Tiananmen 34.14m 7. Zhengyangmen Gate Tower 42m 8. Qianmen Arrow Tower 38m 9. Hall of Prayer for Good Harvest in Temple of Heaven 42.16m 10. Yongdingmen Gate Tower 26m

for the kind of townscape Europe is now trying hard to forestall or rectify. No matter how magnificent they are, individual buildings, if unmatched with the cultural environment of their surroundings, will throw the city into a jumble and the order of the monumental structures will be ruined. On no account must we let Beijing lose its beauty by allowing construction of hundreds of structures diverse in shape, which together 41 will occupy six to ten square kilometers of land. Meanwhile, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang were quite liberal toward the height of those buildings to be constructed in the Central Administration District of the Central People’s Government envisaged in their joint proposal, the “Liang-Chen Proposal”: Building to be constructed in Beijing’s western suburbs can form a system independent on its own, in shapes in keeping with the spirit of our times and also with China’s traditional architectural style. The purpose can be easily achieved. It won’t matter much if buildings four or five storeys high are constructed there.



10/15/2010 4:51:59 PM

204

BEIJING RECORD

But the “Liang-Chen Proposal” was rejected, meaning that construction of high-rise buildings in the walled city was now unavoidable. For Liang Sicheng, there was no other way out but to be a “diehard advocate” for “buildings limited to two or three storeys in height.” At that time, the highest building in town is the seven-storey old Beijing Hotel (the middle wing of the new, expanded Beijing Hotel), a French-style structure built in 1917 by Banque Franco-Chinoise pour le Commerce et l’Industrie that lies just a few hundred meters to the east of the Forbidden City. Commenting on the structure, Liang Sicheng once said that it could have been of “a little value” had it been built on a French beachside. But “it’s 42 a shame to have it located on Beijing’s Chang’an Avenue.”â•›

Old Beijing Hotel (now the middle wing of the new, expanded Beijing Hotel) (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

The architect proposed that new buildings around Tiananmen Square should not be higher than structures in the Forbidden City — than the middle eave of the Tiananmen Gate Tower, to be exact. Speaking at the Beijing Municipal Conference of People’s Representatives in November 1951, he urged the government to limit the height of most new buildings in the city to no more than two or three storeys. Lin Huiyin had the same view as her husband. At a meeting of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission on September 19, 1951, she

42 Wang Dongcen’s unpublished manuscripts, December 1954, by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture.


10/15/2010 4:52:00 PM

FA Reading


205

Perspective drawing of Peace Hotel, in sharp contrast with those siheyuan courtyards round it (Source: Selected Architectural Works of Yang Tingbao, 2001)

said that the height of buildings in Beijing must be “restricted, not higher 43 than the imperial palaces (in the Forbidden City).”â•› Nevertheless, their view failed to win understanding of the authorities. Their call for not constructing government office buildings on the Dongjiaominxiang playground was ignored. Moreover, the office buildings built there were higher than what they hoped to see — the highest being five storeys high. For participants at the Asia-Pacific Peace Conference of 1952, architect Yang Tingbao, on order of the government, designed the eight-storey Peace Hotel at Jinyu (Gold Fish) Hutong in Wangfujing areas near Tiananmen. Liang knew Yang quite well, both being alumni of Qinghua and the Architecture Department of the University of Pennsylvania. Despite their long-time acquaintance, Liang Sicheng was angered. At a meeting of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission to examine Yang’s design, Liang Sicheng offended his old acquaintance, saying that he was “resolutely” opposed to the designed height of the hotel. “I’ll be 44 target of public condemnation if the hotel is that high,” he warned. The Peace Hotel was built all the same, despite Liang Sicheng’s opposition. 43 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, September 19, 1951, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 44 Wang Dongcen’s unpublished manuscripts, December 1954, by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture.


10/15/2010 4:52:01 PM

206

BEIJING RECORD

Having suffered one setback after another, Liang Sicheng started reexamining his views on Beijing’s city planning. During his visit to the Soviet Union Februaryâ•›–â•›May of 1953 as a member of a delegation from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, he did see a limited number of high-rise buildings in Moscow. As construction was well-planned, he found that these structures, their shapes pleasing to the eye, added beauty to the city by serving as the city’s new heights, in contrast with those Western cities where ill-planning had led to structures one higher than another. The architect decided to withdraw a little from his original stand. Now that control of the height of new buildings in the old city was impossible, he thought, why not loosen it in some selected places while improving the city planning. Back at home, at the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress (the local legislature) in August 1953, he briefed participants on the two master urban plans worked out respectively by Hua Lanhong and Chen Zhanxiang. He had the following to say on the height of structures to be built in the city in a report titled Initial Opinions on Planning for the Capital’s Construction: In principle, structures to be built in Beijing should be no more than two or three storeys high, but a few may be higher, up to seven storeys in height. Meanwhile, a limited number of imposing structures — structures a dozen or even more than 20 storeys high — may be allowed under sound planning in some selected areas. Instead of letting high-rise buildings spring up indiscriminately, Moscow has had eight high-rise buildings built at proper places under sound planning, which have magnificent outlines and are good enough to serve as the city’s new heights. Beijing will have more open spaces for greening thanks to (a desired) reduction in population densities and construction of high-rise buildings. High-rise buildings should be constructed in a planned way and in limited numbers, so that Beijing won’t be like central New York where streets are flanked by ill-planned skyscrapers and as a result, turn out to be deep valleys dark 45 and depressing without sunshine. Both master urban plans were turned down, and Liang Sicheng’s compromise on the height of new buildings went nowhere. According to the Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing submitted to the Party by the “Changguanlou Team” in November 1953, structures to be built in Tiananmen Square and along Beijing’s main 45 Liang Sicheng: Initial Opinions on Planning for the Capital’s Construction (unpublished), by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:01 PM

FA Reading


207

streets should be seven or eight storeys high or even higher. “To economize the use of construction space and reduce the cost of infrastructure development, structures to be built in the city should, mainly, be modern buildings. Currently, new buildings should not be lower than four or five storeys high... Residential buildings to be constructed on the fringes of the city may be lower, up to three storeys high. Meanwhile, one-storey dwellings and in46 dependent courtyards are preferred in the planned convalescence zones.” That meant high-rise structures were now recognized as representing the orientation of Beijing’s development. At a meeting on North China’s urban construction in 1954, Tong Zheng, director of Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau, commented: There used to be controversies on the number of storeys new buildings should be allowed to have. Some stood for low buildings, three storeys high at the most. Some others favored higher buildings, at least three storeys high. Over the past two years, more and more people have come to favor higher buildings, thinking that would be better for Beijing, the national capital. Here is the principle for this year’s construction: except factories, hospitals and kindergartens, buildings to be constructed should mainly be four or five storeys high and at the same time, a limited number of three-storey buildings will be allowed. Buildings to be constructed may be even higher and our work will be easier if construction tasks are given to fewer appropriators to facilitate unified construction planning and unified distribution of built structures and if the annual accounting is done ahead 47 of schedule. Helpless at the sight of high-rise buildings mushrooming in the city, Liang Sicheng was again forced to seek the “second best.” Now he pinned his hope on consent of the authorities to let new buildings appear traditional in shape, so that some of old Beijing’s original features could be kept. Both Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin were under fire during the 1955 campaign against the so-called “attempts for restoration of the ancient.” The following text may reveal what was in their minds in promoting dawuding — modern structures with temple or palace-like rooftops:

46 Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995. 47 Management of Construction in Beijing around 1954, in Major Events of Party History, 1st edition, Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party History Soliciting Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995.


10/15/2010 4:52:01 PM

208

BEIJING RECORD

What kind of construction designs can be approved through examination? According to Liang’s theory, traditional architectural shapes should be adopted as far as possible. Lin Huiyin says: “It’ll be safe to let new buildings look ancient, for that will not ruin Beijing’s original shape. It’ll be difficult to foresee what will happen if the new buildings are in new 48 shapes. Such worries had already been expressed in Liang Sicheng’s letter dated August 15, 1951 to Premier Zhou Enlai. Knowing that government office buildings would be constructed on the Dongjiaominxiang playground despite his objection, he had to beg Zhou to intervene so that those new buildings would be in traditional shape: The initial designs for office buildings of the various ministries were slipshod. Though roughly in traditional shape, the buildings to be constructed will hardly be Chinese due to ignorance of the traditional construction methods (on the part of their designers). Defects of this sort can be corrected. And for that purpose I attended a meeting in mid-May though I was ill then, at which I made some technical proposals and urged architects employed by various ministries to work together to revise their designs. To my surprise, one month afterward I found out that the various ministries had each gone their own ways in changing the designed forms of the buildings to be constructed, resulting in things “neither fish nor fowl,” allegedly able to “combine what is Chinese with what is Western”! The reason given is that the kind of traditional semicircle-shaped tiles were nowhere available. If built, these structures will utterly mismatch Beijing’s townscape. Some buildings will be capped by curved roofs traditional in shape, but the roofs are to be covered with the kind of red tiles used only in the West. There are also flattops. There are parapet walls foreign in form but “decorated” with tiles used for traditional Chinese structures. One building is entirely Western according to its design, but it has something that resembles a traditional Chinese porch. All the walls are to be built with bluish black bricks except one, whose proprietor insists that red bricks be used. These buildings will be in a jumble on the most important road in Beijing. Three fourths of the land for construction of the Textile Industry Ministry’s office building cannot be used because there are sewers immediately beneath it. The designed size of the Ministry of Trade building far exceeds the proper space-land ratio of the site where 49 it is to be built. Even so, they are to start building the structure. 48 Impromptu Remarks at an Ideological Study Meeting of the Department of Architecture of Qinghua University, March 17, 1955, by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture. 49 Letter to Premier Zhou Enlai on Planning for Chang’an Avenue, in Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986.


10/15/2010 4:52:01 PM

FA Reading


209

At a meeting held by the Qinghua University Department of Architecture in May 1957 during the Party’s “Rectification Campaign,” Liang Sicheng spoke in defense of his views on China’s traditional architecture: With regard to architectural forms, my idea is that construction of “concrete boxes encased in glass” in Beijing must be opposed. In my opinion, structures in Beijing must be consistent in style and must form an organic whole. From the perspective of architectural art, structures can be compared to a kind of “solidified music.” To produce good music, a tone must be set first so that the orchestra can harmonize the different sounds. The walled part of the city is the foundation for Beijing’s development, where it won’t do to have “concrete boxes encased in glass” constructed. But the fact is that increasing numbers of “concrete boxes encased in glass” are being built in the walled part of the city. So I have done my best to promote national forms of architecture, hoping to set things right 50 by overstepping the limit. On January 10, 1969, Liang Sicheng, already labeled a “class enemy” — a “bourgeois reactionary authority” in architecture — “confessed” his “crime” of favoring dawuding in writing on order of the “work group” supervising over the “Cultural Revolution” at Qinghua University. His view on dawuding was expressed even more clearly in this written “confession,” which the author was able to access by courtesy of Lin Zhu: Having usurped a key post on the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, I, in collaboration with Chen Zhanxiang, a bourgeois rightist, dished out the Proposal on the Location of the Administration Center of the Central People’s Government, in an attempt to oppose (the Party’s policy of) rebuilding old Beijing. We vainly tried to have the administration center of the Central People’s Government built outside Fuxingmen and Fuchengmen gates so that old Beijing would be preserved to serve as a “museum.” But this vile attempt of ours was aborted by the revolutionary masses immediately after we made it. So I stepped back a little by tightening the examination of architectural designs. Abusing the power in my hands, I asked all units having such designs examined to have the buildings capped by dawuding. At the same time, I spared no effort to advertise the so-called “Chinese architecture” in writings and public speeches, stressing the following three points: 1. Architecture is an art; 2. New China’s structures must be national in form; and 3. “Monumental buildings” left over from ancient times must be preserved 50 Faculty Members of Qinghua University Department of Architecture Critical of Old Thinking on Architecture, Beijing Daily, Page 2, May 30, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:01 PM

210

BEIJING RECORD

as far as it is possible. Due to what I did, dawuding became an evil fashion across the country. At the First Session of the First National People’s Congress (in 1954), Premier Zhou Enlai severely criticized those extravagant buildings. By then, our great leader Chairman Mao had issued an instruction calling for criticism of dawuding.” Two sketches drawn by Liang Sicheng, which were used in The Architecture of Our Motherland published in 1954 to visualize “ideal structures” in his imagination, were used as “ironclad evidence” of his “crime.” All the structures in the pictures, including a 35-storey building, are capped by curved roofs in traditional style. “First,” he wrote, “all structures, large or small, can be national in form provided these are constructed by following the rules of our nation’s architectural ‘grammar.’ Second, national forms are manifested in the general outlines of a cluster of structures and the individual structures in the cluster and then in the proportion and rhyme of the wall faces, windows, doors and other parts of each individual structure. Decorative designs and patterns are of secondary importance.” In his report to the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee in December 1954, Wang Dongcen had the following to say on the two paintings: According to Liang Sicheng, all structures must be capped by dawuding, irrespective of their sizes and functions. In examination of designs for government office buildings to be constructed at Dongdan (to the east of Tiananmen), he proposed that all these be capped by dawuding. The ministries of public security and fuel and textile industries refused to comply. The Ministry of Trade accepted his proposal though reluctantly, and as a result, has had something neither fish nor fowl built for itself.

Sketch of a 35-storey building drawn by Liang Sicheng (Source: Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, Vol. IV, 1986)


Sketch of a crossroad square in downtown Beijing, drawn by Liang Sicheng (Source: Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, Vol. IV, 1986)

10/15/2010 4:52:02 PM

FA Reading


211

Liang Sicheng says there should be dawuding structures along both the East and West Chang’an Avenue. He has drawn two sketches to show how dawuding structures look like, saying that all structures round the Dongdan and Xidan (to the west of Tiananmen) squares should be modeled after those in his sketches. He was quite pleased with the sketches. He had lanternslides made of them, which he sent to the Beijing Municipal Government. (Secretary General Xue watched the slides.) No one cared much about them, prompting him to complain: “Why the Municipal Government pays no heed to the sketches to which Qinghua University attaches so much importance?” As he sees it, dawuding structures are even more important for areas round Tiananmen Square, for structures without dawuding would mismatch the (cultural) environment there. He insisted that the office building of the (Beijing Municipal) Public Security Bureau be capped by a dawuding. According to comrades of the bureau, the money thus wasted would be enough for building structures with at least 40 rooms. Besides, the bureau’s dawuding building is ugly looking, so bad that even Liang Sicheng himself has had to admit it is a failure… But he insisted that though the building is a failure, it represents the right 51 orientation for architectural designing.

“Waste” under Attack It is Mao Zedong who started the political campaign of the 1950s against dawuding — structures capped by large palace- or temple-like curved roofs. “Chairman Mao said what’s good about dawuding — those ‘Taoist caps’ and ‘turtle shells?’” architect Wang Jiqi recalled. “And the task of criticizing 52 Liang Sicheng was given to Peng Zhen.” Economist Yu Guangyuan, who worked with the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee 1948–1975, said of the campaign: “At a work conference of the Publicity Department in 1955, Director Lu Dingyi (1906–1996) of the Department said that the Party had decided to criticize Liang Sicheng’s architectural thinking. He proposed that Comrade Peng Zhen guide the campaign since things involving Liang Sicheng had mostly 53 taken place in Beijing.” The so-called dawuding originated from proposals of those Soviet experts who were in Beijing offering advices on the city’s urban construction — from Stalin’s architectural theory, to be exact. For this reason, the “anti-

51 Wang Dongcen’s manuscripts (unpublished), December 1954, by courtesy of Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture. 52 Xia Lu and Shen Yang: An Interview with Wang Jiqi on February 7, 1983, by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture. 53 Yu Guangyuan: In Memory of Peng Zhen, Trends of the Century magazine, No. 5 issue, 1997.


10/15/2010 4:52:03 PM

212

BEIJING RECORD

dawuding campaign” was kicked off only after Stalin died in 1953. To be precise, it followed the Second Congress of Soviet Architects held in November 1954, at which Nikita Krushchev (1894–1971) delivered a report titled On Extending Adoption of Industrial Methods in Construction Industry to Improve the Quality of Structures and Reduce the Cost of Construction. A campaign was kicked off in the Soviet Union to criticize the “doctrine for restoration of the ancient” in answering a call of Krushchev, the top leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In Beijing, the Chinese capital, Party members among architects and other staff members at the China Central Construction Design Institute, Beijing Institute of Architectural Design and Qinghua University Department of Architecture were called together by the CPC Municipal Committee to hear a “complete series of instructions” given them by the Party. “Those anti-popular, reactionary architectural views of formalism, which are in fact manifestations of the bourgeois ideology, were severely criticized during the meeting. Then participants studied Comrade Krushchev’s speech at the (Second) Congress of Soviet Architects and the relevant documents of the National Conference on Architectural Design and Construction.” Thanks to all this, “they were awakened to a realization of how serious the mistakes 54 (made by Chinese architects) are.”â•› 55 Even before the gathering, Chen Gan and Gao Han had already fired the first shot. The two men criticized Liang Sicheng’s view on national forms of architecture in a lengthy article in the Literature and Art Gazette published on August 30, 1954, which was titled A Deliberation on the Question of Socialist Realism in Architectural Art and on Study and Use of National Heritage. In the article, they alleged that Liang Sicheng’s architectural theory “focuses on the similarities of language and architecture without due attention to their differences, on the ‘building standards’ (Fa Shi) that condition the selection of building materials while taking no account of the fact that it is building materials that determine Fa Shi or building standards. As a result, building standards are overstressed, seen as something riding over everything else in architecture. This can be called the ‘theory that building standards decide architectural forms’ — indeed a theory that puts the incidental before the fundamental.”

54 Shen Bo: Self-Criticism of the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design for Mistakes of Practicing Formalism and Doctrine for Restoration of the Ancient, the People’s Daily, Page 2, May 5, 1955. 55 The two men were brothers. Chen Gan was then a member of the City Planning Group under the General Affairs Office of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, and Gao Han, director of the Accounting Division of the Central Newsreels and Documentary Film Studio.


10/15/2010 4:52:03 PM

FA Reading


213

“Mr. Liang’s understanding of the class nature of architectural art is abstract and confusing,” the article continued. “This is attributed primarily to his failure to reexamine his past experiences by taking a correct stand and using correct views and methodology... If we are serious about transformation of Tiananmen Square by using methods of socialist realism, we will not hesitate to call for demolishing the Chang’an Left Gate and the Chang’an Right Gate standing at the east and west sides of the square. On no account must we let this great political symbol, Tiananmen Square, be constrained by the kind of (architectural) form that is already obsolete and is causing inconvenience to our life. Life is of paramount importance. It is life that determines an art form, and art forms can only be meant to serve the needs of life... Siheyuan courtyards are good, but they have one vital defect. The main elevations of a siheyuan courtyard invariably faces inward and only one side of the wall (that surrounds it) faces outward, and even on that side windows are seldom found. What we need today are structures with their elevations facing outward, facing the streets, the city and the people... The misguided architectural concepts held by Mr. Liang may be attributed to failure on his part to criticize his own thinking thoroughly, systematically and from the perspective of history.” The campaign to criticize those “misguided” architectural concepts “thoroughly, systematically and from the perspective of history” was officially kicked off in February 1955 after much organization and preparation. From February 4 to 24, a meeting was held by the Ministry of Construction Engineering which, supposedly on architectural design and construction, turned out to be a gathering condemning “bourgeois formalism and attempts for restoration of the ancient” that “have caused huge waste of resources.” The principle was laid down for architectural designing — “practicability, economy while striving for aesthetic effects 56 provided conditions permit.”â•› At a meeting of the Beijing Municipal People’s Committee (the Municipal Government as it was called then), Peng Zhen said: “With regard to architectural forms, we made it clear three years ago that construction of dawuding structures is not compulsory and that the government must not interfere into construction of those projects that are in keeping with the city’s urban planning. Problem is that now a few people in construction departments of the government are abusing their powers wherever possible, imposing dawuding on structures and forcing others to do this and that.

56 Waste and Poor Construction Quality Exposed at Meeting of the Ministry of Construction Projects, People’s Daily, Page 1, March 3, 1955.


10/15/2010 4:52:03 PM

214

BEIJING RECORD

The Municipal Government has never given them such power. Leaders of construction departments are obliged to investigate into cases in which dawuding rooftops are imposed on buildings, as well as other cases of power abuse, so 57 that these will be properly dealt with.” In an editorial titled Fight against Waste in Construction published on March 28, the People’s Daily, the Party’s mouth, attributed waste in construction to “views held by some of our architects who stick to a formalist thinking and 业主对建筑师说：「要堂皇些，更 stand for restoration of the ancient … 堂皇些！」 Under the pretext of ‘opposing struc苏光作 turalism’ and ‘carrying forward the A cartoon satirical of dawuding in the People’s heritage of classic architecture,’ these Daily of March 18, 1955 Proprietor to architect: The more extravagant, architects have aggravated the tendency the better! of going back to what is ancient. By using palaces, temples, archways, Buddhist pagodas and other structures built under feudalism as models, they have gone all out for construction of costly towers and pavilions, structures with painted or gilded columns and beams with carved decorative patterns, for structures capped by dawuding and with stone lions placed on either side of the gate. A huge amount of manual labor has been used to do ancient pictures and other extravagant decorations (on beams of such structures), which in some cases account for 30 percent of the total construction cost of a building. While a huge waste of money, such structures are not good for practical use. Progress of construction is A cartoon satire of dawuding in the Beijing Daily of March 18, 1955 Empress Dowager Cixi: You’re more imaginative in spending often delayed as too much money than I! Unlike you, I did not demand that my kitchen in the Summer Palace be capped by a huge roof of glazed tiles! has to be done by hand, 57 Beijing Municipal People’s Committee Holds First Session, People’s Daily, Page 1, February 22, 1955.


10/15/2010 4:52:04 PM

FA Reading


215

and subsequently, use of industrial construction methods becomes impos58 sible.”â•› The same day, the People’s Daily started a column called Going All Out to Practice Economy and Fight against Waste in Capital Construction. In the following six months, the column was devoted to criticisms of dawuding structures such as the residential estate at Di’anmen area, the main building of the Central Nationalities Institute and Xijiao Guesthouse in Beijing, and Chongqing Auditorium in Chongqing City, Southwest China. Meanwhile, those involved one way or another in design and construction of dawuding buildings were forced to publish their “self-criticisms” in newspapers — to name just a few: architects Zhang Bo, Zhang Kaiji and Cheng Deng’ao; Shen Bo, deputy director of the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design; and Wang Jiqi, who doubled as deputy director of the Beijing Industrial Design Institute under the Ministry of Construction Engineering. One more “battleground” was opened by the Beijing municipal authorities with assistance of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee. A writing group of several dozen people was set up in the Hall of Heart-Cheering Views (Chang Guan Tang) of the Summer Palace and charged with drafting articles in support of the anti-waste campaign. Nevertheless, Peng Zhen told the group that criticisms of dawuding structures must be “convincing.” Such criticisms, he said, must not be sweepingly “raised to the higher plane of principle.” He urged members of the group to “conscientiously study and investigate.” “Don’t use laymen’s language,” he said. “Liang Sicheng thinks we, the Communists, know nothing about architecture. We must make him believe that we can become experts in 59 architecture through study.”â•› Scores of articles were produced before long, with foundry proofs sent to concerned leading officials for examination. Commenting on these

Di’anmen residential building (by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture)

58 The People’s Daily, Page 1, March 28, 1955. 59 Yu Guangyuan: In Memory of Peng Zhen, Trends of the Century magazine, No. 5 issue, 1997.


10/15/2010 4:52:05 PM

216

BEIJING RECORD

articles at a meeting of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, Zhou Yang, deputy director of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee, had the following to say: “Aesthetics is the weakest link in MarxismLeninism and in China, study of Marxist-Leninist aesthetics is especially inadequate. Even a layman like me cannot be turned round by your articles and how can they be used to convince experts? Let me say a few words about national forms. National forms are inherent in things left over from the past and the question of national forms is not associated with things that are new to the nation. For example cars were not invented by the Chinese and therefore there are no cars in ‘China’s national form.’ But a sword can be in national form. Put a sword on display and people will instantly identify what it is, a Burmese sword or Japanese sword. Another example is modern drama. Modern drama does not originate in China and it was brought into 60 China by Tian Han and others from Japan. Unavoidably there was a little imitation in modern drama acting at first. For one thing: the actor would shrug his shoulders supposedly to be surprised. That was not a Chinese habit and therefore often made the audience laugh. Definitely there are national architectural forms and I think it’d be better not to publish these articles. Our criticism must be directed against waste, because we do not have a theoretical basis for criticism of national architectural forms. We need to explore the theoretical aspect of the question.”

A corner of Di’anmen residential building (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

60 Tian Han (1898–1986) was a prominent playwright in contemporary China and the song writer of China’s national anthem — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:52:06 PM

FA Reading


217

Nevertheless, one “theoretical” article was published in the Study magazine on October 2, 1955. Titled My Views on Certain Mistaken Ideas in Liang Sicheng’s Architectural Thinking, the article was authored by a young man named He Zuoxiu, a Qinghua University graduate. At a meeting held in November 1950 at Qinghua University, He Zuoxiu argued that “natural sciences are devoid of a class character,” which drew the attention of Yu Guangyuan, deputy director of the Theoretical Division of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee. On Yu’s invitation, He came to work with the Party’s propaganda organ. He Zuoxiu’s article consisted of five parts under the following subtitles: Liang Sicheng Turns “Seeking Aesthetic Effects” and “Practicability and Economy” Upside Down; Liang Sicheng’s Advocate for “National Forms” Amounts to Call for Restoration of the Ancient; The So-Called Architectural “Grammar” and “Vocabulary” Are Idealist Theories; Liang Sicheng’s Architectural Theory Clashes 61 with the Party’s General Line for Building Socialism ; and Liang Sicheng’s Erroneous Views Stem from Bourgeois Idealism. He Zuoxiu asserted that “Liang Sicheng takes an unprincipled, uncritical approach” toward ancient structures. “Is it possible that planning for ancient Beijing is totally perfect? No. Take for example the city walls, which impede traffic between downtown Beijing and the city’s suburbs, forcing us to dig some entrance and exit openings through them. Huge as it is, the Forbidden City sits right in the heart of the city, forcing people to walk round it, thus aggravating the traffic problem.”

Students’ dormitory building at the Central Nationalities Institute (photo by Wang June, October 2002)

61 The ruling Communist Party’s “general line for building socialism” in this period was to realize the state industrialization and socialist transformation of agriculture, handicraft industry, and capitalist industry and commerce — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:52:06 PM

218

BEIJING RECORD

He Zuoxiu was also critical of the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” “It is impossible for Liang Sicheng not to advocate his erroneous views,” he wrote. “As everybody knows, he once called for preserving the entire city of Beijing as a museum, and for Beijing’s urban development, he proposed a principle summarized as ‘giving due consideration to both the modern and the ancient so that both can develop.’ Stubborn as he is, he has repeatedly voiced opposition to demolition of the Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate on either side of Tiananmen and the gateways at Dongdan and Xidan. Erroneous proposals such as these met with strong public opposition and were aborted one after another.”

Xijiao Guesthouse (now called “Friendship Hotel”), where Soviet experts were put up (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

Chongqing Auditorium (photo by Wang Jun, October 2000)


10/15/2010 4:52:07 PM

FA Reading


219

Attacks from China’s architectural community were equally vehement, if not more. The Architecture Journal ran three successive special issues criticizing Liang Sicheng. Chen Gan and Gao Han published a second article critical of the “national forms” Liang Sicheng had advocated. “The huge waste caused by formalist structures that has been exposed by newspapers so far comes as the most accurate test on the theory and practice upheld by Mr. Liang for architectural creation,” stated the article titled On Liang Sicheng’s Basic Understanding of the Motherland’s Architecture. “In essence, his theory and practice can only be called reactionary.” The article attempted to prove that “the theory advocated by Mr. Liang Sicheng about our country’s old structures is an indoctrination of formalism, which is difficult for us to understand.” “In trying to understand old structures,” the authors alleged, “he bases himself on a separation of old structures from their social foundation, and from the superstructure on which such social foundation was built. In trying to understand new structures, he separates construction of new structures from China’s economic conditions and social life during the transitional period. With a few excep62 tions such as Zhaozhou Bridge, ‘structures of our motherland’ cited by Mr. Liang were all meant to serve the needs of the feudal ruling class directly or indirectly. While lauding these to the skies, Mr. Liang pretends not to know anything about those structures serving the needs of the laboring people over the millenniums. He has never said a word about these structures even though they constitute the foundation of Chinese architecture.” According to the article, “attempts for restoration of the ancient” and structures resulting from such attempts were “manifestations of moribund social ideas.” Chen Gan and Gao Han admitted that “structures built on the old (social) foundation that highlights the old ideology may testify to the boundless wisdom of the laboring people.” Despite that, they asserted, “that cannot justify the demand that all old structures be preserved and that none of them be changed or demolished.” China’s architectural community “will eventually find itself in an impasse if it fails to promote dialectical materialism and oppose bourgeois idealism in studying old structures and building new structures. To publicize dialectical materialism and oppose bourgeois idealism will be a historical, arduous task to which China’s architectural community must be devoted over a long period to come. This 63 is also a major political task for now.”â•› 62 Built some 1,400 years ago, the bridge across the Jiaohe River in Zhaoxian County, Hebei Province, is the world’s oldest surviving stone arch bridge — Tr. 63 Chen Gan and Gao Han: On Liang Sicheng’s Basic Understanding of the Motherland’s Architecture, No. 1 issue, Architecture Journal, 1955.


10/15/2010 4:52:08 PM

220

BEIJING RECORD

Among those articles critical of his views, Liang Sicheng was most irritated by Criticism of Mr. Liang Sicheng’s Idealist Thinking on Architecture by Liu Dunzhen, a prominent expert in ancient Chinese architecture and a colleague at the Institute for Research in Chinese Architecture for 11 years. Liu Dunzhen accused Liang Sicheng of “putting one-sided emphasis on architectural art to the neglect the principle of economy and practicability.” “In essence,” he added, “this one-sidedness is a manifestation of bourgeois idealism.” He continued, “For protection of monumental and historical buildings, Mr. Liang Sicheng has proposed the principle of ‘giving due consideration to both the old and new so that both can develop.’ In his practical work, however, protection is just for the sake of protection. In disregard of the people’s current needs and interests, he is opposed to any change in the city’s original shape, thus seriously hampering the country’s economic 64 construction.”â•› At one of a series of meetings held by Qinghua University Department of Architecture specially for criticizing Liang Sicheng, Professor Zhou Buyi went so far as to allege that the “Liang-Chen Proposal” would “ruin (China’s) cultural heritage.” “Mr. Liang stands for building a new Beijing in old Beijing’s western suburbs so that the old city can be preserved,” he said. “He actually means to let old Beijing die a natural death. That is to say he does not mean to cherish the cultural heritage but to ruin it. His way of doing things goes against the laws governing urban development, and in no way does it have any resemblance with urban construction under the guidance 65 of materialism.”â•› Before the campaign against him was officially kicked off, Liang Sicheng had fallen ill and was hospitalized on January 2, 1955 at Tongren Hospital in Beijing. Not long afterward, Lin Huiyin, who was dying, was sent to the same hospital, hospitalized in the ward next to her husband’s. Before that, she spoke for the last time in defense of her husband. Her remarks were retold in a letter of Wang Dongcen to Xue Zizheng: Mr. Liang fell ill on December 3, and I and Chen Zhanxiang went to Qinghua to see him. Following is what Lin Huiyin said to me: 1. Some people say that Liang Sicheng stands for restoration of the ancient. I think he is wronged. 2. Some people say that he quotes views of Soviet experts that are identical with his, and never quotes their views different from his. 64 Liu Dunzhen: Criticism of Mr. Liang Sicheng’s Idealist Thinking on Architecture, Architecture Journal, No. 1 issue, 1955. 65 Zhou Buyi: Criticism of the Erroneous Architectural Views Spearheaded by Mr. Liang Sicheng (unpublished), March 24, 1955.


10/15/2010 4:52:08 PM

FA Reading


Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin survey the North Mausoleum of Shenyang in 1929. The mausoleum is where Emperor Huang Taiji (1592–1643), founder of the Qing Dynasty, and his queen are buried (by courtesy of Lin Zhu)

221

Lin Huiyin’s tomb designed by Liang Sicheng (by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture)

3. What do dawuding structures of the Central Nationalities Institute and the PLA Navy Headquarters have anything to do with Liang Sicheng? Moreover, the cost of construction for the main building of the Central Nationalities Institute didn’t increase much because of its dawuding rooftop. Reports on these matters are not true to the facts. Who made them? Lin Huiyin also talked about those double-decker beds in students’ dormitories, etc. I was quite suspicious of her: How did she know so much about what was discussed by the Municipal Party Committee that night? Mr. Liang said the following to me: 1. Architectural forms fall into two categories, one Western and the other Chinese. Some architectural designs are more of the Western in form and others, more of the Chinese. “I think right designing should be done here,” he said, gesturing with his hand to show the middle. 2. He said he was quite puzzled about why roofs must be in shape, and must not in shape (with the sides curved a little). Before we left, Lin Huiyin said Liang Sicheng and Zhang Xiruo love cultural relics, but they take different approaches toward cultural relics.


10/15/2010 4:52:09 PM

222

BEIJING RECORD

Details of the Monument to the People’s Heroes (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

Zhang loves cultural relics the way a connoisseur does… We (the Liangs) both study hard. For example we are very serious about the Dream of 66 Red Mansion campaign and we have studied all the relevant Party documents. 67 She was calm this time, not so excited like she has always been … In Tongren hospital, the Liangs, both ill, tried to keep each other company at this time of difficulty. Professor Wu Jingxiang of Tongji University, a friend, recalled: After a criticism meeting, I accompanied Liang to Tongren hospital where Lin was dying. Neither the husband nor the wife was able to speak. They just looked into each other’s eyes. I couldn’t control my feelings and I shed 68 tears. Lin died not long afterward. Lin Huiyin died On April 1, 1955. Grief-stricken, Liang Sicheng designed her tomb with a wreath in white marble relief placed in its front. The relief was designed by Lin Huiyin for the Monument to the People’s Heroes in the Tiananmen Square. 66 In the autumn of 1954, Mao Zedong launched a political campaign against “bourgeois idealism” as manifested in studies of the classic Chinese novel Dream of the Red Mansion (Hong Lou Meng) — Tr. 67 Wang Dongcen’s letter to Xue Zizheng in December 1954 (unpublished), by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture. 68 Wu Jingxiang: In Memory of Liang Sicheng, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986.


10/15/2010 4:52:09 PM

FA Reading


223

Chen Zhanxiang visited Liang Sicheng in the hospital. He recalled: Though bedridden, he told me time and again that he only wanted to see China’s cultural heritage inherited and developed. And for this aspiration, he said, he would never give up his academic thinking, and with these 69 words, he encouraged me to pluck up courage. One day in May, Peng Zhen sent people to the hospital and get Liang Sicheng to his residence, where the host and guest spent the whole afternoon chatting — in fact arguing — on the question of dawuding. In the end, Peng Zhen showed Liang Sicheng some figures of the “shocking waste” allegedly caused by dawuding. He told Liang that China was still poor and must practice economy and must make every cent 70 count. He also showed Liang newspapers in which Krushchev’s criticism of the “doctrine for restoration of the ancient” was printed. He told Liang: “Aren’t you convinced now that Comrade Krushchev says he stands against it?” Finally, Liang Sicheng agreed to make a self-criticism for his role in promoting dawuding. By piecing together what Liang Sicheng jotted down in a notebook, we may get to know what Peng Zhen stood for: The maximum interests of the people are the ultimate criterion for judging truth. Pursuit of the maximum interests of the people is the inevitable trend of history. The mass viewpoint … Practicability = people’s interests Talk of architectural art not in the context of economy is idealist. Economic foundation highlights universal truth. Heed not only what one says but also what one does … In the past, architects were able to pay no heed to economy and the people because they served the ruling class. Take a critical approach toward

Monument to the People’s Heroes (photo by Wang Jun, October 2002)

69 Chen Zhanxiang: In Memory of Professor Liang Sicheng, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986. 70 Yu Guangyuan: In Memory of Peng Zhen, Trends of the Century magazine, No. 5 issue, 1997.


10/15/2010 4:52:10 PM

224

BEIJING RECORD

the old so that it can develop. National forms are to be used, tangibly or intangibly. Things of all nations are to be used, provided they suit today’s needs. Responsible for the people, responsible for the nation Guard against architectural chauvinism Rob the people of every cent while spending money like water … A tool indispensable for production Arts are subordinate to … (Soviet advisor) Mochin paid no heed to the national economy. Art 71 is his only concern …. On May 27, Liang Sicheng, still ill, wrote My Self-Criticism for Advocating Dawuding, saying that he was willing to share the responsibility for the “waste” attributed to dawuding: I haven’t designed any building over the past six years since liberation. Nevertheless, I have spared no effort to advocate a kind of architectural “theory” through teaching at Qinghua University, through work on the Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission, through writing for various publications including the Architecture Journal under my editorship, and through social activities such as lectures and speeches I have delivered in many places. This “theory” of mine has exerted a harmful influence on the thinking of many architects, leading them astray Liang Sicheng convalescing in the Garden of Harmonious Delights (Xiequyuan) in the onto a wrong path and subsequently, to Summer Palace after Lin Huiyin died (by regrettable waste of resources. courtesy of Lin Zhu) … In the most recent two years, a number of buildings with serious defects have been built, including for example the Xijiao Guesthouse. These are costly to build, with improper plan designs and ill-planned structures. But I have always tried to find excuses for these defects, claiming that they represent the “correct” orientation and that problems with them are just of “minor importance.” Moreover, in my opinion such buildings are “a bit too few,” and they are just “not good as desired.” Though I know the Party disagrees to my “theory,” I have persistently and

71 Liang Sicheng’s work notes in May 1955, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:10 PM

FA Reading


225

stubbornly stuck to my views, and I was so self-conceited that I believed I was “upholding the truth” and I was being “isolated for a just cause.” … I think the Party is good at making and leading revolutions, but knows nothing about architecture. I have gone so far as to believe that this Party, which has liberated the Chinese people 600 million strong, is not in a position to lead construction! Like a mother who has no confidence in her son’s school, I am ill at ease to let the Party take care of “my most 72 favored son” — architecture … In November, Liang Sicheng recovered from illness. By then, the Ministry of Construction Engineering had organized several meetings criticizing the “doctrine for restoration of the ancient” and “bourgeois idealism” in architectural designing, and had received nearly 100 articles attacking Liang Sicheng. In December, the New Construction magazine had a third article jointly authored by Chen Gan and Gao Han. Titled On the Essence of Fa Shi and Liang Sicheng’s Erroneous Understanding of It, the article came as a direct attack on Liang Sicheng’s life-long study of Yingzao Fashi or Fa Shi (Building Standards) of the early 12th century. After their first article attacking Liang Sicheng was published in 1954, Chen Gan and Gao Han heard the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee held that without a correct, adequate understanding of Fa Shi, never would there be a thorough solution to the problem of waste for which Liang Sicheng was held responsible. So the brothers “were determined to study Fa Shi for a thorough understanding of it, and by dint of hard work for a whole year, made clear the social and historical background against which Fa Shi was 73 produced.” Their “study,” so to speak, resulted in “discovery” that Fa Shi was associated with the reformist movement of Wang Anshi (1021–1086), a poet and prose writer but best known as a governmental reformer who implemented his unconventional idealism through the “New Laws,” or “New Policies,” of 1069–1076. That prompted the brothers to claim that there was “class struggle” in Fa Shi, a classic of ancient Chinese architecture! In their article, Chen Gan and Gao Han said they hoped to “ascertain what Fa Shi, or Yingzao Fashi, was initially meant.” This, they believed, “may help make it clear exactly where Mr. Liang Sicheng, who uses modern

72 My Self-Criticism for Dawuding (unpublished), by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 73 Gao Han: Clear Blue Sky — Recollection of Anecdotes of Chen Gan, in Collected Works of Chen Gan — Thoughts on Beijing’s Development compiled by the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, 1996.


10/15/2010 4:52:10 PM

226

BEIJING RECORD

Water color sketch of the gate of a courtyard in the Summer Palace, done by Liang Sicheng while convalescing there (by courtesy of Liang Congjie)

architectural terminology to cover up his confusing, silly and erroneous architectural views, as well as all those who, represented by Mr. Liang Sicheng, stand for restoration of the ancient, has erred.” They alleged that Liang Sicheng “has twisted the real meaning of Fa Shi, and deprived it of its essence.” “He tries to find things that may justify his own theory from works of comrades Stalin and Mao Zedong and also from works of some Soviet experts, and use their words to whitewash himself. By doing so, he has been able to use various tricky methods to publicize his views and methods in full regalia, culminating in an evil tendency characterized by one-sided stress on ‘national forms.’ In essence, as some comrades have pointed out, he has changed the Party’s principle of ‘practicability, economy while striving for aesthetic effects provided conditions permit’ into his own principle of ‘pursuit of aesthetic effects while striving for practicability and economy provided conditions permit.’ This is, in fact, the essence of his theory in the smokescreen of Fa Shi and ‘national forms.’” At the end of 1955, Liang Sicheng prepared a draft “self-criticism,” and foundry copies of the draft were distributed among participants at various “criticism meetings” for scrutiny.


10/15/2010 4:52:11 PM

FA Reading


227

On February 3, 1956, at the Second Session of the Second National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, Liang Sicheng read out his “self-criticism.” Though reluctantly, he described everything he had done over the past two decades as “idealist and metaphysical” — his research reports on ancient Chinese architecture, his work on Chinese classics of architecture, his monographs and other writings on the history of Chinese architecture and city planning, and his theory of architectural art creation, etc. His theory of architectural art creation, he said, was a “theory of idealism” meant to “encourage a restoration of the ancient.” “Over the past seven years,” he said, “I have been sincere in supporting the Party’s political, economic and cultural policies, cheering every great achievement made by our motherland in socialist transformation and construction. But I have always resisted the Party’s policies toward city planning and architectural designing. I have done my utmost to advertise my theory even though it is erroneous, and to use it to guide Beijing’s city planning, examination of architectural designs and teaching. The harmful influence I exerted has spread from the capital city to all parts of China, culminating in an evil tendency characterized by practices of idealism for restoration of the ancient. This has not only caused a huge waste of money, the fruit of labor of our workers and peasants, that would have otherwise been used in socialist construction, but also poisoned the minds of thousands of young people who will work as architects... I always think that I am on the right side, and that the Party does not know architecture. Because of this, I have been alienated from the Party and the people and therefore I have embarked on a wrong road... It is the Party that has guided our people to liberation. It is under the leadership of the Party that we have made one great victory after another in socialist transformation and in economic construction and cultural development. Without the Party all these brilliant achievement would be unthinkable. ‘Let the Party be the political leader and let experts manage technical affairs’ — views of this sort are totally wrong. On no account must the Party’s leadership over technical affairs be open to doubt.” Liang Sicheng blamed himself for making the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” The “Liang-Chen Proposal,” he wrote, “resulted from the kind of ‘elegant taste,’ the kind of fondness of ‘musing over things of the remote past’ which, though characteristic of the feudal ruling class, are nonetheless deeply rooted in my mind. Because of this, I wanted to turn the people’s capital city into a brand new ‘fake antique,’ to force the broad masses of workers and


10/15/2010 4:52:11 PM

228

BEIJING RECORD

peasants to accept this ‘elegant taste’ by living in a Beijing with its original 74 shape retained.” The architect, as a matter of fact, was somewhat resentful of the political campaign against him, which he thought came all of a sudden. “When the campaign was kicked off,” he recalled in 1967, “I had no idea of how serious my mistakes were. Neither did I realize that I was the ‘chief culprit.’ I thought I was doing what the Soviet experts called for. Moreover, designers of those dawuding structures came to me for advice on their own accord, and I just tried my best to ‘help’ them. Later on, I got to know the criticism targeted at me was just the beginning of a fierce class struggle taking place within 75 China’s architectural community.”â•› Jin Yuelin, Liang’s philosopher friend, once tried to comfort him, saying: “You specialize in civil engineering. The art aspect of your learning is now repudiated, but you still have the other half of your ‘capital’ — the engineering aspect — at your disposal. My learning has been ‘uprooted,’ and I have to learn everything anew. My pains are definitely greater than yours. 76 But what matters if all this has to be done for the sake of the people?”â•› Fourteen years after the anti-dawuding campaign, the architect remained resentful. “I kept thinking: I had neither stocks nor housing properties, and 77 why should I be labeled as ‘bourgeois’?” he said.

74 Liang Sicheng’s Remarks at the CPPCC Session, the People’s Daily, Page 6, February 4, 1956. 75 Liang Sicheng “confession” of his “crimes” during the “Cultural Revolution,” December 3, 1967, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 76 Liang Sicheng: The Ten Years of an Intellectual, China Youth magazine published on October 1, 1959. 77 Liang Sicheng “confession” of his “crimes” during the “Cultural Revolution,” January 10, 1969, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:12 PM

FA Reading

Chapter 6


10/15/2010 4:52:12 PM

Chapter Six Perplexities of the Wise

Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate While Liang Sichang was undergoing “socialist transformation” in himself, the “socialist transformation” concerning the old city of Beijing threw him into deep perplexity. No sooner had the debate on the fate of the city walls died down than a new “encounter” started around the fate of the Chang’an Left Gate and the 1 Chang’an Right Gate in front of the Tiananmen Square. The two structures of the Ming Dynasty can be seen in the documentary film Ceremony on the Founding of the People’s Republic of China. Together with Tiananmen and Zhonghuamen, they form a T-shaped square. But the two gates were pulled down on account of obstructing traffic and parade activities. People advocating for the dismantling of the two structures held that “every year, there would be hundreds of thousands of people receiving the review by Chairman Mao. The two structures obstructed Chang’an Left Gate in 1950, by courtesy of Beijing Municipal 2 the view of the people.” Institute of City Planning & Design (BIPD)

1 The two structures were habitually called “East and West Three-Ways Gates (Sanzuomen).” According to the studies conducted by Zhang Xiande, a consultant of the Beijing Institute of Cultural Heritage, the real East and West Three-Ways Gates were situated to the east of the southern end of Nanchizi and to the west of the southern end of Nanchangjie outside the Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate. They were built in the 15th year of the reign of Emperor Qianlong of the Qing Dynasty. The Chang’an Left Gate and the Chang’an Right Gate were similar to the Zhonghuamen, all built in the Ming Dynasty while the East and West Three-Ways Gates were smaller. They were rebuilt at the beginning of the Republican period to facilitate traffic. The appearance was similar to the gateways of Nanchizi and Nanchangjie. The rebuilding was undertaken at the same time as the opening of the gateways of Nanchizi and Nanchangjie. The East and West Three-Way gates and the ochre wall were removed in 1950. See Wu Liangyong, Planning and Designing of the Tiananmen Square, carried in the Collection of Papers on City Planning and Designing, Beijing Yanshan Publishing House, 1988. 2 Chen Gan, Gao Han: A Deliberation on the Question of Socialist Realism in Architectural Art and on Study and Use of National Heritage, Wen Yi Bao (Literature and Art Gazette), No. 16 issue, August 30, 1954.


10/15/2010 4:52:13 PM

FA Reading

Perplexities of the Wise

231

“When there is military review during festivals, the military flags have to be lowered to pass the gates and that angered the army greatly. The people in the parade are waiting for long to see Chairman Mao, but the paraders are unable Chang’an Right Gate in 1952 (by courtesy of BIPD) to pass the gates till the 3 afternoon, thus unable to see Chairman Mao.” Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin tried every means to stop the dismantling action. “If the three gates are dismantled, I would hang myself there,” Lin Huiyin was quoted as saying. Lin Zhu recalled: Liang Sicheng opposed the dismantling of the East and West gates, because, to him, the gates have a big role to play in forming the Tiananmen Square. But it was the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress that adopted the resolution to dismantle them, on account of obstructing traffic, especially the procession of the parade. They hoped that the parade would get through the East and West Chang’an Avenues straight and in neat strides. With the gates standing there, the procession had to bypass them or get through the gateways and that would throw the procession into disorder. So they held the People’s Congress and summoned many tricycle riders to accuse the gates for obstructing the traffic and tell the congress how many people were killed in traffic accidents. They were determined to pull them down. At the same time, the workers were awaiting there to 4 act as soon as the revolution sailed through. The People’s Congress of Beijing was held from August 11–15, 1952. Former reporter Yang Zhengyan of the Beijing Daily, who covered the congress, recalled: Lin Huiyin spoke at the congress on behalf of Liang Sicheng. The congress was held at Zhongshantang inside the Zhongshan Park. As there were no

3 Qinghua University Department of Architecture: Collected Papers on the Ideas of Teaching (1), January 1965, by courtesy of Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture. 4 Lin Zhu recalled the event during an interview with this author, July 5, 1994.


10/15/2010 4:52:13 PM

232

BEIJING RECORD

fixed seats, a large number of soft chairs were moved there. In order to facilitate the entry and exist of the delegates, a number of passages had to be reserved. As soon as Lin Huiyin took the floor, she questioned the delegates: “Why have the chairs been arranged this way? Isn’t it for the purpose of facilitating movement? If we say that the city walls left over from the Ming Dynasty obstruct traffic, why not to open more gates?” What she said was truly provocative, as the East and West Gates in front of Tiananmen had really made it inconvenient for traffic and there were several hundred clashes between vehicles and between vehicles and pedestrians. The Beijing Municipal Party Committee and the government had long been determined to remove the gates. Workers were already on the spot, ready to swing into action as soon as the delegates put up their hands. In view of the sentiments at the meeting, Peng Zhen, for fear of the resolution being voted down, immediately called a meeting of Party members, demanding them to support the decision of the Municipal Party Committee. As most of the delegates were Party members, the decisions 5 sailed through in the end. The two gates disappeared overnight. The Chang’an Left Gate and the Chang’an Right Gate was sentenced to “death” at the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress and they disappeared

Tiananmen area of the Qing Dynasty (Source: Selected Works of Zhao Dongri, 1998)

5 Yang Zhengyan: The Biggest Foolish Move, Beijing Chronicle journal, No. 5 issue, 2000.


10/15/2010 4:52:14 PM

FA Reading


233

Zhonghuamen in 1954 (by courtesy of BIPD)

overnight. But Liang Sicheng was elected member of the Beijing People’s 6 Government Committee. The “encounter” lasted for nearly three years. After the ceremony of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, Chairman Mao Zedong proposed the building of a reviewing stand in front 7 of Tiananmen Gate in order to get closer to the people. In the meanwhile, the plan of dismantling the Chang’an Left Gate and the Chang’an Right Gate was mooted and Liang Sicheng was ordered to study the proposal.

East and West Sanzuomen (Three-Ways Gates) were dismantled in 1950. The picture shows the East Sanzuomen, east of the Chang’an Left Gate. The picture was taken on October 2, 1935 (by courtesy of Zhang Xiande)

6 The Beijing Municipal People’s Congress Closes, People’s Daily, Page 1, August 15, 1952. 7 In his Initial Opinions on Planning for the Capital’s Construction, a speech to the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress in August 1953, Liang Sicheng had this to say: “The reviewing stand of Tiananmen will be rebuilt so as to bring us closer to Chairman Mao.”


10/15/2010 4:52:15 PM

234

BEIJING RECORD

Liang Sicheng’s son Liang Congjie recalled: There was a plan to rebuild Tiananmen. But the plan was pigeonholed later on. Liang Sicheng was forced to map out the plan. Chair- Sketch for the rebuilding of Tiananmen drawn by Liang Sicheng man Mao disliked standing in his notebook in 1958 (by courtesy of Lin Zhu) on top of Tiananmen as it was too far from the people. He then gesticulated how high the Lenin Mausoleum was, saying that Tiananmen was too high and it was no good to stay high up, far removed from the people. It was better to put up a low platform by the Jinshui Bridge down below Tiananmen. Two stories would do. I saw the draft scheme. If a two-storey platform is put up, the gateways of Tiananmen would become too long, just like staircases stretching out in front of Tiananmen, with the staircases linked with the gateways. On the platform, there were also white marble rails so that Chairman Mao could stand on it to wave to the parade. The platform would be very close to the Jinshui River and edged to the Jinshui Bridge. But Liang Sicheng racked his brain. There was no way out. The decision was taken by the Central Authorities. Liang Sicheng tried to make it look not too abnormal when viewed in front, trying to make the platform part of Tiananmen, 8 an organic part. Although the scheme was completed, Liang Sicheng tried to keep it from being implemented. On May 22, 1952, he wrote to Peng Zhen, saying that his scheme could not solve any problem but degrade Tiananmen and so “I hesitated to rash into action.” Seeing that the dismantling of the Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate was becoming inevitable under huge pressures, Liang Sicheng proposed to “postpone the action until a decision was made as to 9 which scheme to adopt.” He won a few months’ time for studying. A meeting was called on May 31 to discuss the problem of rebuilding Tiananmen. The meeting raised the problem of where to remove the Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right 10 Gate. His idea was ex situ conservation of the gates. This was but his own wishful thinking. 8 Liang Congjie’s recollection during his interview with the author, November 11, 1993. 9 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, May 22, 1952, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 10 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, May 31, 1952, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:15 PM

FA Reading


235

Kong Qingpu, a retired chief engineer from the Bridge Institute of the Beijing Municipal Civil Engineering Administration who headed an engineering team for road maintenance of the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau and participated in the action of dismantling the gates, recollected: The Sanzuomen (Three-Ways Gates) often referred to by the people were actually the Chang’an Left Gate and the Chang’an Right Gate. The Chang’an Right Gate was pulled down by the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau. I participated in it. The Chang’an Left Gate was pulled down by the Beijing Municipal Construction Engineering Bureau. At that time, non-Communist party personages disagreed to pull down the two gates. But they were indeed obstructing the traffic and stood in the way of expanding the square. After several rounds of discussions, a consensus was reached to pull them down. But it required the preservation of all the parts so that they would be used when the gates were rebuilt elsewhere. For this purpose, Peng Zhen presided over a meeting. Liang Sicheng proposed removing them to inside the square, but most people were against the idea and so were the municipal leaders, as the goal was to make Tiananmen Square the biggest and the most magnificent one in the world. So most people deemed it improper to put up some isolated structures in the square. Liang Sicheng was strongly opposed to the pulling down of the two gates. Wang Mingzhi, head of the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau once said to us that Professor Liang deemed Chang’an Left Gate as his left arm and Chang’an Right Gate as his right arm. On that day, our engineering team stayed in Zhongshan Park and the team of the Construction Engineering Bureau stayed in the Cultural Palace of the Laboring People. At 4 o’clock that afternoon, we were just about to have supper when we were notified that the People’s Congress had ended, deciding to pull down the two gates. We immediately swung into action. The work was completed in one day and one night. While doing the work, we were very careful to remove the tiles one by one and removed them to the northern side of Zhonghuamen. Parts of the Left Gate were put on the left side of gate and those of the right gate were put on the right side of the gate. We used a crane, which used to belong to the Beiping City Public Works Bureau before liberation, a US-made one. The Construction Engineering team did not have any crane. They put up a scaffold. We nearly had an accident when lifting a basement stone. It was so heavy that the crane tilted, nearly collapsing on one side. When the crane turned its arm, it suddenly tilted to the right. One young man quickly got grip of the big rope and climbed up the crane arm and tightened the rope. We tried very hard to pull the rope to straighten up the arm of the crane.


10/15/2010 4:52:15 PM

236

BEIJING RECORD

The dismantling gave a lot of troubles. We had to take down the parts one by one and used a wooden chute to make the pieces slide down one by one to a straw mat at the end. For bigger pieces, such as animal-shaped decorative objects, a big basket had to be used to lift them down. In the evening, we used kerosene lamp instead of flash lights. In the afternoon the following day, both gates were pulled down and the roads were leveled by dusk. The materials were handed over to the Housing Administration Bureau. It was said that some of them were used by the Palace Museum. The stone materials had stayed on the northern side of Zhonghuamen for a number of years. It was said that Liang Sichang, Wu Han and Chai Zemin were all present on the site. It was said that all mayors would be present and we 11 were told to work in an orderly manner. The scene was still fresh in the memory of Chen Zhanxiang: “Tears were 12 rolling down from the cheeks of Mr. Liang...” To Mr. Liang, the two gates were the cream of the old city of Beijing, an indispensable part of the central axis of the city, because “From the SunFacing Gate, the axis extends further north, to Zhonghuamen Gate, and then from Zhonghuamen Gate to Tiananmen, the main gate of the Imperial City, through the middle of the Thousand-Step Corridor (Qianbulang), the Imperial Road. The length of the Thousand-Step Corridor and the width of the square both match perfectly with the size of the key structures to the south and north of the square, 13 showcasing a boldest arrangement of construction spaces.” And in this boldest spatial treatment, the Chang’an Left Gate and the Chang’an Right Gate played a key role. If the “Liang-Chen Proposal” had been adopted and if the Chang’an Avenue and Tiananmen Square and the surrounding areas had not been the seat of administrative center, there might have been another ending for the two rare structures of the Ming Dynasty. Liang Sicheng, too, had taken into consideration the traffic problems caused by the two structures. In fact, he was the best choice for accusing the structures of obstructing traffic. On May 7, 1923, Liang Sicheng and his younger brother Liang Siyong were riding on a motorbike participating in a demonstration by Beijing

11 Recollection by Kong Qingpu during an interview with the author, January 9, 2002. 12 Recollection by Chen Zhanxiang during an interview with the author, March 2, 1994. 13 Liang Sicheng: Beijing — the Best Example of City Planning, April 1951, in Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986.


10/15/2010 4:52:15 PM

FA Reading


237

students to commemorate the “National Humiliation Day.” When they reached the outlet at Nanchangjie, the car carrying Northern Warlord Army’s Secondary Commander Jin Yongyan ran head-on with the motorbike. Liang and his brother were rushed to the Union Hospital for treatment. It was established that Liang had composite femoral fracture on the left. He only started to recover after undergoing three surgeries. Since then, his left leg was about one centimeter shorter than the right. He had to suspend his study for a year and had to postpone the departure for studying abroad. Due to the leg injury, his dream of becoming a soldier busted. So he decided to study architecture abroad and serve the motherland after his return. The traffic accident left him with serious sequela. At about 40, he suffered from perichondral ossification that pressurized the central nerves system. He had to wear iron-clad jacket and work in the office. Liang Sicheng was one of the earliest to speak about traffic and accidents. On May 8, 1949, in the double capacity as a veteran driver holding European, Southeast Asian and Beijing driving licenses and having 27 years of driving experience, and as an architect studying city planning, he proposed a solution to the traffic problem. He said that the problem must be tackled from the roots. In this regard, he said that “there are both dynamic and static sides. On the dynamic side, it involves management and control. On the static side, there must be improvements in the streets, especially crossings, where there is the need of increasing safety facilities that would avert clashes and injuries of pedestrians.” He pointed out that “problems on the static side belong to city planning. That involved the improvements of all major streets and crossings… To do the work well, it is necessary to conduct a dynamic survey of the number of vehicles and predict for the future before planning the road network or system, transform 14 the road crossings and open up more gateways.” So, what Liang Sicheng conceived with regard to traffic problems, that is, traffic control and rational city planning, was based on scientific analysis. He then elaborated his ideas in the later “Liang-Chen Proposal,” saying that the problem must be resolved economically by rational zoning and the balancing of residential quarters and places for employment so as to reduce the burdens on motorized traffic. This idea is still of great practical significance today. If we see the problem of Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate in this perspective, wouldn’t it present a broader view?

14 Liang Sicheng: Vehicles and Pedestrians in Beiping City, People’s Daily, Page 2, May 8, 1949.


10/15/2010 4:52:15 PM

238

BEIJING RECORD

Wu Han Launches Attacks In November 1950, the Beijing Municipal Government decided to pull down Xi’anmen, the western gate of the imperial city during the Ming and Qing dynasties in order to improve traffic. Preparation meeting was held and it was about to act when a big fire in the small hours of December 1 flattened it. Kong Qingpu recalled: I remember that it was early winter 1950. I was then a clerk of the Road Section of the Beijing Municipal Construction Bureau. We held a meeting, deciding to pull down Xi’anmen. But early in Xi’anmen in the Republican period (1911–1949) the morning the next day, our section head told me that it was not necessary to dismantle it. A fire did the job for us. One of my colleagues also saw it when he was passing Xi’anmen on his way to the office. The fire started at the southern end of the gate. There lived the cleaning squad. They put up a fire to warm themselves, but unfortunately, the fire got out of control. They rushed to fetch water from the neighbors. At that time, there was no tap water available. People had to fetch water from wells and store it in a jar at home. So the water was not enough. Then, there was no telephone and there was no way of reporting the fire. The Traffic Section of the Public Security Bureau strongly complained about Xi’anmen, as it affected traffic. Even if the gate was not to be removed, there should be a road built around it. Later on, the municipal 15 government decided to pull it down. On December 3, 1950, the People’s Daily reported the accident, saying that the “Xi’anmen market was on fire” and “a big part of the gateway was burnt down” and claimed that the “fire was caused by the family known as Wang Chaozong, a stall keeper who sold dried fruit, cigarettes, matches and 16 other inflammables.” Who caused the fire, after all? Kong Qingpu insisted that it was caused by the cleaning squad, saying that he heard it from a report by the Con

15 Recollection by Kong Qingpu during an interview with the author, January 25, 2002. 16 Shacks are Easy to Catch Fire; Xi’anmen on Fire; Shack-Dwellers Should Learn the Lesson, People’s Daily, Page 2, December 3, 1950.


10/15/2010 4:52:16 PM

FA Reading


239

struction Bureau. The cleaning squad was an affiliate to the Public Security Bureau. At that time, there was a road on the southern side of Xi’anmen, without any houses around. There was no way for a fire to spread up to Xi’anmen. This author noticed that the report by the People’s Daily was provided by the Publicity Department of the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau. Was it that the Public Security wanted to shift the blame to others? Now let us leave it. Xi’anmen was burned down, anyway. The fire relieved the workers of their troubles. Since then, a large-scale dismantling of ancient structures began to spread. Archways used to be important structures decorating the streets of this ancient city. There were a number of wooden-structured archways toward the end of the Qing Dynasty. They included those over the streets outside Qianmen, at Dongjiaominxiang, Xijiaominxiang, East Gong’an (Public Security) Street, Sifabu (Ministry of Justice) Street, East Chang’an Avenue, West Chang’an Avenue, Dongdan, Xidan, Dongsi, Xisi, Emperors (Diwang) Temple, Dagaoxuan Hall, Beihai Bridge, Chengxian Street and Guozijian. There were also two archways by streets. They were an archway opposite Dagaoxuan Hall and the Huoshenmiao Archway in front of the Drum Tower. The Dongdan and Xidan archways were pulled down and part of the archways were converted into concrete structures during the Republican period (1911–1949). They included those outside Qianmen and at Dongjiaominxiang, Xijiaominxiang, Dongsi, Xisi, Chengxian Street, Guozijian and Beihai Bridge. At the beginning of September 1950, the Beijing Construction Bureau pulled down the archways at the East Gong’an Street and the Sifabu Street to make way for the road expansion project in front of Tiananmen. The stone tablets were preserved by the Cultural Heritage Administration under the Ministry of Culture. That was the first wave of dismantling archways after the founding of New China. It was in that month that the Beijing Construction Bureau repainted the archways along the East and West Chang’an Avenue in preparation for the celebration of the National Day. The Administrative Council, following the instructions of Premier Zhou Enlai, issued a document to the Beijing Municipal People’s Government, urging it to protect ancient structures and other historical relics. The Beijing Municipal Government immediately urged the Construction Bureau to carry out a survey of the towers and archways and other ancient building structures and come out with a plan for repairs and maintenance.


10/15/2010 4:52:16 PM

240

BEIJING RECORD

Kong Qingpu, who participated in the survey, recalled: In 1950, some citizens reported that some parts of the city walls had been damaged and needed repairs. Secretary-General Xue Zizheng assigned the job to the Construction Bureau. From then on, my specific job was to oversee the repairs of city walls, towers, pagodas, archways and screen walls and other public structures. At that time, the screen wall at the Iron-Lion Lane (Tieshizi Hutong) still bore the slogans “No civil war and No hunger” and “Go home, Yankees.” We were responsible for clearing them up. So long as there were letters from the people complaining about these matters, the Construction Bureau would take up the responsibility. I was then a clerk of the Construction Bureau in charge of bridge repairs. I was also concurrently head of the Comprehensive Technical Engineering Corps of the Road Maintenance Affairs Office. After taking some protective measures, I wrote a report. But the government asked us to carry out further surveys for better protection and repairs. Veteran engineer Lin Shizhen of the Construction Bureau was put in charge of the work. I just ran errands for him, as Mr. Lin was too old to move. I was young and helped him do the investigations. There was no car or bicycle. I could only take the trolley bus that ran round the city. I submitted my report to Vice-Mayor Zhang Youyu in mid-October. Vice-Mayor Zhang asked Vice-Mayor Wu Han to tell Liang Sichang that Beijing would repair city towers and archways. Liang Sicheng jumped with joy. One day in late November, Xue Zizheng said to Xu Jingqi, deputy head of the Construction Bureau, after a meeting at the East Hall of the city government office, “The Premier approved the repairing of city towers and the Administrative Council will appropriate some fund for the purpose. The Premier said that Chairman Mao showed great concern for the ancient buildings and historical sites and that the city towers and archways and other ancient building structures were the treasures left over from our ancestors and should be well protected. Our country was still very poor and there were a lot of areas that needed money and so the repairs should mainly be protective in nature for the time being. The central government appropriations could not be much. There must be a plan and a budget first. Specific arrangements would be made after the money was appropriated.” At that time, there was a Beijing Cultural Relics Consolidation Committee (known as CRCC) under the Ministry of Culture. CRCC was headed by Yu Tongkui. The Beijing city government wrote to CRCC on matters about repairs of city walls and archways, telling it that the Beijing Construction Bureau


10/15/2010 4:52:16 PM

FA Reading


241

would be in charge of the work, with the assistance of CRCC. Lin Shizhen and Yu Tongkui were thus put in charge of the matter. The two units started a joint survey in 1951. CRCC was in charge of designing and compiling a budget while the Construction Bureau was in charge of bidding and contracting out projects and doing the supervision. Wang Huaihou of the Construction Bureau was a specialized supervisor. He and I were the assistants to Lin Shizhen. In early January 1951, the Construction Bureau and CRCC drafted a plan for repairing city walls and archways. In mid-April, the road maintenance affairs office started the overall repairs of the archways along the East and West Chang’an Avenue entirely according to the technical procedures required of ancient building structures. On April 25, the Municipal Government notified the Construction Bureau that the Administrative Council allocated CNY1.5 billion (old currency) earmarked for ancient structure repairs and that the spending for archway repairs was listed in the annual investment by the Construction Bureau, making the repairs as simple as possible. The Construction Bureau changed the repair and renovation projects into simply maintenance project, with investment cut by half. But there were too many projects to complete in a year. By the end of 1951, we wrote another report on the second phase of repairs. But the 17 report was not approved. After that, there was a swift turnaround. In May 1952, the idea of dismantling all the archways began to brew in the Beijing Municipal Government. It was first mooted by the Traffic Section of the Public Security Bureau, which attributed the frequent traffic accidents to archways. That year, a serious traffic accident took place in front of the Beijing Library at Wenjin Street. Li Zhun, former chief engineer of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration recalled: The traffic conditions were indeed very poor. There was a downhill road leading from the Beihai Bridge westward. The driving speed was usually high. When a vehicle passed through the Jin’ao Archway, where the visibility was relatively good, it immediate came to the Sanzuomen (Three-Ways Gates) in front of the Beijing Library. There were three passageways, each big enough to allow the passage of only one vehicle. Further on, there was a bend leading northward. The vision was thus obstructed. At that time, a car was running in the east-west direction. 17 Recollection by Kong Qingpu during an interview with the author, January 9, 2002.


10/15/2010 4:52:16 PM

242

BEIJING RECORD

When it was about to enter the Sanzuomen, another car came head-on just turning from the bend. Seeing that a Soviet Expert in the car, the driver turned the car toward the gate to avoid clash. The car carrying the Soviet Expert passed the gate, but the driver of the other car was killed. There were many similar accidents. Obviously, there are conflicts between structures across the roads and the traffic and there should be a swift and 18 rational solution. In May 1953, a traffic bulletin claimed that there were four traffic accidents in front of the gate of No. 3 Girls School and attributed them to the archways of the Emperors Temple. “The props and bearing stones of the archways had been bumped into for a number of times, so much so that the whole archways were at peril. The Dongjiaominxiang was too steep in gradient and this, plus the archways, made the place an accident-prone 19 area.” On May 4, the Beijing Municipal Party Committee requested for instructions from the CPC Central Committee on the traffic problem and informed the CPC Central Committee that it planned to pull down the city towers and barbicans (or small round town outside the city gate) of Chaoyangmen and Fuchengmen so as to straighten out the road. To be dismantled together should be the archways at Dongsi, Xisi and Emperors Temple. On May 9, the plan was approved by the CPC Central Committee, with the instruction to make necessary explanations so as to win popular support. Vice-Mayor Wu Han undertook the task of explanation and came into conflict with Liang Sicheng. Liang held that city gate towers and archways were the unique cityscape of this ancient city, the city gate towers were the appositive scenes to major streets, the archways and pylons made the straight streets have more orderly and rich spaces, having the same effect as the sculptures, and arches of victory and obelisks in the west were beautiful decorations and landmarks. They could be preserved by rational planning such as Portrait of Wu Han building roundabouts. 18 Li Zhun: Cultural Relics Protection: Beijing City Planning Discussion III, in Beijing Planning and Construction magazine, No. 5 issue, 1995. 19 Kong Qingpu: Beijing Archways and Their Repairs and Removal, in Reminiscences of Hundred Schools of Architecture, China Architecture & Building Press, December 2000.


10/15/2010 4:52:17 PM

FA Reading


243

Accordingâ•‡ toâ•‡ the recollection by Wu Liangyong, Liang Sicheng once said to Premier Zhou Enlai in the presence of Wu Han and Secretary-Generalâ•‡ Xue Zizheng: “I have a lot of complaints about these twoâ•‡ leaders,â•‡ because they do not care about One of the archways of the Emperors Temple before being pulled down (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1954) the protection of city 20 towers.” Fang Ji, who was then working in the State Council, recalled: Liang Sicheng and Wu Han even colored up to the ears in the heated argument about the preservation of some archways, glazed tiled palatial gates and other ancient structures. Once at an enlarged State Council executive meeting, Wu Han jumped to his feet, shouting: “You are a stubborn conservative. When there will be high rises everywhere in Beijing, your archways and palatial gates would be so surrounded that they would be reduced to chicken cages or chicken coops. There would be no value to speak about. Mr. Liang was so infuriated that he was choked 21 with tears. We were on-spot witnesses to the event. One summer evening in 1953, Lin Huiyin also clashed with Wu Han. It was at a gathering of the Western Returned Scholars Association of China (WRSA) sponsored by Zheng Zhenduo, Head of the Social and Cultural Affairs Administrative Bureau of the Ministry of Culture. Zheng Zhenduo said that the cultural heritage left over from our ancestors had all gone at the roaring of bull-dozers. Lin Huiyin pointed at the nose of Wu Han, denouncing him loudly. Although Lin Huiyin was suffering from serious lung troubles and lost her voice, recalled Professor Chen Congzhou of the Tongji University, “From the way she spoke and the atmosphere in which she spoke, we can tell that she was filled with deep feelings in every 22 word she said.”

20 Wu Liangyong: Master of a Generation Going down in the Annals, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth, 1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986. 21 Fang Ji: Letter to China’s Famous Historical Cultural City Protection Committee, January 2000, unpublished. 22 Chen Congzhou: In Memory of Lin Huiyin, in Essays of Cheng Congzhou, 1st edition, Tongji University Press, July 1999.


10/15/2010 4:52:17 PM

244

BEIJING RECORD

Lin Zhu said to this author: “It was the directive of the Chairman to dismantle the archways. Wu Han only implemented the directive. Liang Sicheng was locked in fierce disputes with Wu Han. But Wu Han was nothing 23 but a tool. What he did was to implement the directives from above.” Liang Sicheng wrote to the central leadership, arguing that it was onesided to dismantle archways simply because of traffic requirements. It was, therefore, necessary to view cultural heritage protection and prevent traffic accidents from the perspective of the whole city planning. For instance, he said, an alternative way was to build roundabouts and preserve the archways as street scenes. Besides, there would be different ways of doing it according to different circumstances. The pairs of archways at Emperors Temple, for instance, were no obstruction to traffic at all. “The center of the streets had a net width of 6.20 meters, without any turns, enough to allow two trucks to pass in the opposite directions at a speed of 20km per hour, without the need of dodging or evading; nor was there the need of a low-speed movement. If a white line was drawn in the center of the street, it would be safer, with 5.15 meters on each side. There was no problem for the traffic to pass safely... We do not have the slightest feeling of musing over things of remote past. We simply respect the excellent creation by the ancient working people and let every street of our capital represent a vigorously new democracy and the outlook of the era of great socialism. It is, therefore, necessary to reconsider the one-sided stress on traffic and the decision to dismantle cultural relics on the alibi of ‘development.’” He proposed a survey of ancient structures so as to bring them under protection by making laws and according to classification. “It is necessary to incorporate into the new plan the protection of cultural relics. Decision should not be taken lightly concerning the destiny of cultural monunents on account of one24 sided views or according to individual preference.” Disputes became fiercer. On July 4, 1953, upon the instruction by the city government, the Beijing Construction Bureau called a forum on the dismantling of the archways at the Dongjiaominxiang and Xijiaominxiang and at the Emperors Temple. The forum agreed to dismantle the former two archways. As to the archways at the Emperors Temple, the cultural heritage departments proposed preserving it on the spot or ex situ.

23 Recollection by Lin Zhu during an interview with the author, July 5, 1994. 24 Liang Sicheng: A Letter to the Leadership on the Dismantling of the Dongsi and Xisi Archways, August 12, 1953, from Gao Yilan and Wang Menghui: Liang Sicheng’s Thinking on Protection of Ancient Cities and City Planning, Issues 1–5 of 1991 of the World Architecture magazine.


10/15/2010 4:52:17 PM

FA Reading


245

On August 20, sponsored by Wu Han, a meeting was held to discuss the protection of ancient structures. Present were Xue Zizheng, Liang Sicheng, Hua Nangui, Zheng Zhenduo, Lin Huiyin, Luo Zhewen, Ye Gongchuo and Zhu Zhaoxue. Zheng Zhenduo was firm, saying that “If ancient structures are to be pulled down, it is necessary to contact the Social and Cultural Affairs Administrative Bureau and it is up to the central authorities to decide. It is inadvisable to adopt a rude attitude.” But, Wu Han said shrewdly: “National problems must be decided by the central authorities.” Did that mean that if an issue was not national, there was no need to request for the decisions from the central authorities? Lin Huiyin said that “cultural heritage protection and new buildings cannot be separated. The purpose of protecting the old is to carry forward the fine traditions in building the new” and “the nine city gates of Beijing are symmetrical. Once they are destroyed, it would deprive the city of its foundation. If only the Hall of Prayer for Good Harvest is preserved and everything else in the Temple of Heaven is destroyed, we cannot call it protection of cultural relics.” She deemed residential buildings an important part of cultural relics protection, saying that “there are two traditions with regard to arts. One is the palatial art and the other is folk art, which should include some residential buildings and shops that are very well arranged. It is very important to find ways of preserving them.” Liang Sicheng pointed out that “Beijing has developed on the basis of its history and it is, therefore, necessary to preserve the beautiful styles that evolved in history. Some units (such as public security, communications and economic departments) only heed their own interests” and “the capital should display its exemplary role in preserving the ancient cultural relics and structures. Cautiousness is necessary.” He said that “the principle of building Moscow is to preserve the ancient structures as much as possible.” He also used “private ownership of land” to mock at the acts of destroying cultural relics and ancient structures, saying: “All Beijing government institutions seem to be obsessed with the idea of ‘private ownership of land.’ They do what they like within their turfs, without giving the slightest consideration to the whole city.” But Wu Han said: “It is necessary to heed the opinions of experts, but it 25 does not mean that their views must be accepted.”

25 Excerpts from Minutes of Meeting at the Forum on the Protection of Cultural Relics and Ancient Structures in the Capital, August 20, 1953; by courtesy of Luo Zhewen.


10/15/2010 4:52:18 PM

246

BEIJING RECORD

After the forum, the Beijing Municipal People’s Government and the Social and Cultural Affairs Administrative Bureau of the Ministry of Culture formed a joint survey group to carry out a survey of the archways and some other ancient structures in the city districts of Beijing. In the end, it was decided to adopt three measures: preservation, removal and dismantling. Those in parks and temples may be preserved; and all the others except the four at Chengxian Street and Guozijian would be removed or pulled down. Unfortunately, all the materials of the survey got lost during the “Cultural Revolution.” The archways removed from the East and West Chang’an Avenues to Taoranting Park were all dismantled upon the order by Jiang Qing, Mao Zedong’s wife in about September 1971. On December 28, 1953, when summing up a forum on the ancient structures in the capital, Wu Han said: “The forum has reached consensus 26 with regard to a few ancient structures. First, Jingdefang â•‡ shall be dismantled first, and how to handle the aftereffect will be studied later. Second, the fate

Archways at Dongjiaominxiang before being pulled down, photo by Luo Zhewen, 1954

26 The archways of the Emperors Temple.


10/15/2010 4:52:18 PM

FA Reading


247

of Di’anmen remains to be studied, but the ten houses around it will be pulled down in order to solve the traffic problem. Third, the archways at the Dongjiaominxiang and Xijiaominxiang may be pulled down.” As Liang Sicheng stuck to his stand, Premier Zhou Enlai had to come out in person to persuade him. They talked for about two hours and Liang Sicheng poetically described the charming scenes of the setting sun at the Emperors Temple. But Zhou Enlaid only replied: “Although the scene of the 27 setting sun is infinitely beautiful, it is a pity that it is already dusk.” Kong Qingpu oversaw the dismantling of Jingdefang and the archways at Dongjiaominxiang and Xijiaominxiang. He recalled the scenes of Liang Sicheng bidding farewell to the archways: The city government held Mr. Liang Sicheng in great esteem. On March 6, 1954, when we were about to dismantle the archways at Dongjiaominxiang, Vice-Mayor Zhang Youyu told us the following day to “stop until Professor Liang Sicheng shows up.” We pulled down the scaffolding the very evening and put the fir poles in front of Zhonghuamen. We waited for two days, but Mr. Liang still did not show up. We reported it to the Secretarial Office. On March 12, the Secretarial Office picked up Mr. Liang. I received him. Mr. Liang only saw the archways at Dongjiaominxiang, saying the two archways had been rebuilt with concrete. They were no longer ancient structures. Since they affected traffic, it was OK to pull them down. He also inquired about the archways at the Chang’an Avenue and when they were to be pulled down. He said that they should be preserved ex situ, as they are ancient structures, built with wood. I told him that they would be dismantled before May 1 according to plan and before June 15, the Dongsi and Xisi archways will be dismantled. He said nothing and left. After Mr. Liang left, I reported to the Bureau, saying that Mr. Liang said nothing but that the Dongjiaominxiang archways were not ancient structures. The Bureau reported it to the city government, which issued the instruction to start dismantling. But a few days later, the city government issued a circular to postpone the dismantling of the archways over the Chang’an Avenue and wait until further notice as to the dismantling of the Dongsi and Xisi archways. Later on, the archways in these places were all dismantled. Work on dismantling the Chang’an Avenue archways started at 7:00pm on August 21, all at the same time. The site was cleaned up by August 25. Work on the Dongsi and Xisi archways started on December 21 and was finished at 6:00am on December 26.

27 Lin Zhu: Architect Liang Sicheng, 1st edition, Tianjin Science and Technology Press, July 1996.


10/15/2010 4:52:18 PM

248

BEIJING RECORD

We also dismantled the Emperors Temple archways. We started preparations on January 1, 1954. On January 10, Mr. Liang Sicheng came to the site, of his own accord. When he showed up, we were putting up the scaffolding. He looked and when he saw me, he asked when the dismantling would be finished; whether photographs were taken and where to put the parts and whether there was any decision as to where it would be rebuilt. I told him that the photographs had been taken, including frontal views, side views, local views and the general layout; that we were told to dismantle it, with care taken not to damage any tiles and not to cut the wooden parts. The props and braces may be cut if necessary. The parts dismantled would be kept inside the Emperors Temple, waiting for the arrangements by the Beijing Cultural Relics Consolidation Committee. I told him that the decision as to where the archways would be rebuilt was still pending. According to Yu Tongkui of the Committee, the Central Nationalities Institute planned to build the archways inside its campus. Mr. Liang said these two archways were the best in Beijing, with the most exquisite carvings. Looking from the east to the west, there was the Fuchengmen Gate. In sunny days, the West Hill was visible, very beautiful, especially at the time when the sun was setting. He said that he wrote to Premier Zhou, pleading to preserve the archways. But the Premier said cleverly that although the scene of the setting sun was beautiful, it was pity that dusk was to fall. Sigh, it was hard to say. It was really hard to resolve the traffic problems there. The archways were dismantled because they affected traffic. Vehicles often bumped into the braces of the archways. But Mr. Liang said that it would become meaningless if the archways were removed. He asked me about the degree of decay of the wood. I told him that the initial examination showed that most of the big pieces had been seriously decayed. We had to take extreme care to dismantle them. Mr. Liang said in the end: “Thanks! Thanks! I have come to say farewell to the archways.” I accompanied him to see the Emperors Temple, which was occupied by the No. 3 Girls School. When Mr. Liang was told that the eastern flank house in the backyard had been vacated to keep the materials dismantled from the archways, he was satisfied. I did not know how beautiful the scene was. I waited for days on end to expect the beautiful scene to appear. There were sunny days and evening glories. But it was a pity I could not have any photo taken because 28 the archways were covered by the scaffoldings. Luo Zhewen, president of the China Cultural Heritage Society recalled: “Mr. Liang Sicheng cried for several days after the Emperors Temple archways 28 Recollection by Kong Qingpu during an interview with the author, January 9, 2002.


10/15/2010 4:52:18 PM

FA Reading


249

were pulled down. They were removal in name only, because no decision was taken as to where to move them. The materials dismantled from the archways were nowhere to be found. There were two Xili (Rites Practising) Pavilions in front of the Dagaoxuan Hall, in the same courtyard. The Xili Pavilions were like the Corner Towers of the Forbidden City, but more beautiful. They were also dismantled on the pretext of removal. But where to remove it? There was no decision at all. The materials were nowhere to be found either. Probably they were burned as firewood during the “Cultural 29 Revolution.” Later on, Mao Zedong set the keynote to the disputes: “To cry over the dismantling of archways and drilling holes in city gates in Beijing is a matter 30 political in nature.” The following is a record of when the Beijing archways were dismantled starting from January 1954: On January 8, 1954, Jingdefang of Emperors Temple, by the Road Maintenance Office of the Beijing Construction Bureau, completed on January 20; On March 15, the Dongjiaominxiang archways, by the Road Maintenance Office of the Beijing Construction Bureau, dismantling of the East Archway was completed on March 21 and the West Archway was completed on the morning of March 25; In mid-April, four smaller archways at the west end of Damochang, west end of Weaving and Dyeing Bureau, west end of Chuanban Hutong and south end of Xinsi Hutong;

Archway at East Chang’an Avenue moved to Taoranting Park (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1956)

The Chengxian Street Archway — One of the four over-street archways surviving in Beijing (photo by Wang Jun)

29 Recollection by Luo Zhewen during an interview with the author, September 18, 1998. 30 Li Rui: My Personal Experience of the “Great Leap Forward,” 1st Edition, Shanghai Yuandong Publishing House, March 1996.


10/15/2010 4:52:20 PM

250

BEIJING RECORD

On August 21, work on dismantling both archways on the Chang’an Avenue started at 7:00pm and was completed at 4:00am on March 25; all the wooden pieces, tiles and stones were moved to inside the north gate of Taoranting Park; On November 27, dismantling of Dajingzhuan Archway was approved by the Municipal Government; work started on December 9, finished on December 20; On December 15, a circular was issued by the Municipal government to dismantle the Dongsi and Xisi archways, the Dagaoxuan Hall archways and the Three-Ways Gates at Beihai before the Traditional Spring Festival. Work started on Dongsi and Xisi archways on December 21 and was finished at 6:00am on December 26; the stone plates were moved to the Social Beihai Bridge before being rebuilt (1950) and Cultural Affairs Bureau of (by courtesy of BIPD) the Ministry of Culture for preservation; On January 2, 1955, work started on the two over-street archways at Dagaoxuan Hall and was finished on January 14; In late May 1955 the Beijing People’s Committee issued orders to the Housing Bureau to dismantle the archway at Zhengyang Bridge. Work started on June 12 and was finished on June 21. In November, the Jin’ao and Yudong archways were dismantled when the Beihai Bridge was widened; From May 28 to June 10, 1956, the archway facing the Dagaoxuan Hall and the Xili Pavilions were dismantled during the process of widening the Jingshan Front Street; Beishangmen and other ancient structures were also dismantled. By then, only four archways were left: two on the Chengxian Street and 31 two in Guozijian. No more dismantling has been done since then. Liang Sicheng also had his rare moment of success — the preservation of Tuan Cheng (Circular City) of Beihai Park. 31 Kong Qingpu: Processes of Dismantling and Repairs of Beijing Archways, in Reminiscences of 100 Architects, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, December 2000.


10/15/2010 4:52:20 PM

FA Reading


251

Group photo of the staff members of the Social and Cultural Affairs Administrative Bureau on the Tuan Cheng in 1953 ( by courtesy of Luo Zhewen)

Tuan Cheng was an important structure of the imperial gardens during the Ming and Qing dynasties. It is surrounded by crenelled brick walls. At the beginning of the founding of New China, the Cultural Heritage Administration under the Ministry of Culture (Social and Cultural Affairs Administrative Bureau from October 1951 to May 1955) set its office in Tuan Cheng. This famous historical site escaped its fate of being dismantled although it had been accused of obstructing traffic. Liang Sicheng was infuriated at the meeting discussing the dismantling of Tuan Cheng, saying that “simply cut the road straight through by filling 32 in the ‘Sanhai’ and flattening the Forbidden City.” He paid a visit to Zhou Enlai, pleading him to stop the dismantling craze. In June 1954, Zhou Enlai conducted a fact-finding tour of Tuan Cheng and decided to preserve that important cultural heritage. Tuan Cheng was preserved. But what about the Jin’ao-Yudong Bridge? Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang came out with the following proposal: Keep the Jin’ao-Yudong Bridge intact and build a new bridge to its south, make two one-way traffic, remove the two archways in between the two bridges, with the south bridge facing right to the corner tower of the Forbidden City, rebuild the square in front of Beihai Park, erect a restaurant

32 Recollection of Liu Xiaoshi during an interview with the author, December 25, 2000.


10/15/2010 4:52:21 PM

252

BEIJING RECORD

at a place facing Beichangjie Street, open up a pathway on the southern wall of Jingshan Park, build a corridor in front of the wall for visitors to rest and see sights. Later on, Liang Sicheng instructed a civil engineering teacher at Qinghua University, Guan Zhaoye to produce Liang Sicheng talking with Zhou Enlai in Zhongnanhai in 1956 an improvement plan, which when attending to the work of formulating national plans for scientific development (by courtesy of Lin Zhu) featured wider new bridge to allow two-way traffic and the 33 original Jin’ao-Yudong Bridge was used for pedestrians only. But that plan was not accepted. Instead, the plan by the Soviet Experts was accepted. The plan was to dismantle the Jin’aoyudong Bridge and build a new one on its base. Despite this, Tuan Cheng was preserved after all. The success was too few and far between for Liang Sicheng. At the Municipal City Planning Commission, people often heard him appealing: “The pressing task was how to keep Di’anmen. Otherwise, we 34 would be thrown into a passive position again.” Di’anmen was a major ancient structure on the central axis of the city. In order to preserve it, Liang Sicheng came out with a plan for building a roundabout. But Di’anmen was dismantled all the same, in the early 1955. That was a sweeping drive to build roads. The Twin-Pagoda Qingshou Temple on the West Chang’an Avenue, which was built in the Jin Dynasty, was ordered to be dismantled to make way for traffic in 1954. Even Kublai Khan tried to save it by ordering the city 35 wall built 30 paces away from the temple. Liang Sicheng had proposed that it be kept inside a roundabout in order to enrich the roadscape, but it courted strong opposition from all sides, especially from the traffic engineers. In such circumstances, Liang Sicheng came out with another plan: “Postpone it for the time being” in the hope of preserving it for a longer period of time to see the result. But he failed, too. Soon, this valuable ancient structure disappeared. 33 Gao Yilan and Wang Menghui: Liang Sicheng’s Thinking on Protection of Ancient Cities and City Planning, Issues 1–5 of 1991 of the World Architecture magazine. 34 Manuscript by Wang Dongcen, December 1954, unpublished, by courtesy of the Library of Qinghua University School of Architecture. 35 Forty Years of Archaeological Work in Beijing, 1st edition, compiled by the Beijing Institute of Cultural Heritage, Beijing Yanshan Publishing House, January 1990.


10/15/2010 4:52:21 PM

FA Reading


253

Jin’ao-Yudong Bridge section at the beginning of the Founding of New China (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)

Bird’s-eye-view and plane chart for the transformation of the Jin’ao-Yudong Bridge by Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)

Plan for the transformation of Jin’ao-Yudong Bridge drawn by Soviet experts (Source: Collected Research Papers on Liang Sicheng’s Academic Thinking, 1996)


10/15/2010 4:52:24 PM

254

BEIJING RECORD

Tuan Cheng and Beihai Bridge after the rebuilding of roads (1956) (by courtesy of BIPD)

On November 14, 1957, Wu Han wrote an article to comment on the criticisms by “rightists” that “the present is inferior to the past” with regard to the protection of cultural heritage, saying that the Party and government leaders of Beijing went to great length in the protection of cultural heritage and relics, adding that “in order to keep pace with the city development and solve the problem of large volume of traffic, we have dismantled the Dongsi and Xisi archways, the Jingdefang at Yangshi (Lamb Market) Street and the few archways along the Chang’an Avenue. But before we did, we carefully studied and discussed the issues and sought the advice from experts. Peng Zhen went in person to see the archways at Dongsi and Xisi before taking the decision to dismantle them. All the materials left have been properly preserved. Also, Peng Zhen showed great concern for the repairs of Guozijian and Confucius Temple and the Dagaoxuan Hall Archways and Xili Pavilions before they were dismantled. He squeezed time out to see them for himself 36 before taking the decisions.” But Liang Sicheng was apparently not satisfied with all these. At that time, some leaders held that “it had better preserve fewer old things in the transformation of old Beijing. The Forbidden City Di’anmen before dismantlement (by courtesy of BIPD) may be preserved so as to 36 Wu Han: Cultural Heritage Protection in Beijing, Beijing Daily, Page 3, November 14, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:25 PM

FA Reading


255

let the future generations to see what the past was like, but it is not necessary to keep those things that could be 37 done away with.” The dismantling of Chang’an Left Gate, Chang’an Right Gate, Di’anmen, archways and other ancient structures were regarded as a “good start in the thorough and rapid regeneration 38 of the old city.” There were some people who even advocated for the regeneration of the Forbidden City and came out with a plan. This will be discussed later. Liang Sicheng was unable to figure out the reasons why and went so far as to A pagoda of the Twin-Pagoda Qingshou think that Mao Zedong “has gone back Temple (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1952) 39 on his words.” He was made to absorb architectural legacies critically and see that city and architectures were revolutionary and developmental. But Liang stubbornly insisted that what he advocated for was to “critically absorb the cream of legacies, which is revolutionary and developmental.” He told Peng Zhen straight from the shoulder: “On these matters, I am advanced while you are lagging behind” and “in 50 years, history will prove Map perceived by Liang Sicheng for the protection of the Twinyou are wrong and I am Pagoda Qingshou Temple 40 (source: Positive Urban Architectures by Guan Zhaoye, 1988) right.”

37 Wu Yuzhang’s comments, see Ideas on City Planning of Premier Zhou Enlai, Central leaders, Delegates to the 8th National Party Congress and delegates to the People’s Congress, 1956, from Gao Yilan and Wang Menghui: Liang Sicheng’s Thinking on Protection of Ancient Cities and City Planning, Issues 1–5 of 1991 of the World Architecture magazine. 38 Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995. 39 Liang Sicheng: “Confession” at the Cultural Revolution, March 4, 1968, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 40 Liang Sichang: Self-Criticism on Dawuding, May 27, 1955, unpublished, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:27 PM

256

BEIJING RECORD

Big Compounds Developed Into Enclaves What made Liang Sicheng and other city planners perplexed in the drive of removing the old to make way for the new was not only the protection of cultural monuments but also the “divide” between realities and plans, which seemed insurmountable. On September 19, 1949, Liang Sicheng wrote to Nie Rongzhen, complaining about the willful construction without the consent of the city planning commission. “If it is allowed to continue,” he said, “the construction market in Beiping would be thrown into chaos in no time and it would be very hard to set it right.” He hoped that Nie Rongzhen “would make a public announcement, to both public and private organizations and individuals in the name of the mayor and chairman of the Beiping Municipal City Planning Commission, that, apart from rebuilding projects, all the new startups, especially on existing open spaces, no matter how big or small they are and whether they are permanent or temporary, must get the advice from the City Planning Commission before making the blueprints. This is one of the major tasks of the Commission (although part of it is passive in nature). If this cannot be done, the Commission is but an empty shell that loses the value of its 41 existence.” At that time, all government organs tried to occupy former residences of princes of the Qing Dynasty, which were mostly vacant, to ease the shortages of offices. The Ministry of Public Health occupied the former residence of Prince Chun; a Liberation Army organ occupied the former residence of Prince Qing; the State Council organ occupied the former residence of Prince Li; the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) occupied the former residence of Prefectural Prince (a second rank prince) Shuncheng; the Ministry of Education occupied the former residence of Prince Zheng; the Overseas Chinese Affairs Office of the State Council occupied the former residence of Prince Li; the Office of the State Council occupied the former residence of Prince Hui; and the Ministry of Foreign Trade occupied the former residence of Prince Lian. On the western outskirts of the city, a large expanse of land was divided up by the army, resulting in one big compound after another, such as the Navy Compound, the Air Force Compound and the National Defense College Compound. On the northwestern outskirts, large areas of land were 41 Liang Sicheng: Letter to Nie Rongzhen, September 19, 1949, in Selected Works of Liang Sicheng (4), 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1986.


10/15/2010 4:52:27 PM

FA Reading


257

Map showing the locations of the Princes’ Residences in the Map of Beijing under Emperor Qianlong (Source: Studies on Architectural History, 1992)

occupied by the Central Nationalities Institute and the Renmin (People’s) University of China. The central government would appropriate money to whoever that wanted to put up buildings, without caring about occupation of land. As all the departments seemed to have a strong backing, the city planning commission was kept on the run to cope with the demand, almost becoming a “land appropriation committee.” An army commander even went so far as to question Wang Dongcen in the office of Xue Zizheng: “How can I tell our land use plan since it involves military secrets? Even we cannot


10/15/2010 4:52:28 PM

258

BEIJING RECORD

tell how we develop, let alone you.” Wang Dongcen was dumb-founded and 42 had to give out the area of land demanded.” On December 22, 1952, the People’s Daily published Liang Sichang’s article Soviet Experts Help Us Take a Correct Approach toward Architectural Designing, in which he lashed out at the independent “big compounds” phenomenon through the mouth of Soviet Experts. “Now many buildings have still retained the semi-feudal and semi-colonial colors. Each unit fenced itself up to become independent enclaves,” he said.

Distribution of the state organs in the old part of Beijing at the beginning of the founding of New China (Source: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning by Dong Guangqi, 1998)

42 Wang Dongcen: My Work at the Metropolitan Planning Committee, in History of Planning, 1st edition, compiled by the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party Records Collection Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995.


10/15/2010 4:52:28 PM

FA Reading


259

On January 31, 1953, writer Lao She complained at a study session of the Beijing Municipal Government: “Literary and art workers have neither time to write nor time to read. They need life and theories. Whenever there is a campaign, a government department would ask for things from the literary and art department, just like asking for a dozen of pencils from the Department Store. The marriage law allows two months in a case of the mother-in-law beating up the daughter-in-law. But two months are not enough to write about how the daughter-in-law resisted. It would be much better to write a love drama of permanent value without bothering the provisions of certain articles of the marriage law. It is hoped some freedom are given to literary and art workers so that they would produce something 43 good. Do not force them to rush out things.” When Liang Sicheng heard about it, he wrote in his notebook: “It is the 44 same with our master map.” Just like Chen Zhanxiang’s teacher Professor William Graham Holford, who described the Soviet Union as a “paradise for planners,” so was Liang Sicheng filled with the yearning for the socialist system after reading the book Reconstruction of Areas Destroyed in the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union written by Professor Nikolai Nikolaevich Voronin, a Soviet archaeologist who studied architecture. Liang Sicheng felt highly encouraged in 1949 when New China was founded, thinking that the golden age of city planning had come. Liang Congjie recalled: In 1949, my father was fill excitement and so was my mother who was seriously ill. They thought socialism was a system featuring planning, with only a unified planning that will be observed by all, unlike capitalism where everyone went his or her own way. My father deemed it very hard to realize city planning in capitalism, under which land was privately owned. If you wanted planning, sorry, this piece of land was mine and it was my right to build anything I like, free from the interference by the state. He thought that only under the conditions of socialism, where land was publicly owned and all activities had to be carried out in a planned way, was it possible to plan a city with a general view and make a city built according to the most scientific and the most rational manner of a master plan. But in capitalist countries, a street may be built in a variety of ways and there was no way of changing it, because it got the protection

43 Work notes of Liang Sicheng, January 31, 1953, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 44 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:52:29 PM

260

BEIJING RECORD

by law and it was the private property. Only the Communist Party could 45 solve this problem. In 1951, Liang Sicheng recalled what he felt at the time: There were several reasons for me to stay in Beijing. One was that I had not the slightest illusion about the reactionary government; the other was that I cherished my illusions for “socialism.” Starting from my theoretical studies, I thought I was a supporter of socialism. I was for socialism not only because its plans for the economy but also plans for regional, city and town, metropolis and housing as well... I thought that I was close to the Communist Party in my thinking. That was why I was willing to stay here 46 in Beijing, waiting for the Communist Party to come. Liang Sicheng was quite different from his father Liang Qichao with regard to public ownership of land. In 1906, when Liang Sicheng was five years old, his father Liang Qichao was locked in a heated debate with Dr. Sun Yatsen, a debate which was described by some historians as between “Bourgeois Reformists” represented by Liang Qichao and the “Bourgeois Revolutionaries” represented by Dr. Sun Yat-sen. Dr. Sun Yat-sen was clear-cut in his political stand for realizing the equalization of land rights by way of making the land state-owned. Liang Qichao, however, Portrait of Liang Qichao at the age of 55, was firmly against it, holding that he had (by courtesy of Lin Zhu) the “obligation” of “crushing that evil advocacy.” He wrote two articles to refute it. By analyzing the history and reasons for the private ownership of land, Liang Qichao said that the private ownership of land was a product of history. “There are historical reasons for public land ownership to evolve into private 47 ownership. It cannot be rejected.” To him, private ownership was the

45 Recollection by Liang Congxie during an interview with the author, November 11, 1993. 46 Liang Sicheng: For Whom I have Served for More than Two Decades, People’s Daily, Page 3, December 27, 1951. 47 Liang Qichao: Refuting a Newspaper for its Theory of Public Ownership of Land, Collection of Ice Drinking Room, China Book Store, 1989.


10/15/2010 4:52:29 PM

FA Reading


261

source of all civilizations of the modern society. “The biggest motivational force behind an economy comes from selfishness of mankind. The desires of humans result in economic behaviors of all descriptions. The economic desire is to garner wealth for one’s own disposal. Only when things are at one’s own disposal, one can consume, use and transfer them freely, thus consolidating one’s economic behaviors without peril.” The result of such economic behaviors was “not only favorable to me to deal in my rights with others, but also favorable to others if others deal with me with that right.” Therefore, “all the economic behaviors today are based on ownership and operated on it. As everyone wants to get or expand ownership following the economic law, all the nations would get rich and increase value, without 48 knowing it.” Liang Qichao also commented on the state-ownership of land in socialism, saying that the deprivation of private ownership of land would lead to a situation that hurt both the national economy and individuals who seek personal wealth through industrious labor. “If the concept of ownership is ignored and everybody works for justice or for satisfying the direct consumption only, is it impossible to keep up the enthusiasm of the people for work without being detriment to the whole national economy as far as the nature of man is concerned?” “Once individuals are being deprived of land ownership or the most important part of property ownership is taken away, the motivational force for industrial labor would be reduced by a big half. Socialism is certainly feasible if it refuses to recognize property ownership but seeks other ways to motivate the people to work. If a system of inhibiting the motives is adopted instead of exploiting such motives for 49 developing the national economy, it would hurt both.” But Liang Sicheng went the opposite of what his father said about land ownership. Liang was different from his father in approach. He approached the issue neither from historical sources of private land ownership nor from the motives for economic development, let alone from social contract on which private ownership is based. Nor did he have the political view of “equalization of land ownership” advocated by Dr. Sun Yat-sen. He simply approached the issue from his planning and architectural profession and arrived at the conclusion that the public ownership of land was better than private ownership and socialism was superior to capitalism.

48 Liang Qichao: Refuting a Newspaper for its Theory of Public Ownership of Land (2), Collection of Ice Drinking Room, China Book Store, 1989. 49 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:52:29 PM

262

BEIJING RECORD

Lenin’s Thatched House drawn by Liang Sicheng in his notebook in 1953 during his visit to the Soviet Union (by courtesy of Lin Zhu)

But Liang was thrown into confusion after 1949 when there was segmentation and all were going their own way without any plan. He tried to seek a solution. In 1953, Liang Sicheng visited the Soviet Union. After returning, he wrote articles extolling the superiority of the socialist system embodied in urban construction: A city built without plan cannot provide a planned economic service, just like a factory that is built not according to a production plan and a scientific production process, cannot serve production at all. All the cities and villages in the Soviet Union are being constructed and developed according to plan. The plans of these cities and villages follow the principles laid down by Comrade Stalin for urban construction. Magnitogorsk (Магнитогóрск) on the Ural River and Novorossiysk in western Siberia are but only two examples of the countless Stalin-type cities. In these cities, industrial areas are built in the leeward or downstream of residential areas to avoid soot and sewage water from invading. Residential areas are separated from industrial areas and at the same time are linked in the most convenient way. Not only do the residential areas and city centers have greened streets, squares and parks but also


10/15/2010 4:52:31 PM

FA Reading


263

factories have beautiful flowers and grass and trees. Schools are distributed in the residential areas according to the proportion of school-age children so that they can walk to school within minutes without passing trunk roads where the traffic is crowded, which ensures their safety. Besides, hospitals, kindergartens, nurseries, cultural palaces, libraries, shops, theaters, sports grounds and mini-parks are distributed according to the proportion of population, enabling every resident to have the easiest access to entertainment, welfare and resting facilities as well as daily supplies. Only under the socialist system is it possible to have such cities that have been planned according to the requirements of the economy, production and working people. It is absolutely impossible to realize it under private ownership of property and individual liberalism that seek private gains 50 under the capitalist system. In 1957, Liang Sicheng again called attention to the experience of the Soviet Union in urban construction. In the Soviet Union, city planning is the extension of the national economic plan. It goes along with planned production and improvement of the living standards of the people and other major projects in the construction of socialism and communism. It is only after the elimination of class oppression and exploitation and private land ownership, then is it possible to plan, construct and manage cities. It is impossible under the 51 capitalist system. But, the realities in China were that the long-time development without plans had gone to such extent that it was difficult to control effectively. In 1954, the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee delivered a report to the central authorities, pointing out that “it is imperative to stop the phenomena of putting up structures in any space available inside the city 52 and willfully occupying land outside the city, without cooperation.” In 1964, Vice-Premier Li Fuchun wrote a report to the central authorities, entitled On City Construction of Beijing. In the report, he said: “As the construction plan is issued to different departments, all units are responsible for their own projects and that makes it difficult for Beijing to develop in a planned manner and in large blocks of land. Till today, there is not a complete and decent street in the city. Many units want to form their own

50 Liang Sicheng: Communism-Oriented Soviet Urban Construction, China Youth Daily, March 12, 1954. 51 Liang Sicheng: Learn the Soviet Experience in Urban Construction and Building, People’s Daily, Page 7, November 14, 1957. 52 Strengthen Planning and Unification of Capital Construction, November 1954, Records on the Journey, 1st edition, Beijing Publishing House, August 1994.


10/15/2010 4:52:31 PM

264

BEIJING RECORD

patterns, resulting in irrationality in layout and disharmony in the architectural forms. Many units have fenced up to form large compounds and no buildings are planned for the near future, thus resulting in a serious waste 53 of land.” In 1982, Beijing came out with a master plan for urban construction, saying that “in the future, no big compound is allowed and the situation in which each going its own way, establishing its own turf to indulge in the pursuit for ‘big and complete’ and ‘small but complete’ must not continue.” But up to the end of the 1980s, city planners found that there were 25,000 big compounds in the city when they reviewed the implementation of the master plan for urban construction.



10/15/2010 4:52:31 PM

FA Reading

Chapter 7


10/15/2010 4:52:31 PM

Chapter Seven Pedantism

Self-defense in the Campaign of Airing Views After the 1955 soul-searching session and death of Lin Huiyin, Liang Sicheng kept silent most of the time. He said to Wang Jiqi, the then secretary-general of the Architectural Society of China: “One of these days, I will organize an association of ‘nonsense talkers’ and I will be the president, because I am the best nonsense 1 talker.”â•› He recalled later on: “Following the soul-searching session in architectural thinking, I have not written any articles on architecture except on the occasion of accepting a ‘task’ and in the ‘guideline’ imposed. I thought that 2 in this way I would not commit any mistakes anymore.”â•› In February 1955, Beijing set up a capital city planning commission. In April, with the approval of the central authorities, a nine-member Soviet expert group in urban construction came to Beijing. Following it was a Soviet subway expert group. They all came to help Beijing with the study and compilation of a master city plan. The original city planning commission ceased to exist. Although Liang Sicheng was appointed vice-chairman of the new planning commission, he ceased to do any specific work on the compilation of the master plan for urban construction. On February 27, 1957, Liang Sicheng attended an enlarged meeting of the Supreme Conference of State Affairs to hear a report by Chairman Mao Zedong on Correctly Handling the Contradictions among the People. Since then, he was involved in the campaign for airing views through debates and putting up big-character posters. The second day, at a group discussion, Liang Sicheng spoke about the problem of Bai Hua Qi Fang, Bai Jia Zheng Ming or “letting one hundred flowers blossom and one hundred schools of thought contend.” He pointed 1 Xia Lu and Shen Yang: Interview with Wang Jiqi, February. 7, 1983, not published, by courtesy of the Qinghua University School of Architecture. 2 Liang Sicheng: “Confessions” in the Cultural Revolution, January 10, 1969, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:31 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

267

out that following the criticism of “formalism” and “back-to-the-ancients” doctrine, there appeared another form of “formalism” in the disguise of structure and functions and that there appeared a one-sided stress on “economy.” That was “neither adaptive nor decent looking, only cheap but not economical” and in the end it would make the “possibilities” of decency 3 “impossible.” On April 26, Liang Sicheng spoke again on the 1955 soul-searching session at a forum on China’s architecture. He said that national style was an issue not about form only. It was an issue involving contents. The creation of national style architecture must be based on real life and the study of graphic design must be elevated to the plane of affection. He defended against the accusations of his “formularization of national style,” saying: “There is not any formula, never. There was in history, but there will never be any in the future.” He reaffirmed the necessity of studying city structure in planning and with regard to protection of ancient structures. It is necessary to stress entity and harmonious blending of both the old and the new. He also boldly put forward the idea that it is “unnecessary to apply mechanically (the Party’s theory of) the history of social development in the 4 study of the history of architecture.”â•› On April 27, the Zheng Feng Yun Dong or the “Rectification Movement” started officially. On May 17, Liang Sicheng spoke at a forum on “in and outside the Party” sponsored by the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee. While saying that “he has lived down the expectations of the Party,” he tried to defend the former city planning commission, saying that “the commission wanted to accept the Party leadership, but did not know how to and it did not get any better help from the Party Central Committee.” The Party attended to the work of compiling the master plan for city construction and was fruitful over the past three years, he went on. But there were three problems. One was that “all the original members of the committee were shut out,” making the compilation board consisting of only “Party members plus children,” another was that the work proceeded “too confidentially, without the backing of the masses of people. There is no way of commenting since everything is ready,” the third was that “there is 5 sometimes too much interference by the leadership” on technical matters. He did not know why the Twin-Tower Qingshou Temple was dismantled and why more projects were added to the Concert Hall. The Concert Hall 3 Work notes of Liang Sicheng, February 28, 1957, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 4 Work notes of Liang Sicheng, April 26, 1957, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 5 Work notes of Liang Sicheng, May 17, 1957, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:32 PM

268

BEIJING RECORD

in Zhongshan Park was put up during the Japanese puppet regime. It was an open-air structure at first, for temporary use only. After liberation, a windbreak wall was built and a roof was added. With the time going on, it became a massive permanent structure, which did not match with the sight of the Altar of Land and Grain and the Forbidden City. He also described his work at the new city planning commission as “having the position but not the corresponding power,” saying mockingly: “I do not know how to implement policies and principles and can take no correct decisions, because my political level is low.” He also complained about why he could not make decision even on such “petty matters” as the basement of the Monument to the People’s Heroes. He even surprisingly described the 1955 soul-searching campaign as “freewheeling, eccentric and indiscriminate.” He also said that Peng Zhen asked him to write as few articles as possible at the time and he did not want to write any more. “I have been idle till my temples have turned grey; neither 6 have I studied.” It so happened that the Beijing Daily published on the same day an interview with Liang Sicheng on national style and protection of ancient architecture. In the interview, Liang Sicheng continued to defend himself. Liang Sicheng stuck to his own views on the issue of national style, saying: “All objects created by people since ancient times have their own national style and even a table or a knife is no exception... The so-called national style is something that attracts the feelings of the people. Any building structure today, be it a factory premise or a nursery or a house that has existed since time immemorial, has to have its own national features. The problem lies in whether or not the architects understand the national tradition; whether or not they can correctly apply such tradition. In some new buildings in Beijing, people may find that beam head is treated as sparrow brace, just like putting a piano on an embroidered skirt, not very harmonious. This is certainly not what is known as national form... I dissent people who call erroneous things national form and negate national form.” Liang Sicheng felt puzzled at the new term Dawuding or “big roof,” saying: “Till this day I am not clear about the definition of ‘big roof.’ According to some people, something that has a ridge, a gradient and an eave, with some curves, is a ‘big roof.’ In fact, generally speaking, there are two kinds of roofs: sloping roof and flat roof (dome or round roof is also a kind of slope roof), sometimes with eaves stretching out and sometimes not; some with curves and some not. Doesn’t a ‘big roof’ has eaves stretching 6 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:52:32 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

269

out, with only a not so conspicuous ridge but without curves? I have not got clear about it, indeed. Although I like big roof with glazed tiles, my view is that before the glazed tiles are used, the production and engineering methods should be improved. At present, the manufacturing process of glazed tiles is almost the same as several hundred years ago, using a given glaze produced in a certain mountain. Even pelinite has to be stirred by cow and a 15â•›â•›cm thick mud layer has to be applied on the roof boarding. In such circumstances, architects insist on designing glazed tile big roofs. Isn’t that asking for trouble?” He sighed: “I should be responsible for the doctrine of ‘going back to the ancients’ in the area of architecture, because I have written the book Qing Structural Regulations and compiled Li Mingzhong’s Building Standards. So I am partly to blame and I have to accept the blame as I have written the two books. But I should not take all the responsibility.” He opened the book Qing Structural Regulations, pointing to the last sentence in the Foreword, which says: “To have no books would be better than to believe in books.” He opened the other book and found the wording “adding or doing away with the standards in proper contexts” in several places. He said, “No one forces architects today to regard it as a formula to copy mechanically. The two books are the experience summed up about prefabricated members and standard designs at the then historical conditions. The application of these may accelerate the pace of construction and make it easier to estimate workdays and materials to be used. It can also ensure a certain level of artistic

Beijing Children’s Hospital (photo by Wang Jun)


10/15/2010 4:52:32 PM

270

BEIJING RECORD

level and entity and uniformity. But now the situation is quite different. Nevertheless, if we learn and sleep on them, it would do us good in today’s building construction.” He was against the views that the national styles would raise the cost, saying, “I absolutely do not believe that aesthetics comes into conflict with cost. It would not necessarily cost much if we creatively apply the national styles and it is not necessary to add many decorations.” He cited the building of the children’s hospital, saying that “I think the building of the children’s hospital is the best of all new structures put up in recent years, because architect Hua Lanhong had a thorough understanding of the basic characteristics of Chinese style buildings and made the size of room, window sills all conforming to the rules of traditional proportions, thus expressive of the national style of Chinese architecture... Although it is not perfect, it expresses the national style while basically satisfying the need and the construction did not cost more than it requires. The major flaw is that its gates are not in harmony with the whole structure. But it is the fault of Xue Zizheng, who insisted that the original design be revised.” Liang Sicheng also admitted that “some structures may cost more in order to make them more pleasant looking. There are two different views about the additional cost. One is that it is worthwhile to spend such little additional money to make the building look better. The other view might be that it is not worthwhile to spend so much money in the pursuit for artistic appeal. This involves different requirements for artistic treatment of some structures.”

Details of the building of the Beijing Children’s Hospital (photo by Wang Jun)


10/15/2010 4:52:33 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

271

On the protection of ancient architectures, Liang Sicheng held: “We must take into account both the future and history of the city in city planning. Plan designers should have a strong sense of entity, putting the ancient structures that need protection into the whole city planning so as to make the ancient structures a positive factor in the modern city instead of making it a burden and designers take pleasure to shed the burden. Some people would stress modernization when talking about socialist city. In reality, a modern city should also have the elements of history. If a city is regenerated, completely doing away with ancient structures, it is not a modernized city, but an ‘upstart’ city.” Commenting on the dismantling of such ancient structures as the TwinPagoda Qingshou Temple and the Emperors Temple, he said that Beijing committed mistakes in its approach to ancient structures. “It is an utter mistake to pull down the Twin-Pagoda Qingshou Temple merely for the purpose of expanding the West Chang’an Avenue. The two towers present no obstacle to traffic at all. On the contrary, they add to the elegance of the street. If flowers and grass are planted around them, they will become beautiful islets. However, the city people’s committee had them dismantled. Why? The city people’s committee may say that they acted upon the demand by the people. But there are also people who oppose the dismantling of the temples. The two towers had survived more than 600 years. Why not allow them to continue to exist for three or five more years or even a year or so, letting it stay there for sometime and see what the people say about it. If the people really demand it pulled down, I would have nothing to say. But the people’s committee did not do that. I do not know why it had them pulled down so hastily. The result is the road had been expanded but improperly. I’m afraid that people might also complain to see so many houses (including the Twin-Pagoda Qingshou Temple ) pulled down to make way for people going to the Quanjude Roast Duck Restaurant to park their cars. “I am also against the pulling down of a small temple in front of the Central Nationalities Institute when the Xiyi Road was expanded. I proposed to retain the small temple in the middle of the road. It would not only add charm to it but also benefit the people if the 11 rooms had been turned into waiting rooms for bus passengers or bicycle repair shops. The archways of the Emperors Temple in front of the No. 3 Girls School should also have been preserved. But it was not. Now I still stick to the view that when the street is rebuilt according to plan, the original archways should be restored and put together with the existing screen wall in the island in the middle of the street and the street is made a two-way road… Perhaps some people would say: It would be very ugly to reserve such low archway among the


10/15/2010 4:52:33 PM

272

BEIJING RECORD

high rises that would be built in the city. That is no excuse. I would ask why spray fountains and sculptures are built among high rises? Aren’t spray fountains and sculptures low? I am absolutely against the way like ‘autumn wind sweeping away the tree leaves’ in treating ancient structures in the drive of city reconstruction.” “Some people may accuse me of advocating for ‘going back to the ancient’ and ‘musing over things of the remote past.’ I cannot accept such accusation. I feel that I have a strong affection of the national heritage, which is absolutely not ‘praising things of the past but deplore things of the present.’ I always appreciate ancient structures and also like all new and good things in the city. When I stood on the cruiser in the New York harbor, I appreciated the magnificent profile of the city but also deplore the disorderliness. I like the extremely smart streamlined telephone but also the former residence of Shakespeare. I have also learned to appreciate the architectures of Russia and Uzbekistan. Some people said that I like only gadgets of the imperial palaces. That is not true. In fact, what I dislike most is the arts of the imperial courts, especially those in the courts of Emperor Qian Long and Empress Dowager Ci Xi of the Qing Dynasty.” Taking up a cross-stitched patterned bib of blue home-woven cloth from the table and a cross-stitched patterned pillow cover, he said: “I also like the folk embroideries of Yunnan and Sichuan. There should be no bias with artworks. It requires a broad mind. We should neither brand it ‘feudal’ at the sight of the big roof nor oppose things modern for the exclusive love of big roof.”

Beijing Xijiao Guesthouse (Now Beijing Friendship Hotel) (photo by Wang Jun)


10/15/2010 4:52:34 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

273

“In the past, some people criticized me, accusing me of preserving Beijing as a history museum, opposing dismantling of any ancient structure. I could not help but cry out about my grievances. I approved the dismantling of Xibianmen Gate. I also agreed to dismantle the archways in front of the Dagaoxuan Hall, which were so exquisite. That was because if the ancient structures in these places were not removed, there was no way of carrying on with construction of new buildings. That is a matter of ‘life or death.’ But the situation is otherwise with the ancient structures mentioned above. That is also why I advocate for the preservation of city walls. Beijing’s city walls, as historical heritage, are unique in the world. It details no difficulty in treatment. It is a test of the wisdom of Beijing planners as to whether or not they can be well treated.” “After liberation, I failed to achieve unanimity with the Party on the problem of architecture. I was locked in disputes with Peng Zhen for a number of years. He lashed out at my views, saying that I was simply a tyrant. However, I always hold that the truth is with me. Looking back, I indeed ignored the economic factors with regard to construction. That is 7 totally wrong. But as to other accusations, I have to agree to differ.”â•› In December 1956, Liang Sicheng and Hu Yuzhi (1896–1986), secretary general of China Democratic League went to Shenyang to attend a forum of local intellectuals. Liang Sicheng said: “I and Peng Zhen are acquaintances. But we have been locked in a dispute on construction. I said that 50 years later, facts will prove that I am right. But Peng Zhen said that ‘if you are an emperor, you are sure to be tyrannical.’ Now, it seems that some of my views are not as correct as I had thought. But I dare to air my views. It won’t do for a person to have no views of his own.”

Building of the former Ministry of Communications (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

7 On National Style and Preservation of Ancient Structures – An interview with Mr. Liang Sicheng, Beijing Daily, Page 3, May 17, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:35 PM

274

BEIJING RECORD

He cited examples of how he dared to argue and encouraged others to air their views: “I have kept on my head for years the cap of ‘formalism and 8 returning to the old.’ Now it seems that I am not entirely wrong.” At some meetings during the Rectification Movement, Liang Sicheng expressed the following views: “The Party has made great achievements in socialist revolution and socialist construction and it would be flawless if it 9 has a ‘correct’ understanding of architecture.”â•› He said: “Its (Party) image is not good enough in the art of architecture. It should have done better and should have made our city look strikingly national... The Party does not 10 understand art. If it improves in this aspect, it would be perfect.” Despite the efforts of Liang Sicheng to cry out against injustice on him, some teachers of the Qinghua University Department of Architecture attending the late May 1957 forum still held that the criticism was correct, but not thorough and also too hasty, without solving the fundamental problem of formalism. But Professor Mo Zongjiang struck up a discordant tune. He held that while criticism against the doctrine of “going back to ancients” was necessary, there were many mistakes in such work and some of them have had a very bad consequence. Without knowing architecture, the Party leadership tried to recourse to political and administrative means to solve academic problems and the attitude was very rude. As a result, there would be no one who dared to talk about architectural theories for fear of asking for troubles. That was probably the reason why people in the architectural world were reluctant to air their views. He also said that in the past the criticism of national style resulted in the ignorance of carrying over the classical architectural heritage and the criticism of estheticism resulted in the non-consideration of architectural art. Exclusive economic views had thus prevailed, holding that simplicity and crudeness conformed to Party policy. The inferior quality of buildings caused alarming waste. A considerable number of teachers, however, defended Liang Sicheng against the injustice done to him, saying that it was unjust that some leading officials who also supported the “big roof” turned to blame “going back to ancients” on Liang Sicheng instead of making self-criticism. Liang Sicheng attended this forum and spoke.

8 Xie Yong: Commemoration of the Centenary Birth of Liang Sicheng, Reminiscences Vol. II, 1st edition, China Workers Publishing House, January 2002. 9 Liang Sicheng’s “Confession” in the Cultural Revolution, November 1968, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 10 Liang Sicheng: “Thoughts in the Anti-Rightist Struggle,” not published, February 20, 1968, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:36 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

275

He said that he had approved many “big roofs” in Beijing and he had much to blame. But the criticism of the notion of “going back to ancients” meant criticism of “big roof” only, without touching formalism in architecture. It just shifted to another direction, that is, copying mechanically foreign classics or glass boxes. It was still mechanical copying in form only. He did not go along with the notion that it was estheticism merely at the mention of beauty, saying: “Buildings must have the elements of beauty. Beauty exists in all physical things. Isn’t there a profile of a city? Even the land has its profile, let alone city. The profile and the city outlook are objective facts in any circumstances. Since there is the profile, it must be treated artistically. Of course, we cannot do the designing based on profile only. But I can never say yes to the view that it is wrong to talk about profile.” “The same is true with street scenes,” he said. “Artistic treatment must be done to any outer appearance. People who dare not mention beauty would come to nowhere. It is wrong to criticize architectural thinking.” In the end, he repeated his old tune, saying that “the Party does not know architecture.” He explained that he meant that “the Party does not know the art and skills of architecture, knowing nothing about space, proportion and colors of buildings.” He said, “We do not expect the Party leaders to know all these. Rather, we only expect them to trust architects with regard to the art and skills of architecture, hoping that the Party would not, like the past, take decisions by administrative means when it does not know it.” He proposed the strengthening of democratic centralism. Architects may seek comments from the people and it was up to architects to take the final decision. What Liang Sicheng said aroused a great repercussion from among many teachers. Huang Baoqing, secretary of the Department of Architecture, expressed agreement with Liang Sicheng, saying that “opposition to administrative interference is by no means the opposition to the Party leadership. It is up to the Party leadership to work out and implement policies, principles and thinking instead of interfering.” It was the general view that the then construction level was too low and it was a big problem of ignoring the artistic appeal of buildings. There were some teachers who held that the Beijing Municipal Party Committee failed to “follow the mass line” and instead they worked behind the closed doors in mapping out the master plan of city construction. They also held that “city planning is highly academic and the views of Chinese experts should 11 be heeded.” 11 Teachers of Qinghua University Department of Architecture Air Views on Problems in the Past Criticism of Architectural Thinking and in the Architectural World, Beijing Daily, Page 2, May 30, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:36 PM

276

BEIJING RECORD

Current view of Zhengyangmen (photo by Wang Jun)

During the May 17 interview by Beijing Daily, Liang Sicheng praised the building of the children’s hospital designed by Hua Lanhong as “the best of all new structures put up in recent years,” saying that “Architect Hua Lanhong had a thorough understanding of the basic characteristics of Chinese style buildings.” But he identified a major flaw of the building, which was that its gates were not in harmony with the whole structure. “But it is the fault of Xue Zizheng, who insisted that the original design be revised,” he said. However, Hua Lanhong was not at all grateful for this. He wrote to Beijing Daily, saying: Firstly, Mr. Liang has overstressed the national characteristics of architectures. I do not think it appropriate to put the way of expression of a building in the first place of creation. Glazed tiles will not necessarily be out of consideration in the future when conditions are ripe. However, for the present as well as for the future, the solution to the housing and living problems for tens of thousands of people by the most economical means should always claim the first place. To make a building acquire a national style is one of the orientations we should strive for, but the examples cited by Mr. Liang with regard to processes and shapes are far-fetched. Secondly, Mr. Liang has over-exaggerated the artistic appeal of the building of the Children’s Hospital. Although the design basically conforms to requirements for use, apart from a few drawbacks, and efforts were also made with regard to spatial treatment that presents good results locally, it cannot be said that it did not cause waste due to the pursuit for forms, such as the treatment of the water tower, the superfluous windows


10/15/2010 4:52:36 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

277

Zhengyangmen Arrow Tower in 1915 when the barbican was demolished and archways were added on both sides of the gate tower (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

and complicated lines. I designed the building. I have made some selfcriticism about these. But now I am not to demand the reversal of the case. There was indeed a dispute on the design of the front gates. But as a designer, I should be responsible for the entire structure. Thirdly, I basically go along with Mr. Liang in his principle of organic combination of the old and the new in city planning. But the examples and ways of treatment proposed by Mr. Liang are not well thought out and therefore are not convincing enough. An architect should present his principled views based on specific designs and should always stay at the level of concept. Fourthly, in order to achieve good results in the “airing views” movement, academic issues should be treated seriously. There may be total differences of views on the concrete expression of “national style,” but it would not benefit much the progress of Chinese architecture to seize some superficial phenomena and stressing some conceptual views without 12 tackling in depth the concrete contradictions in designing. The Beijing Daily published a report on Hua Lanhong’s father Hua Nangui in the same page beside the letter by Hua Lanhong. The report said that Hua Nangui refuted Liang Sicheng for his proposal of protecting the Beijing city walls. Excerpts of the report follow: On the problem of retaining or removing the city walls, Hua Nangui submitted two of his past treatises to this paper. In these writings he presented 40 benefits of removing the city walls. Chiefly among them are: (1) The removal of the city walls may link up people in and outside the city, thus eliminating the barriers between the city and its outskirts; (2)â•‡ In view of the master plan for city construction, the removal of the walls makes it easier to harmonize the architectural styles in and outside 12 Engineer Hua Lanhong Wrote to Comment on Mr. Liang Sicheng’s Views on Architecture, Beijing Daily, Page 2, June 3, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:37 PM

278

BEIJING RECORD

Beijing Ming City Wall Ruins Park in the process of construction (photo by Wang Jun, September 2002)

the city. The existence of the walls would hamper the implementation of the general plan for the capital. For instance, the International Hotel and the Xinqiao Hotel have to face narrow roads due to the obstruction of the city walls. If the walls are removed, the two hotels would face the broad street along the moat, presenting such a magnificent style that would go beyond description; (3) The general construction plan of Beijing requires a ring road and the earth of the basement of the walls may well serve as the solid road bed. The use of the basement to build a ring road would save time and money. The removal of the city walls can also make it possible to expand and green the moat to make it so splendid and beautiful that there would be no rival in the world; (4) The removal of the city walls is of great economic significance. The inner and outer walls of Beijing total about 80 li (40 kilometers) in length and 10 meters in height, with a thickness averaging 10 meters. Given that the skin is 3 meters, the removal of the walls may obtain 2.8 million cubic meters of earth, enough to fill in 700,000 square meters of low-lying land surface. The reclaimed bricks would come to 1.2 million cubic meters, amounting to 600 million pieces of ordinary bricks. Besides, the removal of the walls may free 1.2 million square meters of space, enough to build 700,000 roomed six-storey buildings. Hua Nangui also refuted the notion of regarding city walls as ancient structures that need protection. He said that it was necessary to distinguish what was cream and what was trash among historical heritage. The three 13 major halls â•‡ and the Summer Palace should be retained as they are the cream. But the walls built with brick and earth cannot be put on a par with the Summer Palace. He also opposed the proposition of building gardens on the top of the walls, saying that “people cannot enjoy the 13 The hall of Supreme Harmony, the Hall of Central Harmony and the Hall of Preserved Harmony in the Forbidden City.


10/15/2010 4:52:38 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

279

gardens as they are on the top of the walls. It also involves a big problem of watering. It takes more than 100 stairs to reach the top of the wall. Old 14 people and pregnant women cannot make it.” It was perhaps a coincidence for the Beijing Daily to publish the controversial articles by the father and son of the Hua family against Liang Sicheng. But it shows the divide between the Hua family and Liang Sicheng.

Political Storm Scholars never expected a political storm in 1957 as they had just went through an extraordinary spring in 1956. This was the year that witnessed the fastest development of the national economy since the founding of New China. Although there was still one year to go in the first five-year plan, all major targets had been met ahead of time. In January 1956, the socialist transformation of capitalist industry and commerce started from Beijing, Tianjin and Shanghai. In merely half a month, Beijing completed the merger of public and private enterprises and held a celebration on January 15, when Peng Zhen declared “our capital 15â•‡ has become a society of socialism.” At the first meeting of the preparatory session for the 8th National People’s Congress on August 30, Mao Zedong said in a poetic style: “Given 50 or 60 years, we certainly ought to have 16 overtaken the United States,” Knowledge was reevaluated. On January 14, 1956, a central meeting on intellectuals opened ceremoniously. In his report on intellectuals, Zhou Enlai issued the call to march toward science and incorporated the 17 “overwhelming majority” of intellectuals as “part of the working class.” In March, the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee approved the founding of the State Council Science Planning Commission to take charge of compiling a “12-Year Prospective Program for the Development of Science” (1956–1967). Liang Sicheng was invited to do the job. He insisted the incorporation of the study of Building Standards, which was the worst victim of the 1955 criticism, into the prospective program and succeeded.

14 People’s Deputy Hua Nangui Inspects Beijing — He Stands for Demolishing City Walls, Beijing Daily, Page 2, June 3, 1957. 15 Beijing Mayor Peng Zhen Speaks at Beijing Rally in Celebration of the Socialist Transformation, People’s Daily, Page 2, January 16, 1956. 16 Mao Zedong: Strengthen Party Unity and Carry Forward Party Traditions, Selected Works of Mao Zedong, Vol. V, 1st edition, People’s Publishing House, April 1977. 17 Zhou Enlai: Report on the Problem of Intellectuals, Selected Works of Zhou Enlai, Vol. II, 1st edition, People’s Publishing House, November 1984.


10/15/2010 4:52:38 PM

280

BEIJING RECORD

In his article Early Spring Weather of Intellectuals published by the People’s Daily on March 24, 1957, Fei Xiaotong (1910–2005), famous sociologist at Central Nationalities Institute described the state of mind of these scholars: “Zhou Enlai’s report on intellectuals is like a clap of spring thunder shaking the earth. Then comes the ‘drive of letting one hundred schools of thought contend,’ which is like a whiff of spring breeze. The intellectuals have been instantly motivated. But to ordinary old intellectuals, it seems that such weather has come too early. Their vitality has just begun to show up, but still bashfully, not confident enough. It seems that they still have a lot of misgivings. In early spring, it is inevitable that the weather is changing abruptly and by fits and starts. It is a season that is hard to end. Looking closer, there are many problems. There are always problems, of course. But the problems at the present are, after all, quite different from those of the past.” But before long, Fei Xiaotong’s article was declared an “anti-Communist 18 and anti-socialist signal for attacking the Party.” The course of event is really dramatic. Mao Zedong made two speeches concerning the movement of “Letting a Hundred Flowers Blossom and a Hundred Schools of Thought Contend,” one on April 28 and the other, on May 2, all in 1956. On May 26, Lu Dingyi, head of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee, made a report to more than 2,000 natural scientists, social scientists, medical experts, literary and art workers, aimed at motivating them and exciting their zeal to air their views freely. But half of the year passed and the response from the intellectual community was lukewarm. On February 27, 1957, Mao Zedong called the 11th Enlarged Meeting of the Supreme State Affairs. More than 1,800 people attended. He dwelled for full four hours on the problem of “how to handle correctly the contradictions among the people.” He raised the slogan “Letting a Hundred Flowers Blossom, Letting a Hundred Schools of Thought Contend and LongTerm Coexistence and Mutual Supervision,” sayings that “the Communist 19 Party can exercise supervision over the democratic parties and vice versa.” On April 27, the CPC Central Committee issued directives on the Rectification Movement, declaring war against subjectivism, bureaucracy and factionalism. On May 1, when Mao Zedong asked Zhang Xiruo for comments on 18 People’s Daily, Page 1, July 14, 1957. 19 Mao Zedong: On Correctly Handling Contradictions Among the People, Selected Works of Mao Zedong, Vol. V, 1st edition, People’s Publishing House, April 1977.


10/15/2010 4:52:38 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

281

the Party’s work, Zhang responded two weeks later: “Covetous for things big and self-indulgent in merits; eager to achieve quick success and benefits under the nose; contemptuous of things past; and placing blind faith in the future.” This political scientist, who led the People’s Liberation Army officers to invite Liang Sicheng to draw a map showing the ancient cultural sites when Beijing was besieged in 1948, had been a minister of education for seven years starting from 1952. In 1956, at a study session, he shot off his mouth: 20 “It is the degeneration of human civilization to shout ‘long life’.”â•› This straightforward man came up with the following comments at a forum of non-Communist personnel called by the United Front Department of the CPC Central Committee on May 13, 1957: “First, the emergence of factionalism with people outside the Party has its historical background. Some CPC members hold that they have seized the political power and therefore regard themselves as No. 1 authorities under heaven, putting on airs as heroes of the revolution. They have nurtured this idea toward people outside the Party: Now that the revolution has succeeded and it is good enough to ensure that you have something to eat. It would be very courteous to put you in the official position in addition to food. The purpose is nothing else but for political solidarity, much less that you are not so brilliant. You know this and so do I. This has given rise to authoritarianism, thus adopting the practice that had been adopted by all rulers since ancient times: ‘Once power in hand, just order about.’ Second, with regard to relations with the people, it cooperates with them when it has to. But at the critical moment, it would resort to the Confucius philosophy: ‘The common people should be educated in what they ought to do; but not to be informed why they 21 should do it.’”â•› Lashing out at the three major scourges, he added: “In addition to the three-isms with the CPC, there is another one, that is, dogmatism. Some CPC members have neither much education nor experience. In order to do things well, they have to resort to dogmas. They regard dogmas as the only blueprint, the only dictionary, the only principle and the only thing to turn to... If the ground for the three-isms is allowed to continue, the three-isms will appear in another form. ‘The grass cannot be burned out by a prairie fire. It grows again when the spring breeze blows.’ It is, therefore, necessary 22 for the CPC members to do constant cleansing to remove the dust.”â•› 20 Selected Works of Zhang Xiruo, 1st edition, Qinghua University Press, September 1989. 21 Zhang Xiruo says at a Forum of CPC Central Committee United Front Department: Dogmatism of the Ministry of Education is a Big Source of Troubles, Wen Hui Pao, Page 1, May 14, 1957. 22 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:52:39 PM

282

BEIJING RECORD

Two days later, at another forum sponsored by the United Front Department, he elaborated his views, calling them “four deviations”: Concerning covetous for things big and self-indulgent in merits, there are two aspects. The first is “big.” One is that it is big in physical features and the other is that it is big in organization. The big size in physical feature is the most outstanding. Many people hold that contemporary things must be big enough to keep up to contemporary standards. Take some of the new buildings for instance. The new auditorium of Beijing Hotel, the residential buildings of the Military Commission in Jingshan Houjie, the office buildings of four ministries and one commission in the western outskirts, the Wangfujing Department Store — all these look very elegant, but they are not suitable for use. Many people are not clear what “greatness” means. “Great” is an ethical concept, but not a concept in number or amount. The big size is not necessarily great in morality. Big is big; great is great. The two are not one and the same thing. However, they mistake physical greatness as being big in mass and mistake big size as great. The other is big in organization, or massiveness. Many people called massiveness great. To them, socialism is collectivism; collectivism is centralization; centralization is big; big means discarding of things small. Based on this basic thinking, the organizations of industry and commerce must be big; art and literary organizations must be big; living and recreational organization forms must be big, too. Only big organizations can satisfy their craving for greatness in disregard of the living need of the people and consumers. The organizers of industrial and commercial organizations and social organizations should have served the people. But now, they do not care about the actual needs as if the people should serve them. Why are these people coveting for things big? Apart from their inability of distinguishing between big in size and great in morality, this is an expression of their naivety, indicating their muddled mind and simplicity. The second is eager to get quick success and benefits under the nose. This seems not square with the covetousness for things big and impressive. In reality, it is the two sides of the same coin: One side is covetousness for things big and self-indulgence in merits, and the other side is eagerness for quick success. One of the expressions is stressing instant success. Instant success is necessary in certain circumstances; but it is no good to seek instant success in doing the long-term things. Things should be divided into long-term and short-term. There must be the distinction between a fundamental project for hundred years to come and a minor one for ten years to come. They seek instant success not only in what is tangible but also in what is intangible, especially in profound learning. At present,


10/15/2010 4:52:39 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

283

the institutions of higher learning seem to have not fully recognized this point in training people. They think that a student would have learned enough after finishing university and becoming an associate professor and professor. In reality, all of them, except a few, are far from enough in learning. This is true with the old learning but also true with the new knowledge. The third is contemptuousness of things past. History is inheritable. The wisdom of mankind comes from long-term accumulation. Many people cast a blind eye to the historical factors. They copy all foreign dogmas and regard what is left from history as feudalistic that must be discarded. They hold that when new things come, what is old must be discarded. In fact, our history has left us a wealth of cultural heritage. However, they know little about China’s history and the new society. The fourth is placing blind faith in the future. The future will, of course, be better than the present. But not all things develop into the future. Some will develop and some will stagnate; some may retrogress; and some may be eliminated. In addition, development is uneven, rather than at high speed mechanically. In a word, things in the future are not all developing, right or wrong and big or trivial. It is, therefore, not correct 23 to negate the past and place blind faith in the future. Chen Mingshu, Standing Committee member of the Central Committee of the Revolutionary Committee of Kuomintang, shared the same views with Zhang Xiruo. He wrote a letter, criticizing Mao Zedong in similar terms as Zhang Xiruo did: “Covetous for things big and self-indulgent in merits; capricious in mood, partial to one-side story and despising things past.” Mao Zedong was cool-headedly watching what these scholars were saying and doing. The second day after Zhang Xiruo lashed out at “four deviations,” that is, on May 16, Li Weihan, head of the CPC Central Committee United Front Work Department, suddenly announced the suspension of the rectification forum of democratic personages for four days till May 21. The reason was to set up a group to sort out what the participants said and get everything ready for continuing the meeting. Li Weihan in his book Recollection and Studies published in 1986 revealed the secrets for the emergency suspension of the forum: When the forum of democratic parties and people without party affiliation started, Comrade Mao Zedong did not say about fighting against rightists. I did not hold the forum for the purpose, either. It is not “luring a snake 23 CPC United Front Department Continues Forum, Wen Hui Pao, Page 4, May 16, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:39 PM

284

BEIJING RECORD

out of its hole.” I reported to the Standing Committee of the CPC Central Committee all the views presented at the forum. In mid-May, when it was the third or fourth time I made the report and there had been many bad things coming out, including such fallacies as “to be bankers by turns” (ruling the country by turns) and the “Hyde Park” which is noted for its speaker’s corner. Comrade Mao Zedong was highly alert, saying that what they said might backlash at themselves. So he decided to publish all of what the participants had said in the People’s Daily and gave the instruction to put up a bold face on listening to them and not to rebuff and let them air their views fully. It was after that reporting, I began to get mentally prepared for striking back at rightists. At that time, Comrade Jiang Nanxiang was unable to stand the advocacies for “Hyde Park” by people in Beijing University and Qinghua University. Comrade Mao Zedong asked Peng Zhen to send word to Jiang Nanxiang, urging him to brave himself to listen. When I reported that a high-level democratic personage said that there were people outside the Party who regarded the sharp criticism of CPC as “bicker between sisters-in-law,” Comrade Mao Zedong said: “No. It is not between sisters-in-law but between us and the enemy…” It was not until May 15 after he heard the report that Luo Longji said that the (current situation) was marked by petty intellectuals of Marxism leading big intellectuals of the bourgeoisie and outsiders leading insiders that he wrote the article Things Are Beginning to Change, which was issued to high-ranking officials of the Party… This article expressed the determination of Comrade Mao Zedong to strike 24 back at rightists. In the article, Mao Zedong used the military term “luring the enemy troops in deep and concentrating our forces to annihilate them.” The flame of his habitual militancy began to rage. “Now that large numbers of fish have come to the surface of their own accord, there is no need to bait the hook. They are no ordinary fish, but more likely man-eating sharks with sharp teeth — it is these sharks whose fins people eat and serve as tools for swimming... We shall let them run amock for the time being and let them 25 reach their climax. The more they run amock, the better for us.” The windstorm was imminent. On June 8, the CPC Central Committee issued the directives on mustering forces to repulse the rightists’ wild attack drafted by Mao Zedong. On the same day, the leading newspaper, the People’s Daily, published a leading

24 Li Weihan: Recollection and Studies, 1st edition, CPC Historical Materials Publishing House, April 1986. 25 Mao Zedong: Things Are Beginning to Change, Selected Works of Mao Zedong, 1st edition, People’s Publishing House, April, 1977.


10/15/2010 4:52:39 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

285

article entitled Why Is It?, saying in an utter change of tone: “A tiny group of rightists are challenging the leadership of the Communist Party and the working class in the name of helping the Communist Party rectify its style of work. They have even gone so far as to openly clamor for the step-down of the Communist Party. They are attempting to seize the opportunity to overthrow the Communist Party and the working class, overturn the great cause of socialism and drag back history to the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, back to the semi-colonial status before the victory of the revolution, putting the Chinese people back under the reactionary rule of imperialism and its lackeys... Isn’t it going too far? Things may go to their opposites when they reach the extreme. Don’t they know the truth?” The name of Liang Sicheng appeared in the leading article on Page 2 of the People’s Daily in the same day. His article claimed a banner headline — My Understanding of the Rectification Movement over the Past Month. On the same day, the Beijing Daily carried in its second page the same article by Liang Sicheng. Obviously, it was well planned. In the article, Liang Sicheng wrote: “Demolishing a city gate tower, you are cutting a piece of flesh off my body; taking off a brick from the city walls, you are peeling off an inch of my skin.” which has since long made people sigh. He said: In my contact with Party members during my work, many things have made me feel discontented. I really suffered a lot due to certain methods or style of work of the Party, making me jitter, depressed and silent. For instance, I felt very painful to see the ruthlessness toward ancient

Office building of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee put up in 1956 (photo by Wang Jun)


10/15/2010 4:52:40 PM

286

BEIJING RECORD

structures in the course of city reconstruction. Demolishing a city gate tower, you are cutting a piece of flesh off my body; taking off a brick from the city walls, you are peeling off an inch of my skin. As the criticism against the notion of “going back to ancients” was not thorough, it led to overstress of economy, resulting in a large number of structures that are unsuitable for use and that are cheap but neither economical nor beautiful. It also led to the shift from one type of formalism to another and from “going back to things ancient” to “going back to things European and Russian.” During the process of planning the city, all the “old” technical personnel were kicked aside, resorting to “close-the-doorism,” letting Party members doing everything… so on and so forth. Amidst the hullabaloo for economizing, the office building of the Beijing Party Committee sprang up, which is so big that it seems that it has no parallel, so wasteful, with the inside like the ancient structures in Europe and the appearance like 26 bathroom turned inside out. I am a complainant. What I felt particularly dissatisfied is that the Party goes its own way in adopting many measures and comes down on differences of views concerning academic matters like violent storm, making people breathless, let alone speaking out. Indeed, I am dissatisfied with the Party in many aspects. After that, there was an abrupt turn in the thrust of his writing. “I have never forgotten who had led the 600 million people in their liberation.” Citing a series of successes such as those in the Korean War, the railway construction and oil exploration and development, he said: “Achievements are primary while shortcomings are secondary... It is not ‘very bad’ but ‘very good’ to have so many shortcomings exposed... These shortcomings are sure to be corrected if the right remedial measures are taken... This is something worth celebrating by the 600 million people... I am not at all disappointed at the Party nor have I lost my confidence in it. On the contrary, these have enhanced my confidence in the Party.” In the end, he said: “At a time when the shortcomings of the Party have been ruthlessly exposed, I say: the Communist Party of China is great. It is the most beloved Party. I know that you have shortcomings and I am not afraid of your shortcomings. I will continue to expose your shortcomings fully and ruthlessly so as to contribute my shares to correcting them. I want to add: I will devote all my life to you (the CPC).” This article was regarded as “the first anti-rightist article among intellectuals.” But during the Cultural Revolution, Liang Sicheng paid a heavy price for it.

26 It refers to the tiles on the outer wall of the building.


10/15/2010 4:52:41 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

287

After the old Beijing Municipal Party Committee was overthrown in 1966, Liang Sicheng was forced to tell how the old Party Committee disclosed the secrets to him and asked him to write this article, thus escaping from being branded as an “arch-rightist”. Liang Sicheng had always denied this, stating that he wrote the article of his own accord without anyone asking him to do so. But at that time, nobody believed what this “bourgeois reactionary academic authority” said. Unintentionally, Liang Sicheng became a noted “leftist” in the antirightist struggle and was charged with an important mission, participating in all the rallies against rightists. On June 26, 1957, the People’s Daily carried an exclusive interview with Liang Sicheng, in which Liang said that “my political level was so low” that “I was unable to discern anything or any problem from so many contradictions that were laid bare there. Neither could I elevate it to the theoretical level. Isn’t it a manifestation of low political level?... It is just like seeing a machine-gun there, but without knowing how to pull the trigger.” He also said, “For us, there is no knowledge about class struggle to speak about. I’m afraid that the five million intellectuals in the country are just like children in kindergartens and there are few who have attained the level of first and second graders in primary school.” “The Party leaders, who have gone through 30–40 years of tempering and testing by the harsh life, are indeed high-level intellectuals in 27 Group photo of Liang Sicheng together with his class struggle.”â•› assistants and local people in June 1932 when he was At the National People’s Concarrying out a survey of the Three Buddhahisattvas Hall of the Guangji Temple built in the Liao period gress session in July that year, Liang in Baodi, Hebei Province (Now Baodi is under Sichengâ•‡ andâ•‡ hisâ•‡ colleaguesâ•‡ Yang Tianjin’s jurisdiction), (by courtesy of Lin Zhu)

27 Liang Sicheng on Hearing Chairman Mao’s Report and Has Bravely Stood up against Rightists, People’s Daily, Page 2, June 26, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:41 PM

288

BEIJING RECORD

Tingbao, Lin Keming and Zhu Zhaoxue delivered a joint speech. One of the paragraphs is apparently out of the hand of Liang Sicheng. Again, he cried out for the protection of historical cultural relics such as the Beijing city wall: We hold that many cultural relics and ancient structures left over from history have not received due attention in the city reconstruction and the selection of sites and building of new factories. For instance, in Beijing, Xi’an and Luoyang, cultural relics on and under the ground had received some attention in city planning, site selection and building. But due to differences of views on cultural relics, many of the ancient structures on the ground were unnecessarily removed and many of the historical sites underground were also destroyed. In some places, some economic values of ancient structures received attention but their greater, non-compensable historical and artistic values were ignored. They had done something that risked big things for the sake of small ones, just as the Chinese saying goes, “burning famous string instrument for fuel and cook crane for meat,” which means destroying culture. A big hall of the Liao period in the Guangji Temple in Baodi County, Hebei Province, was dismantled and the materials were used to build a road bridge. Three towers of the Song Dynasty in Longquan County, Zhejiang Province, were removed 28 and materials were used to build a road. Beijing and numerous county towns have pulled down their city walls only for their economic values. In numerous county towns and villages in Northeast China’s Jilin Province, the temples, which were of some economic value, were destroyed on the

28 See Wen Hui Pao report on May 26, 1957, Longquan County Deputy Head Zhang Huiwu and Others Punished for Dismantling Ancient Tower. Full text is as follows:

Hangzhou, May 25 — The case of dismantling the ancient pagoda in Longquan County, Zhejiang Province has been cleared and the People’s Committee of Zhejiang Province decided today to suspend the work of Deputy Head Zhang Huiwu, who took the decision to remove the pagoda and proposed that the People’s Congress of the county to remove him from his post.

The committee also decided to suspend the job of Wang Yanxin, Civil Affairs Section of the County People’s Committee and president of the County people’s court, who executed the decision and proposed that the People’s Congress of the county to remove him from his post.

In January and February of 1950, Longquan County needed bricks and stones for building roads and bridges. Zhang Huiwu and Wan Yanxin set their eyes on the dual tower of Chongyin Temple of the Song Dynasty and the Pagoda of the Jinsha Temple of the Five Dynasties period. More than 100 volumes of Buddhist scriptures from the Tang and Song dynasties, wood block printed scriptures and color Buddhist portraits from the Tang and Song dynasties stored in the towers were mostly burned to ashes. The 30–35 kilograms of coins from the Tang and Song dynasties, a small silver stupa and a gilded ancient coin and silver plates were sold to local banks and the local Supply and Marketing Cooperative, which melted them.

The case was uncovered in December last year. After that, the People’s Committee of Longquan County made self-criticisms and adopted many measures to retrieve the cultural relics lost.

In the meanwhile, the Zhejiang Provincial People’s Procuratorate and the provincial department of supervision formed a group, which spent 45 days inquiring into the case. The provincial procuratorate held that the case had caused irretrievable losses of a large amount of historical relics and the case was very serious. But in view of the motives to build roads and to do good for the people, no criminal responsibilities were affixed on Zhang Huiwu and Wang Yanxin. They did these distressing things mainly because they did not know the policies of protecting cultural relics and could not tell what were cultural relics and what were useless things. They all came to realize their blunders and tried to retrieve the cultural relics. (The end)


10/15/2010 4:52:41 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

289

The Arrow Tower of Zhengyangmen preserved upon the instruction of Premier Zhou Enlai (photo by Wang Jun)

pretext of fighting against superstition. The structures of Guangxiao Temple in Guangzhou had been rebuilt under the guidance of correct policies but became victims of destruction under the incorrect policy. Planners of many cities regarded some cultural relics and ancient structures as burdens that were useless when preserved but regrettable when cast away. They had no choice but to keep them there. They regarded them as the stumbling blocks in city development. How they wish to have them cleaned out of sight at one go. They have failed to see the positive role of many cultural relics and ancient buildings in a city. They have not organically incorporate them into the city plans to enrich the life of the people and beautify the outlook of socialist cities. The problem lies in the fact that our city planners are unable to handle correctly the contradictions between the old and the new in the course of city development. If the contradictions are handled well, the cultural relics and ancient structures will add to the beauty of the city instead of obstructing its development. We hope that the cultural relics and ancient structures would receive due attention from the local governments, construction units and planning and designing personnel. We especially hope that the State Council would take it seriously. Over the past eight years, we have accumulated a wealth of experience in planning our cities. But the experience has not been summed up well. We propose that the Ministry of City Construction would sum up the 29 experience. 29 Construction Workers Shouldering Glorious but Arduous Tasks, People’s Daily, Page 11, July 21, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:43 PM

290

BEIJING RECORD

Gate Tower of Zhengyangmen preserved upon the instruction of Premier Zhou Enlai (photo by Wang Jun)

But not long afterward, the Beijing Daily carried a proposal from a reader, entitled Put the City Walls under Good Management, which reads: The inner walls of Beijing have long been in disrepairs. Now on the top of the walls are overgrown grass and piles of tree leaves. The aprons on the walls have been destroyed. Many places have caved in or cracked (the crack are as wide as two centimeters). Some parts of the walls have been blown up and the parapet and crenels are loosened. When the wall is immersed and washed by rain during the rainy season, cave-ins and collapsing accidents often occur. In the rainy season last year, a section of the city wall from Dongzhimen to Deshengmen collapsed in four parts and the section south of Xizhimen collapsed for 30 meters. The passage ways at Qianmen and Andingmen leak profusely whenever it rains. A big part of the outer walls has been pulled down. Bricks have been dug away, leaving behind huge disorderly piles of earth, which are also in danger of collapsing in the rainy season. I propose to put the city wall under good management. There should be clear provisions that when any unit wants to use city wall bricks, they should, with approval, take them from the most dangerous sections or from places where openings are likely to be made and take the earth away as well. If the earth could not be removed timely, measures must be taken to prevent the earthwork from collapsing and warn people not to come close (in March, a person went to dig earth from the city wall where bricks were removed and he was buried by the earth when there was a collapse) so as to guard against dangers. The city walls not to be removed


10/15/2010 4:52:44 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

291

should undergo checks and repairs. This is especially necessary with the sections close to residential areas and roads so as to prevent them from 30 collapsing. This was the state of the city walls in the process of being pulled down. During this massive drive to dismantle city walls, which was termed as a “people’s war,” there were people who paid the price with their lives. The reader of the Beijing Daily, however, was proposing how to better remove the city walls. It was a big surprise that Zhang Xiruo escaped from being labeled as a rightist. Although showing his generosity, Mao Zedong indeed took to heart how Zhang portrayed the Party. In mid-January 1958, Mao Zedong said at a Nanning Meeting: “â•›’(About) covetousness for things big and self-indulgence in merits,’ we must see what big things and what merits are we indulging in; we must see whether it is reactionary or revolutionary in nature. If we do not covet for things big, should we covet for things small? There is such a big revolution, such big cooperatives, such a big rectification movement in China. They are all big things and great merits. If we do not indulge in merits, should we indulge in de-merits? ‘(About) eagerness to get quick success and benefits under the nose,’ if we do not get success, should we get setbacks? If we do not get benefits for the people, should we make it harmful to them? ‘(About) contemptuousness of things past,’ isn’t it good to be contemptuous of the custom of binding the feet and wearing pig tails? I feel not comfortable to see the houses in Beijing and Kaifeng and I am pleased to see the houses in Qingdao and Changchun. If we do not hold things past in contempt and place hope on the future, is there any hope to speak about?... Antiquities could not be bad and could not be too good either. To cry over the dismantling of archways and drilling holes in city gates in Beijing is a matter 31 political in nature.” On January 28, 1958, Mao Zedong said at the 14th Supreme State Affairs Conference: “One of my friends described me as ‘covetous for things big and self-indulgent in merits; eager for quick success and benefits under the nose; contemptuous of things past; and placing blind faith in the future.’ It hits the nail on the head. (About) ‘covetousness for things big and selfindulgence in merits,’ we must see what big things and what merits are

30 Put the City Walls Under Good Management, Beijing Daily, Page 3 August 14, 1957. 31 Li Rui: My Personal Experience of the “Great Leap Forward,” 1st edition, Shanghai Yuandong Publishing House, March 1996.


10/15/2010 4:52:44 PM

292

BEIJING RECORD

we indulging in; we must see whether it is reactionary or revolutionary in nature... It is good for Nanjing, Jinan and Changsha to pull down the city walls. All the old houses in Beijing and Kaifeng should better be replaced by new ones. Everybody places hopes on the future. The description is well 32 done.” In condemning Zhang Xiruo, Mao Zedong went so far as to drag in the problem of Beijing’s transformation. Soon after, Beijing came out with a plan, visualizing the completion of the city reconstruction in about ten years. This will be touched upon later on.

A Pair of Famous Opponents After the Beijing Capital City Planning Commission (BCCPC) was set up in 1955, Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong, the two “opponents,” were transferred to the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design under the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration in succession, all taking up the posts as deputy chief architects. Concurrently, Chen Zhanxiang served as the deputy head of the No. 5 Office and Hua Lanhong served as the head of the No. 6 Office. Chen Zhanxiang showed great discontent for the transfer, saying: “It was with great complaints against BCCPC that I was transferred to the 33 Beijing Institute of Architectural Design.” â•‡ Hua Lanhong was even more furious. Later on, when he was asked to go back to BCCPC, he said: “I will 34 not go back even if you behead me.” In the spring of 1957, BCCPC came out with a Tentative Master Plan of Beijing’s Urban Construction. Commenting on the plan, Liang Sicheng said that it was a product of “close-the-doorism,” with only the Party members 35 doing everything and the “old” technical personnel were kept out of sight. Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong were not soft either in voices against it. Chen said that “the plan is the brainchild of a few so-called specialists... who worked high up in the clouds that blind their eyes to the sufferings of the human world... It is a writing coming from Heaven... which has caused nobody knows how many troubles to those who read it.” Hua Lanhong

32 Zhu Zheng: Summer of 1957: From A Hundred Schools to Contend to Two Schools to Contend, 1st edition, Henan People’s Publishing House, May 1998. 33 Architectural Journal, Issue No. 11, 1957. 34 Ibid. 35 Liang Sicheng: My Understanding of the Rectification Movement over the Past Month, People’s Daily, Page 2, June 8, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:44 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

293

1957 sketch of planning of Beijing area — A long-range plan (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

described it as a “product made behind the closed doors” “without doing 36 any typical studies” and “it is a typical example of formalism”. During the Rectification Movement, Chen Zhanxiang wrote an article entitled Beijing’s Master Plan and City Construction, saying in biting sarcasm that “the plan deviates from realities... has not much guidance value and it is nothing but empty long-range rambling discourse that inspires instant but short-lived excitement.” It said that BCCPC has done a lot of specific and nitty-gritty work with regard to the plans for public utility projects, but around the master plan under the guidance of the ideas are not well grounded in practice.”

36 Architectural Journal, Issues No. 9 and No. 11, 1957; Beijing Daily, July 24, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:45 PM

294

BEIJING RECORD

He also said that there was a lack of the drive to transform Longxugou (a filthy ditch along which the laboring people lived before liberation) and city construction is not so closely linked with the interests of the people. He opposed the general provisions on the division of streets and the limit set upon the number of storeys, saying that “this is to hold on to the book from Heaven and insist on making the future as the present” and that “the checkers outlined in the master plan are regarded as the basic profile of the streets in the socialist capital. In order to ensure its implementation, the number of storeys of a house is limited to four or five. Now dorms everywhere are four or five storeys. This is said to be socialist... It is subjectivism to force people up to high rises... limiting the height of the houses is oversimplication of city construction problem. This is ignorance rather than subjectivism” and “to divide up the city according to the checkers in the master plan is simply mismatching.” He complained about dismantling of too many houses in the city district. He called the big courtyard that put offices, residential areas and living facilities together as “feudal segmentation,” “private ownership of public land” and “socialism already losing its superiority.” He called it “planned blindness” in using the master plan to direct city construction. He said that the city should “rationally organize the city life based on the problems encountered in real life.” He also proposed the setting-up of a real estate company in Beijing, which will work out the prices of land, with that 37 closest to the city center being the highest.”â•› How about Hua Lanhong? He wrote a “full-length” article entitled On Problems in the Designing of Civil Structures. In the article, he lashed out at the “tentative plan” as “long-ranging plan” instead of plan for the near future,” which can not only be used to direct the current construction but also cause great waste. He held that the city should be constructed in a “cyclical way with the old gradually being replaced by the new” instead of “giving one design and constructing in stages,” because “it is possible to have an accurate estimate and arrangements concerning the contents, requirements and project quality for such shortterm projects that could be completed in three to five years... For longerterm projects (lasting for 15 and even 20 years), the notion of giving one design and constructing in stages is not correct… which has been reflected in the master plan... It is impossible to fix the position, number of storeys, nature and contents of roads, squares and public buildings that will be 37 Architectural Journal, Issues No. 9 and No. 11, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:45 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

295

1957 sketch of Beijing’s master construction plan — A long-range plan (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

undertaken in 20 to 30 years and even 50 to 60 years... If we do, it is a typical expression of formalism.” He also held that “the Party does not pay attention to residential buildings,” “which are far from enough.” “From the liberation to 1956, the floor space of new buildings put up is equal to the total area in the old Beijing, but the population has increased three-fold and the average living space per capita was 30 percent less than before liberation. In this respect, the present is not as good as the past.” The increase of residential buildings has been quite outpaced by that of public buildings. This is tantamount to putting the cart before the horse. “The number of public welfare buildings is meager,” with shops, canteens, baths and hostels directly serving the residents being too few. On the other hand, the plan has listed universities, research institutions, offices and embassies all into consumption buildings. He criticized Beijing for craving for things impressive without considering the national conditions, in particular that “buildings must be high and big and streets must be wide... regarding massiveness as great.” He held that “the public buildings may be cut by one third,” because “they have been built just to show political results and keep up appearance... under the pretext of having to perform political tasks.” He said that “the current


10/15/2010 4:52:46 PM

296

BEIJING RECORD

Chang’an Avenue cannot be rebuilt, because the technical level is not high 38 enough.” When the Qinghua University Department of Architecture asked Chen Zhanxiang to assess the homework of students, he took the opportunity to lash out at the Beijing’s master construction plan, comparing it to a “book coming from Heaven,” which ignored the present and was not based on investigation and reality and the demand by the people. He asked the students to see for themselves in order to know the national conditions. He asked them to study public baths, teahouses and overpasses and go to the army camps and Landianchang of the Qing Dynasty to draw on the strong points of housing designs. He also asked them to draw inspirations from the vending carts of Liubiju, which sold preserved vegetables and steamed sponge cakes. He criticized Beijing Tongrentang (pharmaceutical works) for tarnishing the original atmosphere by changing the front façade of the building for the purpose of expanding business area. He put up a big character poster in the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design, entitled Architect or a Tracing Machine. Excerpts follow: Building design should be creative mental labor. This is the basic feature of our trade. Turning a blind eye to the basic feature would inevitably lead to errors. We have designed so many buildings these years. It is a supersonic speed. It stands to reason that many design masters can be trained in the process. In the old society, the life-long volume of designs undertaken even by a successful architect could be no more than that done by one group of our institute in a year. Look at our works and the daily shortening time limit of the drive for scientific progress. How agonizing it is. Those official buildings scattered in this beautiful land — this is the term given to us by some of colleagues in Shanghai, referring to the dull design, which is quite correct — the people hold them in contempt and hate to see them. Neither are we satisfied. Although the cumulative total areas built are enough to overshadow any advanced countries, the technical level is a far cry. Catching up in a few years? No way. Such great achievements should be attributed to the massive organization work, which worked such magic that it has turned architects into 39 tracing machines.

38 Architectural Journal, Issues No. 9 and No. 11; Beijing Daily, August 21, 1957. 39 Architectural Journal, Issue No. 9, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:46 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

297

What about Hua Lanhong? This architect who is a fervent advocate of modern architectural theories had this to comment on the Soviet buildings professed to be of national style: “You could not open your eyes on the streets of Moscow. The Soviet buildings are too bad... Soviet buildings are nothing but toy building blocks... Soviet exhibition halls are too bad, formalistic. They are obsolete 40 works from the 18th century.” In May 1957, when he attended a forum of architects of the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design organized by the Beijing Municipal Party Committee, he went so far as to claim that failure was primary and achievements are secondary in city construction. He showed great discontent with the municipal Party committee for failing to seek his views on the master construction plan. He said that all countries had special technical organizations devoted to checking the city master plan for construction and the technical review boards were made up of officials who had concurrent duties elsewhere. But Beijing had never had such review organization. He said that some leading officials looked down upon technical Soviet Exhibition Hall designed by Soviet architects and completed in 1954 (Today’s Beijing Exhibition personnel and refused to heed their Hall), (photo by Wang Jun, 2002) views. They refused to let technical people nose into the Party’s principles and policies regarding architecture. He voiced his complaints about Party leadership on three occasions in four years. There was no response to the first and second complaints. The third complaint got a response, but it was not so satisfactory. This happened because the Party thought it unnecessary to discuss with us technical matters that involved political issues. On the other hand, it happened because some leading officials of the Party thought that politics could solve all problems. Such view is incorrect. Marxism-Leninism may provide guidance to all but cannot replace all. The mistake of “going back to ancients” in the past was 40 Beijing Daily, Page 2, August 21, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:48 PM

298

BEIJING RECORD

inseparable from dogmatism on the part of some leading officials, who copied wholesale the Soviet architectural theories. He also said that the Party had not cared for views even on the basic issues in architectural creations. For instance, the saying that “practicable, economical and beautiful when conditions permit” was quite problematic. He wanted it changed into “seeking beauty on the basis of practicality and economy,” because, he thought, architectural art could not be viewed as something plastered and it must be linked with practicality and technical conditions. The major factors of beauty lied not in decoration but in proportion. Hua Lanhong said that the Beijing Municipal Party Committee and all departments in charge of architecture had been biased for things big, high and further more, deviating from the general living standards of the people. Some units were indulged in building big offices on the pretext of performing political tasks. He lashed out at the new official building of the Municipal Party Committee. He also held that Beijing had put up many buildings since liberation, but residential buildings only accounted for 41 about 40 percent, too small a proportion. Toward the end of May, Hua Lanhong accepted an interview at home by Liu Guanghua of the Wen Hui Pao. During the interview, he said that he did not understand why the Chinese architectural world, under the instigation of Soviet experts, launched a campaign to criticize “structuralism.” This word could not be found in the glossaries in Europe and the United States. For a time, many of us were branded as “structuralists.” But till now, those who criticized us had not given any accurate definition of what they said. “Our country has been vacillating in architectural standards. Generally speaking, I deem that the ordinary buildings are of too high a standard, so high that it does not square with our economic conditions and the living standards of the people; nor does it conform to the requirements of ‘doing what is necessary with the least possible money’ in the transitional period.” “The housing problem is quite pressing and brooks no delay in all our cities (especially the rising industrial cities). But this has not received its due attention. Take Beijing for instance. It has built 18 million square meters of buildings, equivalent to the total constructed areas of Beijing over the past 42 few years. But the population of the city in the same period has increased

41 What Are the Problems with Beijing’s City Construction, Beijing Daily, Page 1, May 20, 1957. 42 This is the original text, maybe Liu Guanghua had a slip of the pen or it was a misprint. The 18 million square meters of buildings are similar to the about 20 million square meters of the city proper of Beijing in 1949. The sentence should be: “The 18 million square meters of buildings put up after liberation are equal to the total constructed area of Beijing in 1949.”


10/15/2010 4:52:48 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

299

three-fold. Among the new buildings, only about 40 percent are for living purposes. If they are distributed to the increased population, each person could get only 2.5 square meters, not enough to accommodate a middle sized wooden bed. The housing problem of these people has to be resolved by tapping the potential of the existing houses and by cramping up in the limited spaces. It is rather common for a family of seven or eight to cramp into a small room. This is so not only in Beijing but also in other large cities.” “The harsh living conditions of the laboring people left over from old society have not been eradicated before new problems crop up with the rapid increase in the urban population due to the process of industrialization. The pressing task for the present is how to build more residential houses as quickly as possible and as economical as possible. However, we have used most of the money and designing forces to build high rises. Beijing, on the pretext of ‘special requirements’ as the capital, has not only built too many special public buildings but also office towers as well as many extravagant mansions far beyond the actual need. With Beijing taking the lead, all other places have followed suit, resulting in an unhealthy tendency that has caused inestimable losses.” He was strongly critical of the office building of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee that was plastered with light yellow tiles, describing it as a prominent case of “blowing money” when the central authorities called for “building the country through diligence and thrift.” The building was designed to accommodate 1,000 people, covering 23,000 square meters, averaging 23 square meters per person, more than twice as many as provided by the state and also far more than the norms set for many high-grade office buildings in foreign countries. Each storey is 4 meters high (far above the standard for common buildings) and many rooms have double-story height. In order to avoid looking too spacious, phony ceilings have been installed to lower the height by 1.5 meters. Not the slightest consideration was given in the design of spaces. The two entrance halls and the main stairways occupy 10,000 square meters, equal to the construction area of a middle school with 18 classes or 200 common rooms. “The whole building is of steel-reinforced concrete structure. Yet it has been wrapped with many brick walls. The building has only five storeys and yet a group of lifts has been installed (Generally speaking a five-storey building does not need any lift). The surface bricks were shipped in from Northeast China. The marbles inlaid in the entrance hall and the main stairways came from Shandong. At a time when the government called for economizing timber, all the rooms of the building have hard wood floor


10/15/2010 4:52:48 PM

300

BEIJING RECORD

tiles. The main rooms have been installed with 2.2-meter high hard wood protective walls. The toilets and washing rooms are inlaid with 1.8-meter high porcelain tiles. In order to make it look elegant, all the hardware are made very big. Many equipments of pure decorative purpose are made of copper, violating the state rule of ‘economizing copper.’ The library is installed with four unnecessary palace lanterns, each worth 2,400 yuan.” “It must be pointed out that the building was designed in 1955 and work started in 1956. That means that the design and construction started in the high tide of fighting against big roofs and big waste. But the building was designed with an alarmingly high standard that it has caused waste that had never been seen before, far exceeding many of the high-rises that were subject to criticism.” Lastly, Hua Lanhong said: “In order to accelerate the pace of socialist construction, it is necessary to act immediately to lower the existing standards for all kind of buildings. Do not build these extravagant buildings. It is not allowed to waste the precious money of the state to pursue imposing appearance. In fact, the beauty of architecture and the national style lie in the artistic arrangements and the proper proportion rather than highcost materials, complicated structures and appearance and the useless 43 decorations. This can be achieved with low-standard houses.” Liu Guanghua wrote this exclusive interview, entitled Don’t Bend on Building High-Rises. But he was branded as a “rightist” before he could publish it. Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong also could not escape such fate.

“Chen-Hua Alliance” Chen Zhanxiang was exposed first. Beijing Daily published in big letter banner headline the article Strike Back the Vicious Attack on the Party by Rightists in the Architectural Field; Chen Zhanxiang Refuted for his Anti-Socialist Acts and Words. The article said: “Of late, following their criticism of Rightists Wen Chengqian and Ding Yonghong for their reactionary fallacies, the staff members of the City Planning and Administration and the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design have continued to expose and struggle against antisocialist comments put up by rightist Chen Zhanxiang... A self-professed ‘city planning expert,’ rightist Chen Zhanxiang has viciously attacked the

43 Liu Guanghua: Don’t Bend on Building High-Rises, Architectural Journal, Issue No. 9, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:48 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

301

Party leadership over the capital’s city planning instead of immersing in his work. He has launched brazen and vicious attacks on the leadership of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee over the compilation of the city’s master construction plan Cartoon satirizing “rightists” carried by the Beijing Daily on August 21, and the city planning 1957, entitled Add All that Are Coming — Self-Criticism of Some Rightists work carried out by BCCPC with the assistance of Soviet experts... Since liberation, Beijing has resolutely implemented the principle of serving production, the laboring people and the central government organs in its city construction and scored tremendous successes. All the citizens are overjoyed at it. But Chen Zhanxiang has obliterated all these achievements... He has not only spread words inside the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design against the Party leadership over city planning, throwing mud on the master blueprints and engaging in instigative activities but also took the opportunity of visiting other places to carry out his activities in an attempt to derail the master plan. He put up a big character poster, vilifying engineers and technical personnel as tracing machines and clamored for more ‘freedom’ given to designers in taking their decisions. Chen Zhanxiang’s anti-Party and anti-socialist speeches have aroused great indignation from the people working in the Planning Administration and the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design.” At the second session of the 2nd Beijing Municipal People’s Congress on July 24, Chen Zhanxiang, together with Qian Duansheng and Qian Weichang, the so-called “rightists,” was caught in a cross fire by delegates. The Beijing architectural world was bubbling up. Big character posters criticizing Chen Zhanxiang were put up in the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design. Chief engineers also joined in the “struggle.” All the working personnel of BCCPC were alerted as if facing an attack by the enemy. They held meetings for days on end to criticize Chen Zhanxiang for his “anti-socialist speeches.” They expressed indignation over Chen Zhanxiang for his total obliteration of the achievements by Soviet experts and Chinese staff members over the previous two years and for his “scheme of opposing Party leadership over city planning” and for “his attempt to derail the master plan for city construction.” They put up one


10/15/2010 4:52:49 PM

302

BEIJING RECORD

poster after another to ques44 tion Chen Zhanxiang. The initial “success” of the “struggle” was the “thorough exposure” of Hua Lanhong’s “scheme” and the “exposure” of the “anti-Party alliance” forged by Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong. On August 14, the Beijing Cartoon showing big character posters in the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design criticizing “Chen-Hua Alliance,” Daily opened a special column entitled Division of Labor and Cooperation. It was reprinted in the Beijing Daily on August 29, 1957 with the banner headline Bring to Light the Rightists in the City Construction Department. Chen Zhanxiang was named “a wild political careerist in the architectural world.” “In the recent week, rightist Chen Zhanxiang has become the central figure whose name appeared frequently in the big character posters in the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design. Of the 73 big character posters, 50 are directed at Chen Zhanxiang. This self-professed ‘city planning expert’ that is not used by the Party is in fact a political careerist and an ignorant and incompetent boastful and deceptive 45 expert in the architectural world and is ‘Li Wanming’ in the architectural 46 world.” Deputy leader Shen Yongming of the zoning group of BCCPC also fell victim together with Chen Zhanxiang. He was labeled “a rightist sneaking his way into the Party.” He was accused that “when Rightist Chen Zhanxiang and his company in the architectural world were launching an attack against

44 Counter-attack Rightists in the Architectural World for their Vicious Attackon the Party; Chen Zhanxiang’s Anti-Socialist Speeches Meet with Strong Rebuttal, Beijing Daily, Page 4, July 24, 1957. 45 People’s Daily, August 31, 1956, Li Wanming, political swindler, tried by the Beijing Intermediate People’s Court. The report said:

Beijing, August 30 (Xinhua) — The Beijing Intermediate People’s Court today gave an open trial of political swindler Li Wanming, sentencing him to 15 years’ imprisonment, with the deprivation of political rights for five years.

After the charges were read, the chief judge questioned the accused and political swindler Li Wanming pleaded guilty in a low voice.

Li Wanming confessed: he started his fraudulent activities in 1949 and was uncovered very soon and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. After release, he continued his swindling activities until his arrest on January 10, 1955. During this time, he traveled to a dozen cities and crashed into a dozen important government organs, deceiving into becoming a model Party member, the title of combat hero, a clerk, section leader, secretary and deputy division leader and other posts.

After the debate between the procurator and defending lawyer, the chief judge announced the verdict, pointing out that Li Wanming had committed serious crimes and he confessed honestly after being arrested and therefore sentenced him to 15 years’ imprisonment, with political rights deprived for five years. The proceeds from his criminal activities shall be confiscated.

46 Chen Zhanxiang, Political Careerist with Wild Ambitions, Beijing Daily, Page 2, August 14, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:49 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

303

the Beijing master construction plan, Shen Yongming colluded with them and instigated people to put up big character posters, smearing the planning group the municipal Party committee set up in 1953 as ‘factionalist’ that tried to throw the people of Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission into hell and smeared the master plan as ‘obstructing construction.’ Academically, Shen Yongming had always resisted the Party leadership. He slandered the Party as ‘having often used organizational and administrative means to solve technical problems and some people do not know much of 47 the profession and yet claimed to make decisions.’”

Cartoon showing big character posters in the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design criticizing “Chen-Hua Alliance,” entitled Misunderstanding. It was reprinted in the Beijing Daily on August 29, 1957

On August 21, the Beijing Daily carried in a prominent place an article entitled Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong Have Forged an Anti-Party Alliance, claiming that Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong “have always been antagonistic to the Party leadership over Beijing city construction and the mapping of master plan,” holding that the strengthening of leadership is “factionalist.” During the period of rectification, apart from instigations everywhere, they launched an attack against the Party on the master construction plan and city construction. The Beijing chapter of the Architectural Society of China held enlarged council meetings for days on end to “expose” and criticize this “anti-Party and anti-socialist alliance.” Chen Zhanxiang was charged with “attacking the Party from the perspective of city planning,” “viciously obliterating the achievements of the capital in construction over the past eight years,” “smearing the Designing as a bureaucratic organization, clamoring to crush it to pieces” and “attempting to drag the Institute back to the capitalist road featuring private architect firms.” Hua Lanhong was accused of “attacking the Party from the perspective of architectural policies and principles,” “dressing up as a man who shows 47 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:52:50 PM

304

BEIJING RECORD

concern for the people and distorting facts,” “attacking city construction of the capital,” “presenting before the Party a bourgeois line for city construction, namely, a blind spontaneous city construction of gradually replacing the old with the new,” “opposing the idea of ‘suitable and economical and beautiful if conditions permit’ put forward by the Party” and “opposing the Beijing master plan mapped out under the leadership of the Party and attempting to derail it.” This “alliance” was defined as “an anti-Party alliance forged during the period of free airing of views, with the division of labor of letting Chen 48 attack the planning and Hua attack construction.” Hua Lanhong was forced to make self-criticism at the enlarged meetings of the Beijing chapter of the Architectural Society of China, admitting that 49 he had colluded with Chen Zhanxiang and refusing to present facts.” On August 22, the Beijing chapter of the Architectural Society of China held a rally of more than 3,000 people in Zhongshan Park to criticize the anti-Party alliance. The meeting issued an ultimatum: “The gate of socialism is open to you. You must lay down your arms, put up your hands, and thoroughly confess. Otherwise, you will alienate yourselves from the 50 people.”â•› On August 27, the criticism meeting continued, but on a larger scale. More than 3,800 people attended. Hua Lanhong was the main thrust of attack. “Liang Sicheng knows China’s architecture in the manner as a country pumpkin” — a remark from Hua Lanhong — had become evidence to his crime for “building up his own image by denigrating others.” The man who “had provided” this evidence was an old rival of Liang Sicheng. Before Hua Lanhong was criticized, a leader of the municipal Party committee let Liang Sicheng read the “reactionary article” by Hua Lanhong and asked him where the problem lied. Liang said that he did not see any 51 problems.â•› Everything was so dramatic. Criticism meetings were held one after another and attacks were lashed out with increasing intensity. Up to September 4, seven meetings had been

48 City Construction Must Proceed under Leadership and in a Planned Way; Architectural World in the Capital Refuting the Vicious Schemes of Chen-Hua Alliance, People’s Daily, Page 2, August 23, 1957. 49 Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong Forged Anti-Party Alliance, Beijing Daily, Page 2, August 21, 1957. 50 Architectural Journal, Issue No. 9, 1957. 51 Liang Sicheng: “Confession” in the Cultural Revolution, August 21, 1966, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:52:50 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

305

held and more than 40 people took the floor. But Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong were still “obstinate.” The People’s Daily claimed in a report that “Hua Lanhong and Chen Zhanxiang have always hated the Party leadership over the master plan. Everywhere they spread the fallacy that the Beijing municipal Party committee is ‘factionalist.’ Till recently, even after their rumors and slanders have been brought to light, they still insist that what they oppose is the ‘factionalist practice’ of the Beijing municipal Party committee in providing leadership over the master plan. This has aroused great indignation from architects attending the meeting. Questioning slips kept flying to the 52 platform like snowflakes.”â•› The counterattack by the capital’s architectural world at last won “full victory.” On October 22, the Beijing Daily said in a report: “The Beijing architectural world has defeated Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong for their anti-Party and anti-socialist speeches and actions after three big rallies and nine smaller meetings. This Hua-Chen alliance began to lower their heads to plead guilty” and “through debates, the people in the architectural world have got clear about what is right and what is wrong and experienced 53 a profound education in the process.”â•› Chen Zhanxiang was forced to write a confession My Rightist Crimes. In this “confession,” he compared himself to a merchandise “Made in Britain,” saying that the “biggest crime” he committed when working with Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission was “disunity with Hua Lanhong” and “making troubles” when compiling plan A and plan B. Mentioning the “Liang-Chen Proposal,” he said that “I openly opposed locating the administrative center near Tiananmen. Obviously, it is only imperialists that hope that our capital would stay what it is. But I used this to oppose the plan by Soviet experts.” He also said that he complained about the transformation of the old city as a “clean shave,” which is “very vicious.” Comparing architects to “tracing machines” is “anti-Party and anti54 socialist.”â•› Hua Lanhong was also forced to make a written self-criticism, entitled I Lower My Head and Plead Guilty.

52 Great Debate in the Architectural Field of the Capital; Fallacies of Hua Lanhong and Chen Zhanxiang Attaching Capital Construction, People’s Daily, Page 2, September 5, 1957. 53 Architectural World of the Capital Wins Complete Victory in Anti-Rightist Struggle, Beijing Daily, Page 2, October 22, 1957. 54 Architectural Journal, Issue No. 11, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:50 PM

306

BEIJING RECORD

He had paid the price for accepting the interview by Wen Hui Pao, saying that “during the interview, I shamelessly painted a lofty image of myself and dressed myself up as a ‘master’ who used to be discriminated against and later commonly recognized. By unfurling the banner of ‘building the country diligently and industriously,’ I said that the house built by the Party for itself saw great wastes, exaggerating the defects and quoting untrue figures and situations to attack the building of the Beijing municipal Party committee by comparing it with residential houses and school buildings, trying to drive a wedge between the Party and the people.” He also said that writing a “full-length article running up to ten thousand Chinese characters was driven by the desire to ‘show off’ as being brighter than the Party. I ‘attack the master plan of Beijing’ and do not trust and even ‘look down upon’ Soviet experts, an expression of extremely arrogance and anti-Party 55 mentality.”â•›

A Pair of “Sworn Enemies” “I debated heatedly with Hua Lanhong on the problem of the plan A or B and whether the city walls should be pulled down,” Chen Zhanxiang recalled. 56 “It is rather ironic that we two were branded as ‘Chen-Hua Alliance.’” In reality, this pair of “enemies” had allied only for once.

Yuetan Nanjie (Yuetan Street South) (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

55 Ibid. 56 Recollection of Chen Zhanxiang during an interview with the author, March 2, 1994.


10/15/2010 4:52:51 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

307

Details of Yuetan Nanjie (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

It was in 1954, when the two were both transferred to the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design. They joined hands in designing buildings along Yuetan Nanjie [Yuetan Street (S)], with Chen responsible for drawing the elevation and Hua undertaking the drawing of planimetric blueprints. After completion, the street was re-named “Broad Socialist Road.” In his late years, Chen Zhanxiang was still so excited for having the hard-to-get opportunity. He said to the author: “The buildings along a street must be harmonious, beautiful and useful. It requires unified planning of both planimetric and elevation designs. The superiority of socialism lies in the entity. There is both variation and unity in the buildings along the street. The pity is that the carvings along the street were all destroyed during the Cultural Revolution. But the general outlook has been preserved. We architects are usually scared to see our own works of the past. But when I look at it today, I feel very 57 proud.”â•› But it was this work that served as evidence to his “crimes” in 1957 when he was labeled rightist. “How did Chen Zhanxiang do his designs? It is very difficult to ask for his works. Chen boasted that he designed the elevation of the buildings along the Yuetan Street (S). In fact, he copied 58 from a Soviet book.”â•›

57 Ibid. 58 Architectural Journal, Issue No. 9, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:52:51 PM

308

BEIJING RECORD

The building of the children’s hospital Hua Lanhong designed on the southern side of the street also fell victim to similar criticism. “According to tips from an insider, the planimetric blueprint was copied from a foreign 59 journal and the elevation drawing also had its definite source.”â•› Such “accusation” was fatal to intellectuals. This pair of enemies also explored into academic issues. On October 25, 1956, the Beijing Daily published Hua Lanhong’s article, entitled Is it Good, After All, to Build Houses Along Streets?. Hua said in the article that, according to a speech by a leader of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Municipal Construction Engineering Bureau at the fourth session of the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress, compared with the exemplary cases offered by past city planning and linked with the situation created by localities, it has almost become a principle to put up buildings along major streets. The several newly built streets, such as You’anmen Street, Lishilu Street and Fuwai Avenue, have testified to this. There is no problem to build bazaars and department stores along streets, yet it is unadvisable to build offices, although it is passable. But the consequences of building residential housing are that the residents cannot rest due to harassment by noises. A large number of houses facing west along the south-north roads are subject to the northwesterly winds in winter and the scorching sunshine in summer. He asked: why has it to be so? For the sake of economy? If so, how much it may save? Is it worthwhile to bring so much inconvenience and discomfort? For the sake of making the city more beautiful? The Fuwai Avenue and the You’anmen Street built according to this principle are not beautiful at all. “I do not believe in this truth which insists on putting buildings in an improper place, and creating unhealthy conditions in order to make the city more beautiful.” He also pointed out that “that was the old method adopted in many cities in Europe and the United States several hundred years ago. Although there are some beautiful streets in some places, this method has proven unfavorable to the life of the modern people. Such method has already caused irreparably bad situation in some large cities. Is it necessary to spread it as ‘advanced experience?’â•›” Hua Lanhong’s article aroused a great debate in the architectural world in Beijing. The Beijing Daily received 50 to 60 articles in pros and cons. The newspaper selected eight of them, including one from Chen Zhanxiang.

59 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:52:52 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

Water tower of Beijing Children’s Hospital (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

309

Details of the building of the Beijing Children’s Hospital (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

Chen’s article was entitled Expectation of the Avenue from Xidan to Fuxingmen — a Comment on the Article “Is It Good, After All, to Build Houses Along Streets.” Chen said, “Even if we regard the main streets as the only place for building office towers, that is, important government organs are placed along major trunk roads and secondary government organs put in secondary trunk roads, it would be too simplistic. Whenever the Beijing Hotel holds a banquet, there would be many vehicles coming and going, so much so that they often cause traffic jam. Don’t we have a deep impression of it?” Chen Zhanxiang also held that “it would be too absolute not to build houses along streets in order to avoid noises. By over-exaggerating noises from streets, it virtually regards streets as passage exclusively for motor vehicles. That would inevitably lead to the tendency of avoiding putting up houses along streets in disregard of the special circumstances.” He cited the avenue from Xi’dan to Fuxingmen and put forward a “trade-off” plan: The avenue is an extension of the Chang’an Avenue, the main trunk road extending from east to west. It is also a street for parade. All the public buildings that attract a lot of traffic should be built as far away as possible from streets. It is feasible to allow large enterprises outside the capital to set up offices with exhibition halls in the city so that people may see the achievements of China’s construction from the show windows. Above the exhibition hall, there may be luxury apartments. This street reaches to all


10/15/2010 4:52:53 PM

310

BEIJING RECORD

directions and is very busy. These houses may get the advantage of viewing the biannual parades and fireworks. There should be places for tea houses, where people can enjoy the pedestrians and enjoy life. This shows that Chen Zhanxiang went along with Hua Lanhong in some aspects but had his reservations in others. They were also divided in their attitudes toward the style of new buildings in the old city districts. In 1952, the Peace Hotel designed by Yang Tingbao in Jinyu Hutong of Wangfujing became a target of criticism in the “anti-structuralist” campaign launched by Soviet experts in the domestic architectural field. The 8-storey structure is oblong in shape, with simple and neat outer appearance and rather functional. It was a rare modernistic structure in Beijing at the time.

Peace Hotel (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

Hua Lanhong, who appreciates modernism, contributed an article to the Architectural Journal, which was published in its 6th issue in 1957. In the article, he complained about the unfairness of the criticisms. He presented his detailed views concerning the standards and the layout of the first floor, the entrance hall, the profile and the details, saying that the designer had “used many clever methods to solve many (almost all) practical problems. Practical life has proved this. He also applied properly the novel and good methods of modern architecture to some parts of the building... The hotel was designed at the beginning of liberation. Due to the confusion


10/15/2010 4:52:56 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

311

in academic thinking at the time and the ensuing pursuit for luxuries, the architect community failed to draw on the strong points of the hotel. Instead, they failed to see the strong points due to the anti-structuralist campaign.” As far as a single structure is concerned, the design of the Peace Hotel is no doubt excellent. But in the eyes of Liang Sicheng, it would have been more appropriate to put the hotel outside the old city. Chen Zhanxiang quite went along with him. On June 16, 1952, he told a forum sponsored by Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission that the “terminology of being beautiful” in architecture should be changed into “nationalistic,” 60 which is “clearer.” In 1952, it was planned to build the Capital Theater on the northern end of Wangfujing. This would be the first regular theater built in the capital after liberation. Liang Sicheng insisted on giving prominence to “national style.” Chen Zhanxiang offered a proposal to Liang Sicheng to make innovations on the basis of foreign architectures, including British housing structures of the 19th century, Byzantine architectures, the classical churches of the Renaissance period and the treatment of the roofs of high and straight structures. Liang accepted the proposal and asked Chen to draw sketches. Chen designed a theater with a combination of 13 traditional roofs, looking like the Pyongyang Theater. The design won the appreciation of Liang Sicheng and Lin Huiyin. But the design was rejected without careful discussions because it had a big roof. Chen Zhanxiang and Liang Sicheng made joint efforts to make new buildings to acquire national styles. Wang Dongcen had this to say in his report: In about June 1952, the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications wanted to build an office. He (Liang Sicheng) and Chen Zhanxiang all proposed that it must have a national style... Designers presented their drafts to them and they all said that there was no national style. Liang Sicheng made a drawing himself, which had a big roof. But the Ministry and designers were against it. But Liang Sicheng stuck to his guns. As the two sides could not agree, the blueprint had to be submitted to the then Vice-Mayor Zhang for discussion at the government executive meeting sponsored by Vice-Mayor Wu. The meeting managed to persuade Liang 61 to accept the design without the big roof.”â•›

60 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, June 16, 1952, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 61 Manuscript of Wang Dongcen, December 1954, not published, by courtesy of the Library of the Qinghua University School of Architecture.


10/15/2010 4:52:56 PM

312

BEIJING RECORD

Nevertheless the two scholars disagreed with one another on some issues. Liang Sicheng was firm against “square box” type of architecture in the old city and advocated for Chinese architectural profiles as the mainstream of the building in the Chinese capital. Although Chen Zhanxiang went along with him and put it into practice, Liang Sicheng held that he should be more thoroughgoing in that direction. Both were open with regard to structures outside the old city, but with some variance. Liang Sicheng praised the Children’s Hospital designed by Hua Lanhong for the modernistic style, which bore the fundamental features of Chinese architecture, with space, windows all conforming to the traditional proportions of Chinese architecture, thus expressing the national style. However, while jointly designing the “Socialist Road” with Hua Lanhong, Chen Zhanxiang borrowed the western classic method in designing the elevation. This made Liang Sicheng perplexed. On a number of occasions, he voiced his opposition to western classic architecture. Although Chen Zhanxiang infused into his design some details of Chinese architecture, Liang Sicheng said to Chen Zhanxiang: “We are taking two different roads.” In his report, Wang Dongcen said: Chen Zhanxiang asked Liang Sicheng for his opinion when he was designing the Yuetan Street (S). As he did not put a big roof, Liang Sicheng said: “As we are taking two different roads, I have nothing to offer.” He repeatedly said that BCCPC should not produce such designs. The Nanheyan Street was designed by Chen Zhanxiang under the leadership of Liang Sicheng, who added several big roofs to a theater. But for other structures along the street, Chen Zhanxiang added big roofs to some but not to others. So Liang said to him: “We are taking different roads.” In his opinion, a big roof with a five meter flying eave should be 62 added.”â•› Chen Zhanxiang knew Liang Sicheng was dissatisfied. Perhaps, he felt that their disputes did not concern essential orientation but concerned only the degree of understanding. Chen Zhanxiang’s ideas were deeply influenced by the education he received in Britain. When in the architectural department of the University of Liverpool, the design of each project was studied in the context of the 62 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:52:56 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

313

environment of a place. After finishing the courses in architecture, he went on to study civic design. According to civic design, new buildings must respect the environment and the new structures put up in old city districts must be well blended with the historical styles. With such academic background, it was quite natural for Chen and Liang to come together. In reality, it was Hua Lanhong who followed a line different from that of Liang Sicheng. This was revealed from Hua’s views on the design of Peace Hotel. Hua also hated the notion of “going back to the ancients.” But Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang seemed to find no way out. Although they designed the administrative center in the western outskirts by using the modernistic methods, they could not bear to see buildings of such style around the Forbidden City. Indeed, they had unspoken difficulties when they designed “big roofs.” Interestingly, the Paris-based Académie des Beaux-Arts where Hua Lanhong studied had long been the major place for western classicism, which had a profound influence on the architecture department of the University of Pennsylvania in the United States, where Liang Sicheng studied. However, when Hua Lanhong went to that college in 1936, the academism forces were replaced by the school of modernism that arose in the 1920s. This was perhaps the hotbed for Hua Lanhong to deviate from classicism. Liang Sicheng also knew the quintessence of the fascination of modernistic structures that used new building materials adaptable to the new style of living and he hoped to seek a way of grafting it to the Chinese tradition. But in the 1950s, this was but a hard-to-realize dream. After “bowing to plead guilty,” Hua Lanhong was demoted from an architect of the top class to an architect of the third class, who was allowed to design only some minor projects. Three years later, he met his childhood friend, British writer Han Suyin (pen name of Elizabeth Comber) who came to China for a visit. Han’s father, Zhou Yingtong, was a good friend of Hua Nangui, also a noted civil engineering expert; her mother, Margret Denise, was a Flemish Belgian. Hua and Han had similar family background and were old family friends. It was the “three-year difficult time” for China when they met. Han Suyin recalled that as Hua Lanhong’s wife was a French and a foreign expert, they were given extra food rations and the room was warm and food was good.


10/15/2010 4:52:56 PM

314

BEIJING RECORD

Hua Lanhong’s father Hua Nangui had just passed away and they talked a lot about their fathers. “China is a goal every educated Chinese pursues,” said Han. “You are a bit too Chinese in a certain sense,” Hua said. “From your reactions and all the emotions, I feel that you have never left China and have â•›63 always lived in China. But I, returning in 1951, seem to be a foreigner.” During the Cultural Revolution, Hua Lanhong refused to be idle. He designed a clover-leaf that separated the flow of motor vehicles and bicycles now extensively seen today. For this matter he wrote a letter to the then Beijing City Party Secretary Wu De. In 1979, Hua Lanhong’s wrong was redressed. But two years before, he had already taken his family to Paris, where they settled down. On June 22, 1999, Hua Lanhong came to Beijing to attend the 20th World Congress of Architects. He recalled calmly the scenes when he was a target of criticism: I was labeled “rightist” only because I said that the designs and city planning by Soviet experts were no good and advocated for modern architecture. At that time, all leaned toward the Soviet Union only and all things Soviet were good, no matter it was building designs or city planning. The Soviets were No. 1. In reality, the Soviet Union was very backward in architectural art and city planning, following western classicism. They in fact were learning from the West, the old things of the west. No big change ever took place until Khrushchev came to power. I was labeled “rightist” simply on account of my opposition to the Soviet experts. In reality, the Soviet Union at that time also began to change.” Chen Zhanxiang suffered even more. After he was labeled “rightist,” he was sent down to Changping in the outskirts of Beijing to plant trees. He did manual labor for full five years there. After he returned in 1962, he was given a job as a translator in the information office of the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design. His wrong was redressed at the same time as Hua Lanhong. After that, he at last returned to his design post. He was transferred to the City Planning Institute of the State Bureau of Urban Construction (Now China Academy of Urban Planning & Design) where he took up the post as the chief planner. He was then already 63 years old.

63 Han Suyin: My House Has Two Doors, 1st edition, China Overseas Chinese Publishing Company, December 1991.


10/15/2010 4:52:56 PM

FA Reading

Pedantism

315

In January 1988, he was invited to give lectures in the United States and was given the honor as UC Berkeley Regents Professor and visiting professor of the Cornell University. The University of Missouri at Kansas City honored him as Edgar Snow Professor. He lectured in the United States for two years and four months. He was persuaded to stay in the United States. But he declined. His daughter also asked him to spend his later years in the United States. But he insisted on returning to China. Chen Zhanxiang at Beijing Institute of Architectural “If I had wanted to stay in a forDesign after being labeled “rightist” (by courtesy of Chen Yanqing) eign country, I would have stayed in 1946, when I was still young enough to advance my career,” he said. “Since I returned to China at that time, why should I stay here now? I have already missed more than 20 years and not much time is left. I very much like to do something more when I am still 64 fit.”â•› In 1986, on the occasion of Liang Sicheng’s 85th birthday, Chen Zhanxiang wrote an article in his memory: Before 1957, under the good situation of the country, Mr. Liang and I worked together for a few years, a period worth my recollection. After that, due to bitter personal experience, I did not maintain the cordial relationship with Mr. Liang as before. But Mr. Liang had never any scruples with me due to my “rightist” capacity. He behaved as he had always done, very sincere to me… During the anti-rightist struggle, Mr. Liang presided over many meetings to criticize the “Chen-Hua” Alliance. But at every meeting, Mr. Liang encouraged more than criticize me. I remember very clearly that when I was accused of being a “rightist,” the first thing Mr. Liang told me when we met was “Zhanxiang, why are you so muddle-headed?” In the mid-1960s, when there was a great drive for design revolution, I wrote an unsigned article on applying Chairman Mao’s Talks at the

64 Recollection by Chen Yuqing during an interview with the author, April 8, 2001.


10/15/2010 4:52:57 PM

316

BEIJING RECORD

Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art to the design revolution. When Mr. Liang read it, he would tell everybody he met that the article was surely written by Chen Zhanxiang. I felt very much moved when I learned it from others. Despite artificial separation for many years, Mr. Liang knows 65 me after all.

65 Chen Zhanxiang: In Memory of Professor Liang Sicheng, in Collected Papers Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of Liang Sicheng’s Birth,1st edition, Qinghua University Publishing House, October 1986.


10/15/2010 4:52:57 PM

FA Reading

Chapter 8


10/15/2010 4:52:57 PM

Chapter Eight Blueprint Revealed

Master Plan Drawn The Tentative Master Plan of Beijing’s Urban Construction, which was the target of fierce criticism by Liang Sicheng, Chen Zhanxiang and Hua Lanhong, came out in March 1957 after it was discussed at the Standing Committee of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee. In the following year, it went through some adjustments and additions before it was distributed among various research institutions and the central authorities in June 1958. The report to the central authorities said: “Beijing is not only a political center but also a cultural and education center of the country and it should also become a rapidly rising modernized industrial base and a science and technology center. The outline for this plan was mapped out based on these presumptions. The problem had remained unresolved for years but has been resolved now.” The report, according to the instructions of the central authorities and Chairman Mao Zedong, visualized the completion of the regeneration of the old Beijing in about ten years. It said: “Although we have built 21 million square meters of new houses since liberation, the shabby look of old Beijing has not been changed fundamentally. According to the recent instructions from the Central Authorities and the Chairman (Mao), we prepare to start from 1958 to change the situation in a planned way. Currently 80 percent of the houses are bungalows inside the old city and most of them are very old and poor in condition, while a considerable number of them are in danger. Hundreds or even thousands of rooms collapse every year. The city regeneration would be easier than in Shanghai and Tianjin. From the perspective of improving the urban traffic, it is also necessary to rebuild the old city district. Our initial outline is to dismantle about 100 million square meters


10/15/2010 4:52:57 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

319

of old houses and build 200 million square meters of new ones and it will 1 take about ten years to complete the regeneration.” But it was at this time that great changes took place in the national situation. In August 1958, the CPC Central Committee took the decision concerning the establishment of rural people’s communes, which brought about an upsurge in the Great Leap Forward and People’s Commune Movement. In such circumstances, Beijing modified the initial plan and drafted the Explanations on the Master Plan of Beijing’s Urban Construction and submitted it to the City People’s Committee for deliberation. The revised plan also defined Beijing as “a political center and a cultural and education center of China and will soon make it a rapidly developing modernized industrial base and science and technology center.”

Beijing Master Construction Plan (1958) (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

With regard to the guiding principle, the plan gave prominence to services in city function, namely, making the city regeneration “serve industrial and agricultural production and the efforts to accelerate the industrialization of the capital, industrialization of people’s communes and the factory operation of agriculture and provide the conditions for combining industry, 1 Report of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee to the Central Authorities on the Initial Outline for the Overall Plan of Beijing’s Urban Construction (Excerpts), June 23, 1958, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:52:59 PM

320

BEIJING RECORD

agriculture, commerce, school and army and narrowing the wide gaps between industry and agriculture, between rural and urban areas and between mental and manual labor.” The plan called for “fundamental regeneration of the old city” and “resolutely knocking to pieces the bondage and restrictions by the poor old city.” It said: The construction and architectural art of old Beijing is a concentrated expression of the historical achievements of the great Chinese nation and the wisdom of the Chinese laboring people. But it was built up during the feudalistic periods and therefore restricted by the then low productivity. The construction principles at the time totally served the will of the feudal class. It has therefore become increasingly unable to meet the requirements of socialism and the needs of collective livelihood; nor is it square with the glorious position of the capital of 600 million people. So, it is necessary to retain and develop the style and advantages that conform to the people’s demand, and at the same time resolutely break away from the restrictions and bondage of the poor old city and make it undergo thorough regeneration according to a plan that reflects the Communist ideas and styles so as to make Beijing an industrialized, garden-like and modern great socialist capital. By “fundamental regeneration” of the old city, it means to “rebuild the Forbidden City,” “All the city walls and altar walls must be pulled down” and build the second ring road on the foundation of city walls and moat. It continued: The cityscape must be changed rapidly. The renewal of the Tiananmen Square, the east and west Changan Avenue and other trunk roads will be completed in five years and then bring the project into depth. Large-scaled regeneration should also be carried out in the Xuanwu and Chongwen districts, pulling down some houses to give way to lawns and trees. In the proper places among the residential areas, some houses will be pulled down to give way to some factories that are harmless to hygiene so as to facilitate residents to take part in production locally. The moat along the Chongwenmen, Qianmen and Xuawumen will be expanded and city walls pulled down to plant trees and grass. On the northern side of the Moatside Road, high rises will be built. Preparations should start to rebuild the Forbidden City. Integrating the Tiananmen square, the Forbidden City, Zhongshan Park, the Cultural Palace, Jingshan Park, Beihai Park, Shichahai Park, Jishuitan and the areas along the moat from Chongwenmen to Xuanwumen into a large garden in the city center by dismantling part of the houses and expanding the greening areas, where one million people would enjoy themselves during festivals.


10/15/2010 4:52:59 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

321

The structures in the central area should be usually 4–5 storeys; while those along the trunk roads and the square should mainly be 8–9–10 storeys and some may be taller. All the city walls and altar walls must be pulled down. ... The roads at Caishikou, Xinjiekou, Beixinqiao and Suanshikou should be linked to form the first ring road to be built on the foundation of the city walls... The administrative center of the Central People’s Government will remain in the old city area. The Tiananmen Square should be the central square of the capital. It will be expanded to cover 44 hectares. Flanking the square will be big buildings constructed to house the National People’s Congress and the Museum of Chinese History and Chinese Revolution. Zhongnanhai and its surrounding areas will be the seat of the leading central organs. Other central departments and buildings of great national significance such as museums and the national theater shall be arranged 2 along the major trunk road of the Chang’an Avenue.

Beijing Master Construction Plan (1959) (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

2 Explanations to the Beijing Master Construction Plan (draft), September 1958, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995.


10/15/2010 4:53:00 PM

322

BEIJING RECORD

The plan also decided to divide the city into dispersed groups with different groups linked up by greens. Factories may be built inside the residential areas if they were not harmful to residents or did not need much transportation and occupy much land. All new houses should be built according to the principles of people’s communes. The east and west Chang’an Avenue, Qianmen Street and Gulou Street (S) must be widened to 120–140 meters and extended outward. Other trunk roads must be widened to 80–120 meters; and secondary trunk roads must be widened to 60–80 meters. The plan, which underwent modification for about a year, was submitted to the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee and to Chairman Mao Zedong in August 1959. But the plan did not get the official approval due to changes in the internal and external situation, chiefly due to the “three-year difficult period” and the Sino-Soviet conflicts. But the city construction still followed this plan up to the Cultural Revolution. Chen Gan, who masterminded the plan and headed the General 3 Mapping Office of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration, wrote an article in January 1959, telling about how the plan was ground out after overcoming the interference by the “Liang-Chen Proposal.” The article said: The interference from the “right” was the idea of preserving the old city intact as the world’s most complete and most classic art museum of feudal capital. For this reason, the proposals were made to build a new capital in the place from Yuetan to Gongzhufen, with the old and new city linked by roads. This interference met with rebuttal by history… Why is the idea of keeping the old city intact regarded as interference from the “right”? Since Beijing has been made the capital and the old city could not be used and there was not the strength to build new houses and, even if there were the strength, time is not allowed, then it would become empty words to make Beijing the capital. Furthermore, the old city was filthy, dilapidated and dirty, with crowded places too crowded and open spaces too open. There is no way of changing them. What a capital it should be when seen from the perspective of the people? The old Beijing is indeed our treasure. But how should upright people bear to see 4 such treasure in such environment?â•›

3 In January 1958, the Beijing Capital City Planning Committee and the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration were merged to become the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration. 4 Chen Gan: Whence the Distribution and Dispersed Grouping of Beijing City, in Collected Works of Chen Gan — Thoughts on Beijing’s Development compiled by the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, 1996.


10/15/2010 4:53:00 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

323

In this article, Chen Gan definitely supported the dismantling of the inner and outer city walls. The reason: We cannot cut the feet to fit the shoes; nor should we let the dead control the living. Otherwise, it would “violate the universal law of metabolism,” and “man should not live for the sake of cultural relics. It should be otherwise, cultural relics should adapt to the needs of man.” Chen Gan, who became known for writing three articles together with his brother Gao Han to criticize Liang Sicheng from 1954 to 1955, was born in 1919 in Tiantai County, Zhejiang Province. In 1945, he graduated from the Architecture Department of the School of Technology, Chongqing Central University. In July 1949, he came to Beiping to become a member of Beiping Municipal City Planning Commission, where he was an assistant engineer in the Planning Department led by Chen Zhanxiang. From 1950 to 1953, he headed the library of the Commission. In July 1953, he was transferred to the city planning group of the General Office of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee. From 1954 to 1955, following the drive to criticize the idea of “going back to ancients,” he was given the posts of deputy head and then head of the General Mapping Group of BCCPC to become a principal technician for formulating Beiping master construction plan. Chen Gan held Liang Sicheng in great esteem when he first came to Beijing. His brother Gao Han told the author: “Chen Gan often took me to the home of Liang Sicheng. The couple was a perfect match of a handsome scholar and a beauty. They were very warm toward us young people. At that time, Chen Gan heeded the views of Liang Sicheng on Beijing’s construction. 5 All people held him in esteem. So did I.” But later on, contradictions rose between them in work. The first job assigned to Chen Gan was to participate in the planning of sprucing up the Tiananmen Rostrum and the square in preparations for celebrating the ceremony of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. The specific tasks were to fix the position of the flagstaff for the first national flag and the future monument to the People’s Heroes, the internal refurbishing of the Tiananmen Rostrum and the building of a platform for the flagstaff. Chen Gan held that when the flagstaff was put up, plus the reviewing stands, the huabiao (ornamental columns erected in front of the Forbidden City) and the stone lions by the Golden Water Bridge in front of Tiananmen 5 Recollection by Gao Han during an interview with the author in August 1997.


10/15/2010 4:53:00 PM

324

BEIJING RECORD

would be out of place. If they were removed, it would come into conflict with Liang Sicheng’s principle. According to the recollection by Gao Han, when Chen Gan first arrived in Beiping, he and his classmates called at the home of Liang Sicheng. Liang said to them that the graphic design of Beiping was a great masterpiece of art, the city may become a museum of historical arts, just like Rome and Athens. Chen Gan asked Liang Sicheng: “Since the capital of new China is set in Beijing, how do you mediate between the old city and the capital?” Liang Sicheng said, first of all, Beijing can only be a political center just like Washington of the United States. There should be no industry in the city. Second, the civic center may be sited out of the western outskirts in the vast open space west of Yuetan and east of Gongzhufen, with the northern border reaching the zoo and the southern border reaching Lianhuachi. The 6 old and the new are distinctly divided, without interfering in each other. “Since Liang Sicheng has made it so clear that even the new civic center would give way to the protection of the old city, how he would allow the removal of the Huabiao and the stone lions in the vicinity of the Forbidden City, which would affect the established pattern?” said Chen Gan to his brother Gao Han who came to visit him. He asked Gao Han whether Marx, Engels, Lenin or Stalin said anything about city regeneration. If one sentence is found, it would probably bring hope to solving this problem. They took Engels’s Dialectics of Nature and found one place dwelling on the nature of zero: saying that “Zero, because it is the negation of any definite quantity, is therefore not devoid of content... But not for (analytical) geometry. Here zero is a definite point from which measurements are taken along a line, in one direction positively, in the other negatively. Here, therefore, the zero point has not only just as much significance as any point denoted by a positive or negative magnitude, but a much greater significance than all of them: it is the point on which they are all dependent, to which they are all related, and by which they are all determined.” Chen was so excited to spot this that he said to Gao Han, “According to Engels’ zero analysis, if we make a coordinate of Beiping, zero is the Forbidden City and the other parts would have to be distributed accordingly. There could be clear central axis, with symmetrical pattern on the two sides and corresponding roads. Now, time had changed and the imperial power

6 Gao Han: Clear Blue Sky — Recollection of Anecdotes of Chen Gan, in Collected Works of Chen Gan — Thoughts on Beijing’s Development compiled by the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, 1996.


10/15/2010 4:53:00 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

325

was a thing of the past. If Beiping is made the capital of New China, but Forbidden City remains the center, there would be no difference from the past. Where the time feature would be?” He held that in the capital of New China, the zero point should be fixed at the Tiananmen Square, more definitely, at the point when the first national flag of New China was hoisted. But how to shift the zero point from the Forbidden City to the Tiananmen Square? Chen Gan said that the central axis of Beiping should be set as in the Qin Dynasty and the zero point should still be chosen according to the vertical axis. The horizontal axis would naturally be moved southward accordingly. This could be and must be the Chang’an Avenue. The historical destiny of this avenue would be determined by the zero point. That would make it inevitable to open it up, straighten it and widen it. Otherwise, it would be hard to match it with the central axis. In this sense, it would be a matter of fact to relocate the Huabiao and the stone lions. They must be away from the old zero point and repositioned according to the new zero point. From the moment when the flagstaff was fixed, the center of city planning of the capital of New China had been determined historically. Following it was the transformation of the whole Beijing and the rise of the 7 capital of New China.

Tiananmen Square in 1950 (by courtesy of BIPD)

7 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:53:01 PM

326

BEIJING RECORD

Chen Gan succeeded in his “resistance.” Huabiao and the stone lions were relocated backwards. After that, Chen Gan became the head of the library of Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission. It hit upon a time when the “Liang-Chen Proposal” and the “Proposals for Capital Construction Plan” worked out by Zhu Zhaoxue and Zhao Dongri were in fierce confrontation. Inspired by the nature of zero in sprucing up the Tiananmen Square, Chen Gan fell in with the plan of putting the civic center in the old city. He deemed not daring to touch the old city as a lack of self-confidence, while wayward move as an expression of knowing nothing about history and unknowledgeable. Since the forerunners of the ancient times could display the fine traditions of the national culture and build up Beijing, why this generation cannot preserve and develop Beijing? He said that the “fatal weakness” of the “Liang-Chen Proposal” lies in: first the lack of profound understanding of the decisive significance of “economic necessity” in building the capital; and second, in the lack of understanding of the aspirations of the people who had rendered meritorious deeds in the war of liberation, who were the representatives of 8 the leading force decisive in history. Chen Gan hoped to see an east-west axis cutting across Beijing by planning the Chang’an Avenue, which would cross with the traditional central axis at the Tiananmen Square, thus fixing the new zero point. Later on, the idea became dominant in the planning of the city. In his late years, Chen Gan paid a heavy price for realizing his plan. Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang opposed putting up huge buildings along the Chang’an Avenue. Zhao Dongri, a principal opponent to the “Liang-Chen Proposal,” also opposed the idea of making the Chang’an Avenue an east-west axis of Beijing. In the proposals for capital construction planning on April 20, 1950, he and Zhu Zhaoxue visualized an east-west axis comparable to the northsouth axis of the city, an axis formed by buildings just like the central axis rather than a road flanked by huge buildings. After 42 years, that is, in January 1993, Zhao Dongri published his “new axis scheme” in the Architectural Journal, saying that the then Tiananmen Square had not become the “center” of the city; neither did the Chang’an Avenue a political and cultural center nor an east-west axis. He stated:

8 Ibid. The economic feasibility of the “Liang-Chen Proposal” is explained in Section 5 of Chapter 4.


10/15/2010 4:53:01 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

327 1. Cultural & Educational Institutions 2. State Ethnic Affairs Commission and Institutions under it 3. Ministries & Commissions under the State Council 4. NPC & CPPCC Organs 5. Public Security, Procuratorate & Court organs 6. CPC Beijing Municipal Committee Organs 7. Health Institutions 8. Science & Technology Centers 9. Postal & Telecommunication Services

Chart of east-west axial line in Beijing drawn by Zhao Dongri (Source: Selected Works of Zhao Dongri, 1998)

10. Transportation Services 11. Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Chart of the distribution of functions of east-west axial line drawn by Zhao Dongri (Source: Selected Works of Zhao Dongri, 1998)

For years, I hoped to make the Chang’an Avenue representative of the national political and cultural center and a symbol of New China. It had been so conceived and planned according to this theme that it made it an “east-west axis” that is comparable to the “south-north axis.” But what has been completed indicates that it is hard to express the nature of Beijing as a political and cultural center in this trunk road. In addition, the individual buildings along the Chang’an Avenue have not been built according to the plan. Artistically, it is not ideal, either, except the Tiananmen Square and the Cultural Palace of Nationalities. On the contrary, such buildings as the Beijing Hotel have spoiled the wholesomeness of the ancient capital. The Chang’an Avenue cannot compare with the south-north axis of the city, as it is not on the axial line. Like the avenue from Chongwenmen to Xuanwumen, it is nothing but a road. Along the south-north axis, there are city gates, squares and palaces, with sights varying and mutually reinforcing each other at different levels. People are moving among different scenes and at different levels, with vision dynamically developing and changing with the change in scenes, atmospheres and rhythms. The changes in big and small spaces are artistic, uniform and wholesome. Such cityscape cannot be expressed by a 9 long trunk road and the buildings along it.

9 Zhao Dongri: Planning and Construction of the Areas East and West of the Tiananmen Square, Architectural Journal, January 1993.


10/15/2010 4:53:02 PM

328

BEIJING RECORD

The new axis he visualized started at Jianguomen Street (S) to Fuxingmen Street (S), with the center of the axis running through the central line of the Great Hall of the People, the Museum of the Chinese Revolution and the Museum of Chinese History. It then extended east- and west-ward, where a series of squares and major structures were to be put up. The center of the old city was divided into three zones for government organs, cultural facilities and science and technology departments. Zhao persisted on his idea for more than half a century. The first conflict in the real sense between Chen Gan and Liang Sicheng took place during the course of designing the Monument to the People’s Heroes. On the afternoon of September 30, 1949, the session of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) ended. The session adopted the proposal for building a monument to the people’s heroes and also adopted the text to be engraved on the monument. At dusk, Chairman Mao Zedong and all the participants in the conference came to the Tiananmen Square to attend the ground breaking ceremony for the monument. The second day, Chairman Mao Zedong declared the founding of the People’s Republic of China on the rostrum of Tiananmen. Beijing Municipal City Planning Commission put up a notice to solicit designs for the monument from the whole nation. Not long after, about 170–180 designs were received. There were several types of designs. One was to put up a tablet flat on the ground to make it closer to the visitors because people’s heroes came from among the people; the second was to put up a huge sculpture in the image of a hero; the third was to build a tall tower to signify heroism and loftiness of the revolutionary martyrs. There were Chinese traditional types and also classic European types and modern types. The Commission invited all units and people’s organizations in Beijing as well as some architects and artists to elect the best design. The flat scheme

The three-archway monument plan and its comparison with Tiananmen drawn by Liang Sicheng in his letter to Peng Zhen on August 29, 1951 (Source: Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, Vol. IV, 1986)


10/15/2010 4:53:03 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

329

The ideal plan for the Monument to the People’s Heroes and its comparison with Tiananmen drawn by Liang Sicheng in his letter to Peng Zhen on August 29, 1951 (Source: Selected Works of Liang Sicheng, Vol. IV, 1986)

was rejected, but participants were divided on what type to adopt: huge sculpture or a tower. Liang Sicheng and Chan Zhanxiang strongly advocated for a type like traditional Chinese tablet as the main structure. But they were the minority. Chen Zhanxing recalled: There is a variety of monuments in the West: triumphant gate, sculpture groups, obelisk and columns, to mention only a few. But we invited many noted architects to join efforts in designing the Monument to the People’s Heroes. What they offered were mostly modern ones in addition to some of the general western styles. As they differed in their understanding of people’s heroes, they produced diametrically different designs, from abstract to specific, a dazzling array of designs totally devoid of common language. What the first CPPCC adopted was a monument to the people’s heroes and the inscription was very clear. The keyword was “monument.” We were very familiar with monuments and tablets. There must be a tablet on which the inscriptions are engraved. But this simplest conception was sneered at by most designers and sarcastically “suggested” that there should be a tortoise under the monument. In such circumstances, Huang Shihua of the Planning Section of BCCPC had to take it onto himself to draw the blueprint. It was indeed very simple and was chosen by Premier Zhou Enlai as a stand-by scheme. The drawing conceived was not final and it had to be processed, which was undertaken by Professor Liang 10 Sicheng and Professor Lin Huiyin. Thanks to the efforts by Liang Sicheng, Chen Zhanxiang and Huang Shihua, with the support from Premier Zhou Enlai, the drawing was finalized, with the following principle clearly stated: 10 Autobiography of Chen Zhanxiang, not published, by courtesy of Chen Yanqing.


10/15/2010 4:53:03 PM

330

BEIJING RECORD

1. In view of the fact that CPPCC adopted the resolution on building a monument and on the text of the inscription, the design should be centered on the central theme. So, the monument should take the form of a tablet. The exploits in the three major historical stages may be carved on the tablet in bold relief. 2. Monuments are available in both China and other countries. But such foreign designs as obelisk or L’obelisque de Louxor or the Roman Trojan Column suggested cannot bring out the theme of the tablet inscription. It is a time-honored tradition of China to engrave or carve characters on tablets. It is, therefore, proper to adopt the traditional Chinese tablet. 3. The ancient tablets are small in size, lacking the air of heroes and must be changed. 4. As the text of the inscription is carved on one side only, it is planned to ask Chairman Mao Zedong to write the words meaning “Eternal to People’s Heroes” on the other side. Later on, Peng Zhen asked Premier Zhou Enlai to write the text as he was good at the Yan style 11 of writing. After that, the Commission set out with the design based on all kinds of drafts received. But carvers still stuck to their opinion that sculptured images should be made the theme. In the course of discussing the various schemes, Peng Zhen once said that the central leaders had said that the monument may take the form like the tablet of “Longevity Hill and Kunming Lake” in the Summer Palace and they also mentioned the tablet of “Jade Islet and Shaded Spring” at the foot of the White Dagoba Hill in Beihai Park. The designers also drew inspirations from these instructions. In the summer of 1951, the Commission came out with a plan, featuring a tablet on a platform with three passage ways. The designers also proposed different methods of treatment of the upper end of the tablet and drew three draft pictures. According to the recollection by Gao Han, the plan was masterminded by Chen Gan and won the approval of Beijing leadership. When put on 12 display, a big model was made. At that juncture, a letter by Liang Sicheng changed everything.

11 Liang Sicheng: The Course of Designing the Monument to the People’s Heroes, December 15, 1967, Selected Papers on the Academic Thinking of Liang Sicheng, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, September 1996. 12 Recollection by Gao Han during an interview with the author in August 1997.


10/15/2010 4:53:03 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

331

On August 29, Liang Sicheng wrote to Peng Zhen, saying that the plan was entirely unfeasible, because “it is a violation of the structural principle to put the heavy tablet on a basement with three big holes without a solid foundation. Although it is feasible technically, it lacks visual stability, lacks the quality of ‘immortality.’ It is not proper at all.” Liang Sicheng pointed out that “the design is like a mini-model of Tiananmen. But Tiananmen is put on a magnificent platform and it is a wooden structure. The monument, however, is a stone and must assume an entirely different form. It must stand aloft and straight on a solid foundation. If it is put on a basement with passageways, it is indeed unstable and unnatural. It may be deemed as a bizarre method of construction... The high platform is only the miniature of the platform of Tiananmen, not so solemn. What is more, the two similar platforms would weaken the solemnity of Tiananmen.” He also held that “inserting a big platform about 40 meters wide and 40 meters long and about 6–7 meters high is tantamount to inserting a big auditorium capable of accommodating 1,000 people. That will make the square suffocating. It gives the impression that the platform was forced into the square, forcing it to become suffocating. When looking southward from Tiananmen or looking northward from Qianmen, the square would lose the grandeur and vastness... The four sides of the tablet platform should be obstacle-free and what we want is that people can pay homage to the heroes from four sides. The three holes are neither necessary practically or reasonable structurally. In terms of proportion, the platform is big while the holes are small and the head is thin, making the tablet unstable visually. There is indeed no reason for its existence.” The letter had a major impact on the design of the monument. In the end, the scheme of a platform with three holes was rejected and the draft scheme drawn by Liang Sicheng in his letter was implemented. Chen Gan’s design was derailed by Liang Sicheng at the moment when it was almost accepted. Insiders told this author that Chen Gan felt very grieved for this. In 1954, in their first joint article criticizing Liang Sicheng, Chen Gan and Gao Han said: “We love our teacher but we love truth all the more,” adding that a big scholar like Liang Sicheng would certainly have the capacity of tolerating differences of views. The publication of the article in the Literature and Art Gazette kicked a big row. Liang Sicheng was laid down with illness and became bedridden. Nevertheless, he asked the invalid Lin Huiyin to see Chen Gan living in Xidan, taking with her a carton of milk.


10/15/2010 4:53:04 PM

332

BEIJING RECORD

By that time, Lin Huiyin herself had almost no hope of recovering from her disease. She could move about at home only with the support of her hands grasping on the edges of the table.

City Wall Dismantling Spree One cannot bypass 1958 in writing the history of Beijing City and the history of contemporary China, because the frenzy of Great Leap Forward started that year. In July 1955, Mao Zedong said that socialist construction should proceed at a speed as high as possible. He criticized some people who went as slow as “women with bounded feet.” This touched off a drive to criticize “right-deviationist conservatism,” which went ahead with accelerated momentum. The agricultural cooperative movement saw an upsurge. In a short span of several months, the movement was completed in the whole country. Its influence spilled over to other economic sectors. In 1956, the People’s Daily published a New Year’s Day editorial, calling for “greater, faster, better and more economical results” in building socialism. Around that time, the phrase “criticism of the right-deviationist conservatism” was indispensable in all the Party documents and speeches by central leaders. All fields of endeavor set almost unachievable high targets. Seeking things big and fast and rashness exerted increasing human, material and financial pressures on the state. Premier Zhou Enlai was the first to discern the danger of the situation. At a State Council meeting on February 8, 1956, he said: “Now there is a sign of rashness that merits attention. While the zeal for socialism cannot be thwarted, there should not be unauthorized slogans and groundless urge for speed on matters that have gone beyond real possibilities. Otherwise, it would be very dangerous... Leaders must use cold water to wash their heads if they have got too hot-headed in order to 13 maintain a cool head.” On May 11, he called for a stop to the drive of 14 criticizing right-deviationist conservatism that had lasted for 8–9 months. Liu Shaoqi felt the same way. In May, he presided over a CPC central committee meeting to discuss the matter. The meeting put forward an important principle: to oppose both conservatism and rashness in economic development and seek steady advance in comprehensive balancing. Liu Shaoqi asked Lu Dingyi, the then head of the CPC Central Committee 13 Chronology of Zhou Enlai, 1st edition, CPC Central Documentation Office, Central Documentation Press, May 1997. 14 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:53:04 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

333

publicity department to write a leading article for the People’s Daily to spell out the issue. After the article was finished and submitted to Mao Zedong for a review, Mao wrote: “Bu Kan” (I refuse to read it). A year later, Mao’s discontent burst out. He said that “I wrote a note to this editorial — Bu Kan, because it was directed at me. Why should I read it?” On October 9, 1957, at the closing session of the 3rd Plenary Session of the 8th CPC Central Committee, he lashed out openly at the antirashness campaign, saying that “this is right-deviationist” and “advocating for retrogress.” In November, Mao Zedong led a CPC delegation to the Communist Party and Workers Party Congress held in the Soviet Union. At the meeting, the Soviet Union put forward the slogan of catching up with and surpassing the United States in 15 years and correspondingly, Mao Zedong put forward the slogan of catching up with and surpassing Britain in 15 years. With this mandate, Mao Zedong returned to Beijing. At the meetings in Hangzhou, Nanning and Chengdu in January and March 1958, Mao Zedong came down sharply on the anti-rashness movement and called for emancipating the mind, breaking away with superstitions and daring to think, daring to speak up and daring to do. He urged people not to have a blind faith in ancients, professors, Buddhas and foreigners. In August, the second session of the Eighth Party Congress adopted unanimously the general line of “going all out, aiming high and building socialism with greater, faster, better and more economical results” laid down by Mao Zedong. The Great Leap Forward Movement was then launched. In the summer that year, the central leaders met in the Beidaihe summer retreat and Mao Zedong posed a subject of study: What if we have too much grain? The then Agricultural Minister Liao Luyan said to a leader of the Chinese Academy of Sciences that scientists could not do what the peasants could. 15 Science seemed to be very feeble. During this period, Mao Zedong expressed time and again his dissatisfaction with the cityscape of Beijing. This has been stated in previous chapters. But the author would like to collect them together in the following: In January 1958, at a meeting in Nanning, Mao Zedong said: “I feel not comfortable to see the houses in Beijing and Kaifeng... Antiquities could not be bad and could not be too good either. To cry over the dismantling of archways and drilling holes in city gates in Beijing is a matter political

15 Liu Zhenkun: 20 Years of Winds and Rains — Interview with Du Runsheng, Century Tide, Issue No. 6, 1999.


10/15/2010 4:53:04 PM

334

BEIJING RECORD 16

in nature.” In the same month, that is, at the 14th Supreme State Affairs meeting, Mao said: “It is good for Nanjing, Jinan and Changsha to pull down the city walls. All the old houses in Beijing and Kaifeng 17 should better be replaced by new ones.” At the Chengdu meeting in March of the same year, Mao said: “Beijing should learn from Tianjin 18 and Shanghai in pulling down city walls.” On April 14, 1958, Zhou Enlai wrote a letter to the CPC Central Committee, conveying the spirit of the State Council executive meeting, saying that “according to Chairman Mao’s instructions, Beijing’s cityscape should be changed thoroughly in the next few years... In the future, the State Economic Commission will increase a certain amount of municipal construction funds earmarked for constructing the east and west Chang’an Avenue first. This year, funds will be appropriated for constructing one or two office buildings along the West Chang’an Avenue and will ask Beijing to make specific arrangements and incorporate it in the annual plan. After completion of the buildings, they will be distributed by Beijing... In the future, offices and dormitories of central government organs in the city center and suburbs will be put under the unified management and distribution by Beijing city government... In undertaking the construction, attention should be paid to rational distribution and concentration instead of being scattered. In the meanwhile, attention should be paid to integrating with the long-term construction plan. There must be clear purposes as to what to build, what to be built first and what to be built later and how to be used... The road from Dongdan to Jianguomen must be linked up this year. Beijing 19 should list it into the annual plan and prepare to do it.” It was in this context that Beijing made major revisions to the Tentative Master Plan of Beijing’s Urban Construction it put up in the spring of 1957, and set the goal to regenerate the old city in about 10 years. Groups of lively young people Are pulling down the city walls And carrying the bricks away; With their singing and laughters Awakening the ancient city walls.

16 Li Rui: My Personal Experience of the “Great Leap Forward,” 1st Edition, Shanghai Yuandong Publishing House, March 1996. 17 Zhu Zheng: Summer of 1957: From A Hundred Schools to Contend to Two Schools to Contend, 1st edition, Henan People’s Publishing House, May 1998. 18 Li Rui: My Personal Experience of the “Great Leap Forward,” 1st Edition, Shanghai Yuandong Publishing House, March 1996. 19 Selected Letters By Zhou Enlai, 1st edition, Central Documentation Publishing House, January 1988.


10/15/2010 4:53:04 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

335

Barbican of Yongdingmen removed (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1952)

The ancient city walls, Have been lying dormant for years, Overgrown with thorny bushes; Covered with mud and dusts. Once the guard of feudal emperors, The walls bore bullets and shell of imperialism For so many years; Who knows how many sufferings they have sustained. Today, they have turned up and over, Marching to the forefront of the construction of the motherland; “I had never imagined That I could serve socialism. Isn’t it remarkable That I can witness such a bright and great world?” They look as youthful as young girls, Cast away the dilapidated turrets. The square bricks Have stood up from among the mud. Revealing their smiles. When they hear the young girls say: Use them to build small blast furnaces; Use them to build gas generating ovens,


10/15/2010 4:53:05 PM

336

BEIJING RECORD

They jumped high with joy, Determined to play its due role in the new era 20 And in the technical innovation drive. This is a prosy poem written by Wang Dongcen. It recorded the scene of the students of the Beijing Construction Engineering Institute pulling down the city walls. It took a long time to complete the dismantling of the city walls in Beijing.

Yongdingmen in 1956 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande)

The outer city walls were pulled down in the 1950s. The inner city walls were rooted out in 1965 when a subway was built. Work to pull down the outer city walls started in 1952 and lasted for a number of years. At that time, there was a young man, drawing board on back, went on a lonely journey, hoping to catch the last glimpse of the ancient city walls. The young man drew a large number of water color pictures of the ancient city walls, which have become hard-to-get historical materials for studying ancient Beijing. The 23 moving pictures collected in the Beijing Atlas published in 1994 came from among the water color paintings by this young man.

20 Wang Dongcen: My Work at the Metropolitan Planning Committee, in History of Planning, 1st edition, compiled by the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party Records Collection Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995.


10/15/2010 4:53:06 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

337

He is Zhang Xiande, now in his 70s. He is an advisor to the Beijing Institute of Cultural Heritage and the first-class art director of Beijing Film Studio. This author called on him in 1995 and wrote the following: He was the purest of “old native Beijinger” I had ever seen: wearing a Chinese style shirt and speaking pure Beijing dialect, with the face full of the amity unique of native Beijingers. When we talked about the city walls, Zhang Xiande’s eyes seemed to be filled with nostalgia. He could never forget that he dropped out of school at the age of 13 when Beijing fell into the hands of Japanese invaders and went to Tianjin to work as an apprentice. In Tianjin, when he saw all the foreign buildings along the streets, he missed home and missed Beijing. Every time when he returned home by train, Zhengyangmen seemed like an amiable father welcoming the return of a son. He could never forget that it seemed forever to walk out of the city gate when looking up the rusty city gate on occasions when his father took him out to collect mushrooms. Neither could he forget the scenes of playing with his little friends on the city walls… The city walls were overgrown with wild jujube bushes; swallows were flying over the arrow towers on the walls, where were overgrown with grass, giving a thick atmosphere of mysterious history. “City walls are a record of years and a trace of time. They are like old people. The cracks of the walls are like the wrinkles on their faces. I love city walls because I love its oldness and I love the time-honored history of Beijing engraved on them,” Zhang Xiande told me, with great passion.

Guangqumen with only the platform left in 1957 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande)


10/15/2010 4:53:08 PM

338

BEIJING RECORD

To the common people of Beijing, nothing is closer than the city walls, except hutong and the courtyard houses. The Forbidden City belonged to the emperors; the official residences belonged to the princes. The city walls protected the people in power and aristocrats but also the common people. Since the Ming and Qing dynasties, the Yongding River had often been flooded and the city walls had blocked the surging waves of floods on several occasions so that the people of the whole city had a narrow escape. In the 14th year of the reign of Emperor Zheng Tong of the Ming Dynasty, there were armies trying to capture Beijing. The Minister of Defense Yu Qian defeated the invaders at Deshengmen and General Shi Heng led his army to chase the invaders out of Fuchengmen. At Guangqumen, Yuan Chonghuan owed his victory over the Qing army to the aid of city walls as well. A city and its walls are inseparable in the minds of common people. In this ancient city, the city walls are indispensable. It is exactly because of the magnificent city walls that this great city has become an entity. However, starting from the 1950s, the ancient city walls were regarded as something as decadent as feudal rulers and subject to ruthless criticism. Although there was a scholar named Liang Sicheng who tried all he could to defend them, it was impossible to change the destiny of the city walls. The ancient city walls were at the end of historical journey at last. At first, they were dug with openings; then the city gates were pulled down. Then, bit by bit, the walls were dissected, nibbled away and in the end everything disappeared and rooted out. What could Zhang do at the time

Northwest Corner Tower in the outer city in the process of being dismantled in 1957 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande)


10/15/2010 4:53:10 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

339

Tower of You’anmen in 1957 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande)

when he was nobody? He could do nothing but use his painting brush to record the images of the city walls before they disappeared. He started from the northern gate, Di’anmen, of the imperial city, a place where he was born. Till today, he still remembers clearly that he saw a huge Longwen — roof ridge decor in dragon shape, which connects the slopes and serves as rainproof as well as decoration — almost two meters high was smashed into smithereens under the steel rods and hammers when Di’anmen was dismantled in 1955. During that time, he could go and see Di’anmen every other day and every time he went, he felt his heart broken. Painfully, he put up his drawing board, painting brush shivering in his hand. The dismantling started at the beginning of the 1950s. The outer walls totally disappeared in less than 10 years. Among the outer city walls, Yongdingmen was no doubt the most important one, because it is the starting point of the central axial line of Beijing. In 1956, when Zhang Xiande rushed to Yongdingmen, it was already like a lonely old man waiting for his last day, as the city walls around it had been pulled down. Suppressing his indignation, Zhang recorded the lonely and dilapidated city gate… This period was the last days of the outer city walls of Beijing. Zhang wielded his drawing brush, crying his heart out together with the ancient 21 city walls. 21 Wang Jun: Zhang Xiande and Beijing Ancient City Gates, Outlook Weekly, September 25, 1995, with deletions when published.


10/15/2010 4:53:11 PM

340

BEIJING RECORD

Liang Sicheng and his colleagues were lonely in the problem of pulling down the city walls. In 1952, the Beijing government called a meeting to discuss engineering projects. Wu Liangyong proposed to open arch tunnels to solve the traffic problem. Dai Nianci, chief architect of China Central Construction Design Institute, held that “city walls may be preserved, with some sections pulled down and some others preserved.” But Cao Yanxing, the head of the Beijing Sanitation Engineering Bureau advocated for “dismantling the city walls and using the bricks for 22 city construction.” In May 1957, Yu Pingbo, an expert on the studies of classic Chinese literary works Dream of the Red Mansion, visited the Beijing People’s Committee in the capacity of a deputy to the National People’s Congress, and commented on the municipal construction. He definitely opposed the dismantling of the inner city walls. “City construction and protection Tower of Andingmen in 1957 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande) of cultural heritage are contradictory,” he said. “But this issue should be viewed from all aspects. From the long-term point of view, Beijing should develop underground traffic and the protection of the inner city walls does not obstruct traffic.” He was especially opposed to the dismantling of Chongwenmen, Qianmen and Xuanwumen. “Tiananmen looks prominent and magnificent in that it has structures around it. If the 23 three gates are dismantled, Tiananmen would look very lonely.” However, at that meeting, Ye Gongchuo, Chen Gongpei and Liu Dingwu, all members of the CPPCC national committee, urged to pull down the city walls. Chen Gongpei said that the city walls should be dismantled, but in a planned way. He once walked on the city walls and saw some sections caved in or were damaged and some city gates had become dangerous structures and all these would be dismantled sooner or later. But those 22 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, October 1952, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 23 Yu Pingbo Inspects Beijing Construction, Commenting on Tiananmen and Beijing City Walls, Beijing Daily, Page 1, May 22, 1957.


10/15/2010 4:53:12 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

341

Tower of Dongzhimen in 1957 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande)

section of city walls that were currently in fairly good shape, such as those at Taoranting and Xibianmen, should be used and planted with grass or trees. Ye Gongchuo also agreed to the dismantling of the city walls in a planned way. He proposed to work out a plan, such as using the bricks of the walls flanking the three city gates in the south to reinforce the banks of the moat. Liu Dingwu held that Beijing should set the principle of dismantling the city walls and select part of the complete walls for preservation as historical 24 cultural sites. In 1955, when Liang Sicheng was subject to criticism, the Architectural Society of China called a meeting. Chen Zhi, Liang Sicheng’s alumna at Qinghua University and the University of Pennsylvania in the United States, was on pins and needles about the destiny of the Beijing city walls. “It is now not proper for Mr. Liang to speak out and it is up to us to speak out,” he said. Soon, Tao Zongzhen, member of the Architectural Society, came out with a proposal. Chen Zhi took the lead to fix his signatures. Other scholars such as Ren Zhenying all responded. But Hua Lanhong refused. The proposal was delivered. Not long after, the Party leadership issued instructions to check out who wrote it. It was fortunate enough that secretary-general of the 25 society, Wang Jiqi, tried to muddle it through. 24 Ibid. 25 Tao Zongzhen’s recollection during an interview with the author on June 2, 2001.


10/15/2010 4:53:13 PM

342

BEIJING RECORD

The then vice-cultural minister Zheng Zhenduo was also firmly against pulling down the city walls. On June 3, 1957, he wrote a sarcastic article Problem of Dismantling City Walls, which was carried in the CPPCC Gazette. The full text follows: Ancient city walls played the role of protecting the life and property of the people in ancient times. But in modern warfare, city walls are of no use. So some people want to dismantle them. There are some people who have come out with scores of reasons to instigate the dismantling drive. I am not conservative. Things that should and must be dismantled are sure to be dismantled and there would not be the slightest hesitation. But city walls do not fall into the category that must be dismantled. A bit of leniency should apply. More opinions should be sought and discussions should be held. They should be preserved for at least a few more days or a few more years before actions are taken. Take the Tuan Cheng (Circular City) of Beihai as an example. It is one of the most ancient sites in Beijing. When decision was made to widen the Jin’ao-Yudong bridge, there were many people who wanted to dismantle this ancient site, to root it out. Otherwise, it was said there was no way of widening the bridge. But after careful study by experts, the Tuan Cheng was preserved while the bridge was completed as scheduled. There is no contradiction at all. On the contrary, they are complementing each other. This is a good case in which the beautiful cityscape has been protected without affecting the city traffic.

Tower of Chongwenmen in 1957 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande)


10/15/2010 4:53:15 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

343

This should apply to many historical sites and scenic areas, which all need the minutest consideration and sympathetic protection. There must never be blind following of what others say and pull the sites down, satisfied with nothing but the total destruction as if treating the sites as ferocious enemies. We must know that ancient sites are immovable, but the city planning is done by experts and therefore changeable with place, time and people. The most intelligent city planners can well blend the historical sites and scenic spots into the whole cityscape, making the city look more beautiful and more time-honored so as to inspire patriotism in the people. There are only benefits, without any adverse effect. Those who are not good at designing and do not know culture, history and arts often deem them standing in their way of design and insist on destroying them. When a child falls while learning to walk, the stones on the road are often to be blamed and subject to cursing and kicking. When a walker is walking along the road with head held high and bumped into the pillar of an archway, he would blame the pillar for not having gave way. Ancient sites and scenic spots do not speak. But men can work their brains. It would require a great deal of thinking, careful consideration and extensive discussion and study to cleverly and skillfully plan the development of a city. Never should a certain ancient site or cultural heritage be done away with in a rush due to the subjective decisions by a few individuals. When a man dies, he would never come to life again. Neither could the historical sites and scenic spots be rebuilt after they are destroyed. Be careful and seek evidence from all quarters before taking decisions. City walls belong to the skyline of a city. “The place with green trees and city walls is Yangzhou” (Now there are no city walls in Yangzhou any more).

Southeast Corner Arrow Tower in the inner city in 1957 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande)


10/15/2010 4:53:17 PM

344

BEIJING RECORD

Although city walls have lost their functions of defense, they are still part of the cityscape. Now the drive to pull down city walls is prevalent in many cities. I hope that these places think twice and study it again before taking actions. The city walls should in no way be dismantled or removed at will unless the city is so developed that the walls must be removed. City wall bricks, which are almost 300–500 years old, are absolutely unable to stand the heavy load if they are used to build roads. Since there is no practical use of the ancient bricks, why seek a moment’s pleasure at the 26 expense of the ancient heritage?

Arrow Tower of Deshengmen in 1957 (a drawing by Zhang Xiande)

Soviet experts also moved to the side of Liang Sicheng. In January 1953, Mochin said during a discussion with Liang Sicheng that “the city walls should not be pulled down. They should be utilized and 27 preserved.”â•› On August 10, Paratin, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang discussed the three scenarios of the master city plan and they appreciated 28 the scenario that preserved the city walls. In 1955, Soviet planner Bodlev who came to help map out Beijing’s master plan, also proposed to the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee that the city walls should be preserved. 26 Zheng Zhenduo: Problem of Dismantling City Walls, carried in the CPPCC Gazette, Issue No. 3, 1957. 27 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, January 1953, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 28 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, August 10, 1953, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:53:18 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

345

“Soviet architects take dearly the cultural heritage when renewing a 29 city,” wrote Liang Sicheng in an article. Although the Soviet experts and Liang Sicheng were divided in the general protection of the ancient city of Beijing, they were agreeable to protecting some individual cultural heritage. But the voices against dismantling of city walls were soon overwhelmed ruthlessly. In 1956, with the unfolding of city construction, some construction units began to pull down the city walls and used the bricks as construction materials. On July 16 of the same year, the People’s Daily published a signed article Demolition and New Construction, criticizing Liang Sicheng and others without identifying their names. It said: “Last year, when the four archways were dismantled, some people were said to be unable to sleep the whole night. There were also people who let off their emotions, lamenting ‘the four archways… would remain in name only and they would no longer be seen, not even a piece of wood…’ Some people loved ancient structures but are not interested in new ones. They are disgruntled to see part of the city walls pulled down or archways removed. In a word, their customary views are not honored and therefore do not feel comfortable to see new buildings. Due to their nostalgia, they are cold to anything new. The cold attitude has blinded their eyes, which can see only backward instead of seeing ahead... It would be inevitable to reluctantly part with the old. But when you see new things that are better than the old, such reluctance should soon be replaced by pleasure, feeling that the old should have been done away with long time ago. The key to such shift of ideas lies in whether one wants to or is willing to love things new, that is, whether or not one has the courage to have a 30 clean break with the old traditions at this crucial movement.” On October 9 of the same year, Chaoyangmen Gate was pulled down. The Beijing Daily published a report, explaining: “This city gate is 24 meters high, weighing about 4,600 tons. Due to long years of disrepair, the wall body sank and cracked in many places. Part of the pillars has inclined outward. The flying eaves and the pillar joints have become decayed. The southern face of the gate cracked. If it is not removed, it could collapse at any time. In order to ensure safety of pedestrians and prevent the high-voltage

29 Liang Sicheng: National Forms and Socialist Contents, New Observer, Issue No. 14, 1954. 30 Han Fu: Demolition and New Construction, People’s Daily, Page 7, July 16, 1956.


10/15/2010 4:53:18 PM

346

BEIJING RECORD

Di’anmen in 1952 (the first sketch of Beijing city gates by Zhang Xiande)

line being damaged by the collapsing city gate, the city people’s committee 31 has decided to dismantle it.” Experts of the Cultural Heritage Administration were shocked to see from their office windows the city gate flattened as Chaoyangmen gate was located exactly in the southeastern corner of the big building of the Ministry of Culture. Luo Zhewen recalled: When the highest authorities decided to dismantle the Beijing city walls in 1954 (I did not know at the time), it aroused great disputes among prestigious personages, experts and scholars and even among the cultural heritage workers. Advocating for the dismantling was a minority and those who did not agree were the majority. Those who were against the dismantling were branded as “city wall faction.” In our cultural heritage section, I and Xie Chensheng, Zhuang Min and Zang Huayun belonged to the “city wall faction.” This touched off an open debate… The reason for inducing the disputes was the dismantling of Chaoyangmen in 1956. The office of the cultural heritage section was in the southeastern corner of the Ministry of Cultural Building and from the office one could see the magnificent city tower. … Because of the appeal by experts, the State Council issued a document, urging the Beijing city government and the Ministry of Culture to

31 Chaoyangmen Dismantled for the Sake of Safety, Beijing Daily, Page 2, October 16, 1956.


10/15/2010 4:53:21 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

347

call an expert meeting to discuss the matter. But the Beijing city government just ignored it. The Ministry of Culture drafted a letter to the Beijing city government, reminding it of calling a discussion. But the minister in charge (Party group secretary Qian Junrui) dared not to sign the official letter for release and pushed it to Shen Yanbing, a vice-minister, who had never signed official documents. Shen signed it for release. But the Beijing city government did not respond either. It seemed that the dismantling of the city walls had become a foregone conclusion and no one raised any objection any more. So all the trades and services and all the departments sent people to dismantle the city walls to meet their 32 own needs. From May 1956 to May 1957, Beijing held four exhibitions of city planning, which received more than 16,000 visits. “Many delegates to the Eighth National Party Congress and visitors thought it good to disTower of Chaoyangmen before dismantlement (by courtesy of BIPD) mantle the city walls. Some were of the idea that the city walls may be pulled down but not the city towers. Only a few people were against the dismantling or cast doubt about the necessity to 33 dismantle the city walls.” On August 9, 1958, the People’s Daily carried an article signed by Wang Qixian, entitled City Walls that Bind the City Development. It called on the people to remove the obstacle by participating in voluntary labor. It said: The rules and regulations on production management would not only be unable to promote production but also obstruct production if they do not improve with the development of the situation. However, productivity is the most active and most revolutionary. You cannot bind it whatsoever you try and it would in the end make a breakthrough. 32 Luo Zhewen: Dismantling of Andingmen — Second of a Group of Recollections, China Cultural Relics News, Page 4, February 21, 2001. 33 Major Events of Party History, 1st edition, Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party History Soliciting Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995.


10/15/2010 4:53:21 PM

348

BEIJING RECORD

Similar to it is the city wall. It used to play a role of promoting city construction and protecting the city, but it has obviously become an obstacle to city development. Take Beijing for instance. The many openings in the city walls are enough to prove it. A few openings in the city walls are only breakthroughs at a few points. They are no fundamental solution to the issue. It is necessary to remove the city walls completely. Especially under the current situation when the government calls for economical use of land, the city walls occupy a lot of land. There is a great potential to tap with the city walls. The dismantling of city walls, especially the Beijing city walls, is easy to arouse pity and resistance from the angle of protecting cultural heritage. I think there must be a sober estimation. Cultural relics need protection and we must see the size of their values. No matter what, they should not affect the current development. Haven’t the Sanzuomen in front of Tiananmen and all kinds of archways been dismantled? What pity is there to dismantle the city walls with many openings already cut? 34 Let us use the voluntary labor we all love to root out this obstacle. During the Great Leap Forward years, those units that dismantled the city walls and used the bricks were cited as “Advanced Units.” On August 17, 1960, the People’s Daily in a report praised the Beijing Xuanwu Steel Works with nine small blast furnaces and four converters and electric furnaces, which were built by using the bricks from the city walls, 35 saying that it demonstrated the industriousness and hard working spirit. On the same day, the paper carried a commentary, saying that “the Xuanwu Steel Works has become famous for its industriousness. It turned 36 out that the steel works was built with the old city wall bricks. But the action of dismantling the city walls met with a small hitch in 1957. In June 1957, the State Council relayed a report by the Ministry of Culture, saying that “Beijing is an ancient city well known in the world. The city walls have a history of several hundred years. It needs careful weighing as to its preservation or removal. It is learned that your city has decided to pull down all the city walls (the outer walls had been basically destroyed completely). Many cultural heritage experts at the rectification meetings called by the Ministry of Culture expressed their objections. The 34 Wang Qixian: City Walls that Bind the City Development, People’s Daily, Page 8, August 9, 1958. 35 Industriously Accelerate Production, Xuanwu Steel Works Overfulfils Annual Pig Iron Output Ahead of Schedule, People’s Daily, Page 3, August 17, 1960. 36 Be Industrious Forever, People’s Daily, Page 3, August 17, 1960.


10/15/2010 4:53:22 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

349

State Council agrees with the Ministry of Culture and hopes that your city suspended the dismantling of the city walls, pending the solicitation of extensive views and a full discussion about it.” After receiving the notice, the Beijing city government stopped the dismantling of the city walls. But in 1958, Mao Zedong gave clear instructions to Beijing to dismantle the city walls. So, during the Great Leap Forward, Beijing in its master construction plan clearly expressed the idea of dismantling all the city walls. In September, the Beijing People’s Committee took the decision to dismantle the city walls, thus turning the dismantling actions here and there into a large-scale mass movement. In March the following year, the Beijing People’s Committee took another decision: Dismantle all the outer and inner city walls and complete the work in two or three years. So the outer and inner city walls were 37 dismantled in a well organized and planned way. On November 16, 1993, during an interview with the author, the then deputy head of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration Zhou Yongyuan had this to recollect: Chairman Mao advocated for the dismantling of the city walls. An article in Volume V of the Selected Works of Mao Zedong also said that it was the decision of the CPC Central Committee. This was decided ever since the founding of New China. So many leaders advocated for the dismantling of the city walls. Peng Zhen looked very firm in the public, but in private, when discussing with us the planning, he was very cautious. As Chairman Mao said that the city walls must be dismantled, he of course had to say the same in public. But he also asked us whether there had been any big floods in the history of Beijing and whether or not the city walls had played any defense roles and whether or not the city walls could be utilized, such as building railways on it. He asked us to map out a plan. So I led some people to work out a plan. Peng Zhen also inquire whether it was possible to preserve the four corners and the city gates if the city walls must be dismantled, or whether it was possible to just pull down part of it so long as it can link up the inside and outside the city. The four corners were preserved so that people in future generations may know where the city walls used to be. Chairman Mao said that the city walls were built by the emperors for fear of peasant rebellion and there was no use preserving them. Chairman Mao had his own views on things old. 37 Shen Yurong: Protection and Dismantling of Beijing City Walls, Beijing Planning and Construction magazine, Issue No. 2, 1999.


10/15/2010 4:53:22 PM

350

BEIJING RECORD

There have been disputes around the city walls from the time of liberation till today. All are very passionate. There are even people who say that Chairman Mao was wrong to launch the Cultural Revolution and to “have the city walls dismantled.” Why isn’t there a conclusion that it is wrong to dismantle the city walls? I think it’s wrong to dismantle the city walls. It is allowable to cut a few openings but the city gates should have been protected as a whole. The then head of the road section of BCCPC, Zheng Zuwu, worked out a plan in the mid-1950s. By the plan, the city walls were preserved and a second ring road was built outside the moat. Later on, by order, he began to study how to utilize the city walls and preserve them. On April 26, 1995, during an interview with the author, Zheng Zuwu recalled: The idea of dismantling the city walls was raised by Chairman Mao. According to experts who advocated for the dismantling of city walls, the People’s Liberation Army was infuriated to see the city walls, because many people died there. Chen Gan said this on a number of occasions. At Xi’an Meeting two years before, the protection of city walls was brought up. An old expert in Lanzhou, named Ren Zhenying, said that it was wrong for Beijing to dismantle the city walls. Chen Gan said that Xi’an should protect the city walls but not Beijing, because many of the officers and men of the People’s Liberation Army died due to the city walls. There was really something in what they said at the time. My personal view is that I had neither the idea of dismantling the city walls nor the idea of protecting them. In the 1950s, when I was planning the second ring road, I planned to put up buildings at places 30 meters inside the city walls, such as the Xinqiao Hotel. I drew a 30 meter red line. What about outside the city walls? There was some distance between the city walls and the moat, about 30–40 meters, or 10–20 meters in some places. Why not built roads outside the moat? We planned to build a fast road, which was needed there. If a road was built there, we can build a cloverleaf by using the bridges just outside the city walls. That was very economical. So we drew a red line scores of meters outside it. Soviet experts Smirnov and Bodlev also deemed it right. They all agreed. This plan was partly implemented in 1954 and 1955. This shows my attitude toward the city walls. Though I did not have the idea of dismantling the city walls, if my plan was implemented, the city walls were naturally preserved. Later on, when they wanted to pull down the city walls, I did not object it either, because the leaders said that they must be pulled down. Afterwards the city government took the decision. What Chairman Mao


10/15/2010 4:53:22 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

351

said counted. At that time, what he said must be followed. After the war years and following the founding of New China, the People’s Liberation Army had a very high sense of discipline and self-consciousness. In the past, I proceeded from the engineering angle to plan the ring road along the moat. I did not love the city walls either. But, I thought, it would take a very long time to pull them down, as it involved a lot of earthwork. It could not be dismantled completely by issuing an order. During the Great Leap Forward years, people all rushed to pull down city walls and use the earth and bricks. That was the peak of extreme leftism. All the outer city walls were dismantled, leaving only part of the inner walls. In about 1963 or 1964, Zheng Tianxiang asked me to study the function of flood-prevention of the city walls. He asked me to find out how many times the Yongding River was flooded in history and what role the city walls played at the time. I really found some historical materials. At one time, the city walls blocked the floods and the city gates could not be opened. Later on, elephants were used to open the city gates. At that time, the city government officials were considering whether it was possible to use the remaining part of the city walls to block water and ward off floods. In 1964, I was asked to work out a plan of building a road on the city walls, which was called “high platform plan.” But in the second year, a subway was built under the city walls and the “high platform plan” was derailed. During the Cultural Revolution years, many people put up big character posters, criticizing me for making the “high platform plan,” accusing me of attempting to restore the city walls. In fact, I did not have the idea of protecting the city walls. But if the ring road plan I worked out in the 1950s had been implemented, the city walls would have been preserved. Zheng Tianxiang, the then deputy secretary of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, who was in charge of city construction at the time, had the following to say in 1989 about the dismantling of the city walls: City walls and city gates are the most attractive signatures of Beijing. There were heated disputes as to whether they should be removed and how they were to be removed. The problem was very complicated. In 1953, to facilitate traffic, it was proposed to dismantle the gate and arrow tower of Xizhimen. But later on, practice proved that, in order to thin out traffic volume, it required the building of roundabouts at road junctions. It proved that roundabouts could be built around the city gate and if proper measures were adopted, the city gates presented no obstacles to traffic. So we preserved the city gates in our master plan. Yet the city government


10/15/2010 4:53:22 PM

352

BEIJING RECORD

decided to pull down the city walls that cut off the links of the city with the outside. But it needed further study as to whether all the walls should be pulled down or the four corners should be preserved or the city walls should be replaced by a ring road or cut them low to a certain height for constructing trunk expressways. In 1958, the dismantling action should be suspended although there was instruction to dismantle the city walls from above. The city gates at Chongwenmen and Xuanwumen were dismantled when the subway was built. The city gate at Chaoyangmen was pulled down in 1956 when it was on the verge of collapsing and there was no strength to repair it. All the materials were preserved. During the ten-year upheaval, all the city gates were pulled down except Zhengyangmen, the arrow towers at Qianmen and Deshengmen. The 38 ancient city lost its luster. When the Great Leap Forward movement ended, all the 39.75 kilometers of outer city walls disappeared, leaving only half of the inner walls.

Forbidden City Rebuilding Plan Unimplemented Toward the end of 1957, Beijing started to dispose of the materials left over from the dismantling of the ancient structures. On December 20, the General Office of the Beijing People’s Committee issued the document On Checking the Ancient Building Materials Dismantled and Proposals for Disposal submitted by the Financial Bureau, the Real Estate Bureau, the Cultural Bureau, the Woods and Gardens Bureau and Road Engineering Bureau and the comments made by vice-mayor Zhang Youyu. The joint report said that the report was compiled according to the decisions of the 5th executive meeting of the People’s Committee and after checking and verification of the materials. The joint report and the comments by Zhang Youyu are as follows: 1. Chaoyangmen city tower: The materials left over from dismantling the city tower have been put to the care of the Real Estate Management Bureau. The materials include 398 cubic meters of wooden materials and 21,455 pieces of glazed tiles, of which about 30 percent are not wholesome. The glazed tiles have been taken care of as they are. The housing management company used more than 350 cubic meters of wooden materials and there were about more than 40 cubic meters left, mostly decayed and unusable for repair purposes. 38 Zheng Tianxiang: My Recollection of the 17 years in Beijing, Records of Travel, 1st edition, Beijing Publishing House, August 1994.


10/15/2010 4:53:22 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

353

Approval is requested for discarding them as waste. (Zhang wrote: OK. The cultural bureau should study whether it will be rebuilt and see whether the materials are really unusable.) 2. Guang’anmen city tower: In storage are 812 pieces of large and small squares and log wood, rafters and fly rafters, 112.57 cubic meters of miscellaneous wood, 2,014 trims and 21 ceiling boards as well as bricks, tiles and animal head parts. Some of them were decayed and some could be reused for repairing ancient buildings (they include 66 pieces, each 5 meters long, totaling about 51 cubic meters). The rest is planned to be given to the Housing Management Bureau for reuse. Those that cannot be used at all will be disposed of by the Financial Bureau. (Zhang’s comment: OK.) 3. Archways: The materials are kept by the Road Engineering Bureau. Apart from the archways at Emperors Temple (to be rebuilt ex situ), there are the east and west four archways, the archways at Dongjiaominxiang and Xijiaominxiang, the Sanzuomen at Beihai and part of the wooden materials of the Yuetan archway, the wooden materials of the red walls of Tiananmen Square and the east and 39 west Sanzuomen of Tiananmen and the archways at east and west Chang’an Avenue and the Yunhuilou, from which some wooden materials and tiles and glazed tiles were preserved from long ago. The disposal proposals are: (1) It is up to the city government to decide whether the Sanzuomen at east and west of Tiananmen will be rebuilt, and the rest that have no value of being rebuilt may not be rebuilt. (Zhang: Leave it for discussion.) (2) Although the wooden materials are rotten, most of them can be used for building small houses. They may be given to the Housing Management Bureau and the Bureau of Woods and Gardens for re-use and those unusable will be disposed of by the Financial Bureau. The six pieces of wood from the Sanzuomen are Nanmu, which should be disposed of separately. (Zhang: OK.) (3) Apart from raft pass and doors, which are wooden materials, the rest are glazed tiles of the Sanzuomen east and west of Tiananmen. Part of the glazed tiles are short of corners or ribs, making them difficult to be used. But the 400 cubic meters of

39 They refer to the Chang’an Left Gate and the Chang’an Right Gate.


10/15/2010 4:53:23 PM

354

BEIJING RECORD

stone materials are good. If the Sanzuomen is not to be rebuilt, the materials should be re-used. (4) All the glazed tiles kept have been damaged to varying degrees. According to the No. 610 instruction by the General Office of the People’s Committee in September 1955, the good ones that are usable should be handed over to the Bureau of Woods and Gardens and the broken ones that cannot be re-used should be discarded as waste. (Zhang: OK.) (5) Part of the ordinary gray tiles left over from the archways of Guang’anmen, Dongsi and Xisi and Yunhuilou are planned to be given to the Housing Management Bureau for reuse. (Zhang: OK.). Vice-Mayor Zhang always gave the comment to major items as: The cultural bureau should study whether they are rebuilt and verify whether the materials can be used. 4. Archways of the Emperors Temple: The archways were pulled down because the wood became too rotten. The former Cultural Relics Consolidation Committee plans to change the pillars and other major parts into steel reinforced concrete after renewing the temple. The upper part, such as the arches, have been studied by the Cultural Relics Survey Team together with the Road Engineering Bureau. They are well preserved, with little losses. They can still be used to build two more temples. 5. Dagaoxuan Hall, Xili Pavilions and three archways: The materials from the three archways have been kept by the House Removal Office of the Housing Management Bureau. The pillars are made of concrete and the upper part wooden structures are fairly complete and something may be added in renewal. Some 40–50 percent of the wooden structures of the Xili Pavilions are rotten but the glazed tiles have been preserved well. (Zhang: The Cultural Bureau should come out with their views concerning the Xili Pavilions.) The materials from other two archways are kept at Beihai Park by the Bureau of Woods and Gardens and arches and other members are complete and re-usable. As there is a time limit for dismantling, most of the tendons were sawn and the wooden materials are mostly decayed. These materials cannot be reused in renewal and are planned to be given to the Bureau of Woods and Gardens for utilization. (Zhang: OK.) 6. The archways of the Beihai Bridge: The two stone tablets are preserved by the city cultural relics group and other materials are


10/15/2010 4:53:23 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

355

kept in Beihai Park. Most of the tiles are made of cement and about 40 percent have been damaged. If the archways are not to be rebuilt, the materials may be given to the Housing Management Bureau for use. (Zhang: OK.) 40

7. The tower of Houmen or Back Gate : It has been decided to be used in building the northern gate of the Temple of Heaven. As part of the wooden materials have been decayed, big pieces may be shortened and the structures to be rebuilt might be smaller than the original. (Zhang: Leave it for further study.) 8. Besides, the Housing Management Bureau has kept the materials from the Twin-Pagoda Qingshou Temple of the Chang’an Avenue. The gourd and iron bands at the top of the tower were taken away by the cultural relics group. Still preserved are only bricks and tiles. The cultural relics group held that if the leadership decides not to rebuild it, the bricks and tiles may be given to the Housing Management Bureau for reuse, with only the arches and eave heads to be preserved. (Zhang: Do not dispose of them for the time being.) Vice-Mayor Zhang Youyu also wrote the instruction: Things given to the House Management Bureau and the Bureau of Woods and Gardens for reuse should all be entered as investment in capital construction or 41 repairs. In 1958, inspired by Mao Zedong’s slogan “catching up with Britain in 15 years,” the Great Leap Forward and the people’s commune movement reached their zenith in the whole country. In order to accomplish the task of producing 10.7 million tons of steel in the country, all trades and services and government departments launched steel production campaigns. Many government institutions, schools, factories, shops and residents put up indigenous blast furnaces and worked night and day. By the end of the year, more than 700 neighborhood factories and more than 2,000 indigenous blast furnaces were built in the Beijing city districts. The so-called “making steel by indigenous method” was in fact melting scrap iron, causing great waste in human and material resources. As the campaign was regarded as the concrete action of “surpassing Britain and catching up with the United States” and a movement of tempering the people in the course of making steel, the campaign was endowed with a 40 It refers to Di’anmen, popularly known as Houmen or Back Gate. 41 Records of Beijing Cultural Relics and Museums (1), Compiled by the Beijing Municipal Cultural Heritage Administration, 1994.


10/15/2010 4:53:23 PM

356

BEIJING RECORD

strong political color. Those who held differences of views were criticized as “right-deviationists.” For a time, utopian ideas, rashness, “deciding everything by one man’s say” and false talks were rampant. Although there was a good crop on the outskirts of Beijing, there were no people to harvest it as they were all busy making steel and the grain rotted in the fields. Small indigenous blast furnaces were everywhere and land supply was strained. “What is to be done?” People turned their eyes to the ancient structures that had not been occupied. They converted them into factories to serve the purpose of producing 10.7 million tons of steel. During the three years of Great Leap Forward, the number of cultural heritage sites destroyed in Beijing was quite alarming. The following is the record: On January 25, 1958, the Beijing Chongwen District People’s Committee planned to remove the Buddhist sculptures in some temples and asked the Beijing Cultural Bureau to verify; On April 1, the Beijing Cultural Relics Survey Team (BCRST) of the Cultural Bureau agreed to remove the clay sculptures of the Four Deva Kings and Maitreya in the front palace of the Jile Temple. The wooden Buddhist statue in the main hall was a sculpture from the Ming Dynasty which could not be removed and may be kept ex situ. No heavy-duty machines were allowed to be installed in the ancient buildings. The team also gave the nod to the No. 5 Cotton Textile Cooperative to remove the clay Buddhist statue in the main hall of the Puxian Temple. On April 9, BCRST agreed that the Housing Management Bureau dismantle the clay Buddhist statue in the Guanyin Temple in the Yongdingmennei Street. On July 23, BCRST gave the nod to dismantle the stone tablet of the Wanshan Temple and the nine Buddhist statues in the Guanyin Temple. It also agreed to remove the Buddhist statues in Fahua Temple and Tianning Temple. On August 2, without the permission of the Cultural Bureau, the Water Pipeline Engineering Bureau dismantled some stone materials from the artificial berth of the Yueya River about 10 meters in front of Dingling — one of the 13 tombs burying Ming Emperors, and used the materials, destroying this historical site. BCRST agreed to remove the stone materials from the basement of Dingling and the rejected protective boards and balusters and other stone materials from Jingling, Deling and Yongling (which are also among the 13 imperial tombs of the Ming Dynasty) to repair the seven-arch stone bridge in the Ming Tombs area. On the same day, the Beijing Cultural Bureau wrote a letter to the Pipeline Engineering Bureau, giving the nod to use the stone materials


10/15/2010 4:53:23 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

357

from Dingling, Deling and Yongling for building the seven-arched bridge at the Ming Tombs reservoir. On August 8, Beijing Zhoukoudian People’s Committee issued a circular, calling for disposing cultural relics in support of industrial construction. The circular said that in order to support Great Leap Forward in industry and according to the principle of “laying greater stress on the present than on the past” and “making the ancient serve the present,” all the bronze and iron Buddhist statues, ancient coins and bronze ware in the temples of Tianjing, Shiwo and Liulihe townships should be removed and used in industrial production. According to statistics of the Zhoukoudian District, 35 bronze bells and Buddhist statues were used in industrial production. They were mostly relics from the years of Emperors Wan Li, Jia Jing and Cheng Hua of the Ming Dynasty, resulting in huge losses. On August 16, BCRST approved Chongwen District to dismantle 25 temples, totaling 53 rooms including the Leiyin Temple and Lying Buddha Temple and approved the Xuanwu District to dismantle the Buddhist statues in the side halls of Sheng’an Temple to make room for the Nanheng Street Primary School. On August 23, BCRST gave the nod to the Cultural Palace of the Laboring People to dispose of the 18 bronze relics kept in the Ancestral Temple, including 8 bronze jars, 9 large and small bronze wares and one bronze bell for supporting industry. It also gave the nod to the Xicheng District to dismantle the Buddhist statues in the Guanyin Temple, Shuang Guandi Temple, Yongtai Temple and Jade Buddha Temple. In the same month, BCRST agreed to remove the Buddhist statue in the Guangtong Temple, dismantle the old structures of the Yaowang (Medicine King) Depot, the three Buddhist Statues at the Beijing Labor Education Center and the Buddhist statues in 13 temples in the Dongcheng District. The Great Wall at Gubeikou in Miyun County was destroyed. On September 3, BCRST agreed that the Mentougou People’s Committee remove the Buddhist statues in the Shuanglin Temple. On September 16, BCRST approved the Beijing Education Bureau and the Dongcheng District People’s Committee to dismantle and remove the Buddhist statues in the Bailin Temple. On September 24, the Beijing Cultural Bureau’s Relics Survey Team agreed that the Beihai Park dismantle the clay Buddhist sculptures in the Yuxu Temple. On September 28, BCRST agreed that the Chongwen District Grain Processing Factory dismantle and remove the three wooden Buddhist images in the Main Hall. On September 30, BCRST agreed to dismantle the clay Buddhist images in the Yousheng Temple and preserve the bronze Buddhist statues


10/15/2010 4:53:23 PM

358

BEIJING RECORD

and preserve one bronze Buddhist statue and three clay Buddhist sculptures of the Ming Dynasty in the Cheng’en Temple, Wuxian Temple to God of Fortune, Chong’en Temple and Sea Tide Guanyin Temple, with the rest left to the temple group of the city for disposal. In September, the Great Wall at Dongsancha Village in Yanqing County was partly destroyed and an iron gun was sold by the Dongsancha Work Station of Yongning Township. On December 30, BCRST agreed to dismantle the Monk’s Pagoda inside the Dizang’an Primary School. On January 15, 1959, BCRST agreed to dismantle the Banjie Pagoda in the Chaoyang District. On January 17, BCRST agreed to dismantle the main hall at Yuwangfen in Chaoyang District. On January 26, the stone tablets of the tombs of two princes of the Qing Dynasty at Mafang Township, Changping District, were pulled down and broken into pieces and the neck of the turtle was smashed to pieces by local peasants. The district Bureau of Culture and Education rushed to the spot to stop the action. On February 23, BCRST agreed to dismantle and use the stone materials coming from another imperial tomb in Beigong, Miyun County. On March 26, BCRST agreed to dismantle the gate of the Jiutian Puhua Temple in Chaoyang District. On April 2, the Yangqing People’s Committee issued instructions to protect cultural relics, pointing out that two city walls and city towers and castle of the Great Wall at Dongsancha were destroyed during the drive of making steel. The castle was seriously damaged. On April 7, BCRST agreed to dismantle the half-size pagodas at Suwangfen, Shilihe Temple and Hongshan Temple in Chaoyang District. On May 30, BCRST gave the nod to Chegongzhuang Housing Management Office in Xicheng District to dismantle the Hall of Four Deva Kings of the Yanfa Temple on the Fuwai Avenue. In the same month, the No. 7 production team of Ming Tombs Commune sold about 307 cubic meters of city wall bricks from Dingling and the Changping Cultural Relics Department sent a team to investigate the case. On August 29, BCRST agreed to dismantle the Yaowang Temple in Wangge Zhuang Village and the Buddha Temple of Yujiawu Village in Tongzhou. On November 14, BCRST agreed to dismantle four clay Buddhist statues in the Chanlin Temple, gave the nod to the Cultural Palace of Laboring People to dismantle part of the ochre wall. It also agreed to dismantle Maodui Study in Zhongnanhai and the drum tower in the Town of Tongzhou.


10/15/2010 4:53:24 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

359

On December 24, BCRST agreed to dismantle a brick pagoda from the Ming Dynasty inside the courtyard of the Pinggu Agricultural, Forestry and Water Resources Bureau. On December 29, BCRST agreed to remove three bronze Buddhist statues in the main hall of the Western Guanyin Temple to the Guanghua Temple and disposed of the clay Buddhist statues on the spot. In January 1960, BCRST agreed to dismantle the Sanguan Temple in the Chaoyangmennei Street to make way for building provincial offices in Beijing. In February, BCRST agreed to dismantle the outer gate and drum and bell towers of the South Guanyin Temple and dismantle the remaining part of the Yuqing Temple on the Gymnasium Road. In March, BCRST agreed to dismantle the clay statues of 18 arhats in the main hall of Northern Guangji Temple at Xinjiekou Street. In August, BCRST agreed to dismantle all the Buddhist statues inside the Pantao Palace by the Chongwen People’s Committee. In September, the Beijing Cultural Bureau gave the nod to Fuyoujie Primary School to dismantle three main halls of the Yongyou Temple. 42 …â•› “Since 1958, 22,000 square meters of 426 temple rooms had been vacated for use by factories, government institutions and schools; 5,381 pieces of metal cultural relics, weighing about more than 500 tons were used to support industrial development.” This is part of the summary by the 43 Beijing Cultural Relics Work Team on January 23, 1962.

Bird’s-eye-view of the Forbidden City (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

42 Ibid. 43 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:53:24 PM

360

BEIJING RECORD

People advocating for regenerating the old city turned their eyes to the Forbidden City. “Preparations should start to rebuild the Forbidden City.” This sentence appeared in the Explanations on the Master Plan of Beijing’s Urban Construction (draft). The Explanations said: “Integrating the Tiananmen square, the Forbidden City, Zhongshan Park, the Cultural Palace, Jingshan Park, Beihai Park, Shichahai Park, Jishuitan and the areas along the moat from Chongwenmen to Xuanwumen into a large garden in the city center by dismantling part of the houses and expanded the greening areas, where one million people would enjoy themselves during festivals.” This is the best interpretation of what Chairman Mao Zedong said: “It is good for Nanjing, Jinan and Changsha to pull down the city walls. All the 44 old houses in Beijing and Kaifeng should better be replaced by new ones.” In October 1952, the Beijing city government called a meeting to discuss construction projects. Liang Sicheng recorded what one of the speakers said: “I do not agree to make Tiananmen the seat of the central 45 government.” This shows that making Tiananmen the seat of the Central People’s Government was listed in the agenda of the meeting. “Renewing the Forbidden City” is associated with the general cognition. In an article criticizing Liang Sicheng in 1955, He Zuoxiu said: “Is it possible that planning for ancient Beijing is totally perfect? No.... Huge as it is, the Forbidden City sits right in the heart of the city, forcing people to 46 walk round it, thus aggravating the traffic problem.” The Qinghua University Department of Architecture incorporated an article Architectural Art of Forbidden City and Tiananmen from a Class Point of View in its Selected Papers on the Discussion of Teaching Thought (1). The article said: Today, the laboring people have become masters of the country. The Forbidden City is no longer the palaces of the feudal ruling class, but the wealth of the people. So we must transform it and utilize it and make it serve socialism. But, due to the fact that the Forbidden City was built for the feudal ruling class, the people do not have much affection for it. A liberation armyman named Liu we interviewed said: “I went to visit the Forbidden City soon after liberation. I felt it rather empty, loosely knit. The poor chair put on the platform was very disgusting. Touring the city is more tiresome 44 Zhu Zheng: Summer of 1957: From A Hundred Schools to Contend to Two Schools to Contend, 1st edition, Henan People’s Publishing House, May 1998. 45 Liang Sicheng’s work note, October 1952, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 46 He Zuoxiu: My Views on Certain Mistaken Ideas in Liang Sicheng’s Architectural Thinking, Study, October 2, 1955.


10/15/2010 4:53:25 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

361

than army movement. Now the Great Hall of the People is much bigger. Yet I did not feel tired at all when visiting it up and down. What we are not interested in is what we do not need.” Grandpa Zhang, a retired construction worker, said: “The Forbidden City, in the eyes of us old craftsTaihe Dian (Hall of Great Harmony) taken by Liang Sicheng in men, is nothing but an the 1930s when he surveyed the Forbidden City (by courtesy antique. It is not so good, of Lin Zhu) in fact, archaic in style.” A women federation official said: “The style of the imperial palace was very rigid, not so good.” ... People also said: “It is costly in workdays and materials. The big wood for one room is enough to build 50 at present and the room accommodated only a few people. But it occupies such a big space and in the city center as well.” … Today, people go to the Forbidden City only because they regard it as an exhibition. But in the past, some people were frightened to death by the imperial palace. They had prostrated at the feet of feudal rulers and were unable to stand up until today. … Liu said: “When we marched into Beijing in 1949, I felt very uncomfortable to see Tiananmen. This is a national economic and cultural center. The atmosphere was not right. Looking here it was the city gate. Looking there, there were five dark holes with a narrow path in between and sandwiched by ochre walls. There were many things placed there. But they were of no use. Things like Sanzuomen and the ochre walls were of course useful in the past, because they protected the Forbidden City, not allowing the common people to come near. At that time, I felt that a big country like ours should have a good center.” ... The people loved Tiananmen. But the architectural style is not so satisfactory. The armyman Liu also said: “Now we have the Great Hall of the People and the Museums to match. Tiananmen is repaired very often. It is also magnificent. But the northern side does not match the whole square.” The Neighborhood Committee Chairman Ma said: “Tiananmen


10/15/2010 4:53:26 PM

362

BEIJING RECORD

Walls of the Forbidden City (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

is very old. There must be a new rostrum, a rostrum that must be more beautiful, much better than the Great Hall of the People. The gates of the Cultural Palace and Zhongshan Park are like temple gates. I think that they must be changed.” Grandpa Zhang was more specific when he said: “Tiananmen is nothing but a city gate with a palace on it. All the old people have seen city gates. If a new big building is put up, much higher than the Great Hall of the People, it would be more imposing, much better than Tiananmen.” ... We hold that the Forbidden City was built by the people, who paid a great price. But what they built does not represent their wills. They were forced to work and act according to the will of the ruling class. So, the Forbidden City is absolutely inhumane. It is the architecture of the feudal ruling class. Tao Zongzhen, then an architect with the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration, still remembers what a leader of the Administration said: “Why not to surpass the ancients? Tiananmen may be dismantled and a State Council Building may be put up on the debris to deal a powerful 47 blow to what is feudal and backward.”

47 Recollection of Tao Zongzhen during an interview with the author, on June 2, 2001.


10/15/2010 4:53:26 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

363

Corner Tower of the Forbidden City (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

Preparations were started to work out a renewal plan. The architect who was ordered to do so told the author on November 17, 1993: There was the idea of transforming the Forbidden City before 1958. But nothing was done. It was mooted by Liu Shaoqi. They just mentioned it. Nothing was done. (The idea of) renewing the Forbidden City was (designed to) make way for the heart of the capital, as there was no space for it. At the time, I was asked to come out with a plan. We drew a plan carelessly. Everybody knew it was impossible. I guessed it was just the word of mouth and it was impossible to do it. I guessed that they talked rubbish. It was impossible. On November 16, 1993, Zhou Yongyuan recalled: At that time, Peng Zhen asked: Can the Forbidden City be converted into the offices of the Central Government, as it was built for emperors? Have you ever thought about it? But the technical personnel just drew some pictures at random and did not take it seriously. During the Cultural Revolution, the idea was fumbled out. Some people said that you wanted to build a palace for Liu Shaoqi. In fact, what Peng Zhen said was just repeated from what Chairman Mao had said. On August 16, 1967 when the Cultural Revolution was going on, Liang Sicheng wrote in his diary: “At about 5:30 in the afternoon, so and so


10/15/2010 4:53:28 PM

364

BEIJING RECORD

The Great Hall of the People (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

from the City Planning Administration (including a woman) came to ask me about Peng Zhen’s idea of renewing the Forbidden City and about the 48 renewal of the Square and Chang’an Avenue.” The author also heard of a detail about the matter: When the renewal plan was submitted, Liu Ren, second secretary of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, read it and throw it aside with a laugh.

Administrative Center in the Old City In the summer of 1958, the enlarged CPC Central Committee Political Bureau meeting took the decision to launch a large-scale activity to celebrate the 10th Anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic and display the achievements in all areas since the founding of New China. For this purpose, a number of projects were needed to “show the productivity the socialist China has attained.” “Isn’t there some people who believe that we cannot build a modern country on our own and who think that we are incompetent in everything? We must bring credit to our country and answer them with action and facts.” This was what Beijing Vice-Mayor Wan Li said at a meeting to mobilize for 49 the National Day Celebration projects on September 8, 1958. 48 Liang Sicheng’s diary, August 16, 1967, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 49 Wan Li: Speech at the Beijing Meeting to Mobilize for National Day Celebration Projects, Selected Works of Wan Li, 1st edition, People’s Publishing House, September 1995.


10/15/2010 4:53:29 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

365

Thousands of foreign dignitaries and overseas Chinese would be invited to the grand celebrations, not only from socialist countries but also from capitalist countries. The National Day Celebration projects were also known as “ten major buildings.” They were the Great Hall of the People, the Museum of the Chinese Revolution and the Museum of Chinese History, the Military Museum of the Chinese People’s Revolution, the National Agricultural Exhibition Hall, the Cultural Palace of Nationalities, the Nationalities Hotel, the Beijing Worker’s Stadium, the Beijing Railway Station, the Diaoyutai Guest House and the Overseas Chinese Mansion, 50 totaling 640,000 square meters in floor space. The projects started in October 1958 and took only ten months to complete. What architectural styles did the National Day Celebration projects adopt? Wan Li, who was in charge of the projects, had this to say: In designing, everybody must dare to think, dare to act, letting one hundred flowers bloom and one hundred schools of thought contend. In the past, we for a time fought against waste and big roof (Dawuding). I think we should break with such bondage. If a high level of art can be created with glazed tiled big roof, try it; if there are better forms, just

The Museum of the Chinese Revolution and Chinese History (by courtesy of Zhang Kaiji)

50 Of the originally planned ten big buildings, some had been completed (Soviet Exhibition Hall); some were postponed (Art Gallery); and some were given up (National Theater, Science and Technology Hall and Cinema Palace); some were regarded as two (museums of Chinese History and Museum of Chinese Revolution); some, though not listed among the ten major buildings (Diaoyutai Guest House), were being built and later on listed into the National Day projects (Beijing Railway Station, Overseas Chinese Mansion, Nationalities Hotel and Worker’s Stadium). So the ten big projects fixed in the end were different from the originally planned.


10/15/2010 4:53:30 PM

366

BEIJING RECORD

create them. In a word, we must see that they are beautiful, innovative without any restrictions. The standards for beauty should not be foreign but Chinese. They must have modern features and Chinese national styles and forms. Structures before Tiananmen must be in good harmony with Tiananmen. Money that is needed must be spent and we must build an 51 architectural form to the satisfaction of the 600 million people. “Big roof” was permitted. No doubt, it was a major signal. Bold attempts were made in the architectural art creation. European classic pillar type of architectures was adopted for the Great Hall of the People and the Museum of the Chinese Revolution and the Museum of Chinese History. But the internal and external refurbishing was of national style. The Cultural Palace of Nationalities, the National Agricultural Exhibition Hall and the Beijing Railway Station were covered with big roofs that used to be a target of criticism. Six of the ten big structures were in the old city. They were the Great Hall of the People, the Museum of the Chinese Revolution and the Museum of Chinese History, the Cultural Palace of Nationalities, the Nationalities Hotel, the Beijing Railway Station and the Overseas Chinese Mansion. The

The Cultural Palace of Nationalities (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

51 Wan Li: Speech at the Beijing Meeting to Mobilize for the National Day Projects, Selected Works of Wan Li, 1st edition, People’s Publishing House, September 1995.


10/15/2010 4:53:34 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

367

renewal of the Tiananmen Square was the core task of the National Day Celebration projects. From the very beginning of the founding of New China, preparations were made to put the central administrative area in the old city and the idea was about to come off the table. For a time, the most outstanding architects and planners gathered in Beijing. The CPC Beijing Municipal Committee mobilized all the construction workers and invited more than 1,000 architects, artists and young students from all parts of the country to participate in a competition in the planning and designing of Tiananmen Square. The Tiananmen Square used to be a “T”-shaped square, designed as a square for the imperial court in the Ming Dynasty. It was also known as “Tian Jie” (Heavenly Street). At the southern end of the square was 52 Zhonghuamen. On the eastern and western sides inside the gate was a corridor known as “thousand step corridor” about three meters away from the palace walls, with 100 sections on each side. The northern ends turned toward the east and the west, where there were 34 sections with 144 bungalow rooms for keeping documentation and archives. The corridor ended at the Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate. In the 15th year of the reign of Emperor Qian Long, two structures of Sanzuomen (threearch gate) were built outside the Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate. This imperial court square was an open space for the transition of the central axis from the inner city to the imperial city and the Forbidden City. On the two sides of the square outside the palace walls were the offices of imperial family affairs department, the Six Ministries of personnel, revenue, rites, defense and public works, supervision department and five military commissions, sacrificial rites affairs office and imperial guards during the Ming Dynasty. They were the same power organs during the Qing Dynasty. These central administrative organs were linked together by the imperial square, imperial city and the Forbidden City, symbolizing the supreme power of the emperor. After the 1911 revolution, the enclosed square was opened to common people. Zhu Qiqian, the Minister of Internal Affairs of the Northern Warlord government, rebuilt the square and surrounding structures to facilitate traffic. He removed the thousand-step corridor in 1913 and used the wood to build

52 The building was originally in the place where the Memorial Hall of Chairman Mao is. It was called Damingmen in the Ming Dynasty and Daqingmen in the Qing Dynasty and Zhonghuamen during the Republic period. It was therefore, known as the “door of the state.” It was dismantled in 1959 when a greening project was carried out in the square.


10/15/2010 4:53:35 PM

368

BEIJING RECORD

Barbican of Zhengyangmen removed in 1915, (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

Beijing’s first park — the Central Park (now Zhongshan Park). Specifically, the wood was used to build the Pavilion of Laijinyu, Touhu or Pot Throw Pavilion, Huiying or Image Painting Building, Chunming Hall and the corridors and houses at Shanglinchun. In 1915, the round city in between the Zhengyangmen and the Arrow Tower was dismantled and four arched doors were opened on the city walls on the two sides of Zhengyangmen to alleviate the strained traffic at Zhengyangmen and the railway station on its east. Two passage ways were opened in the southern wall of the imperial city leading to Nanchang Street and in Nanchizi. Before the grand ceremony marking the founding of New China in 1949, the Tiananmen Square underwent revamping, with the national flag pole erected and the Huabiao and stone lions removed. In 1950, the east and west Sanzuomen were dismantled. In 1952, the left and right Chang’an Gates were demolished. The reviewing stands were made permanent structures. In 1955, a big renewal was carried out in the Tiananmen Square, with the two palace walls at Gong’an Street and Xipishi removed to expand the square by nearly one hectare and the China poplar trees replaced with pines and square concrete bricks. What would the Tiananmen Square ultimately become? Beijing produced 15 plans from 1950 to 1954, when there was a big dispute around the nature, scale, the treatment of ancient structures and size of the square. Different plans reflected differences of views:


10/15/2010 4:53:35 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

369

Barbican of Zhengyangmen before dismantlement in 1915 (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

Zhengyangmen after dismantlement of barbican in 1915 (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

First, concerning the nature of the square, some people held that Tiananmen was the symbol of New China and leading state organs should be sited around the square. A museum of revolution should be built to make it a political center; some people held that the structures around the square should not be leading state organs but should be museums and libraries to make it a cultural center. Second, on the scale of structures around it, some people held that the square represented the great achievements in socialist construction and some but not all tall and magnificent new buildings should be put up around it, in front or middle of it to make it an architectural center and peak of Beijing. Some people held that the structures around it should not be higher than Tiananmen and the Monument to the People’s Heroes. Third, on the treatment of ancient structures, some people held that the ancient structures (Zhengyangmen and Zhonghuamen) paled before the


10/15/2010 4:53:36 PM

370

BEIJING RECORD

great construction of the new era and in a considerable time to come, they should give way to tall, new buildings that were great enough to represent socialism and communism; some people deemed it necessary to protect these historical and cultural heritage. Fourth, on the size of the square, some people held that the square was the center for political activities and parade and should be big enough, about 30–40 hectares; but some people deemed it improper to make it bigger (20–25 hectares would do) as seen from the angle of architectural 53 proportion. After Beijing set up BCCPC in 1955, the city came out with ten schemes under the direction of Soviet experts. Compared with the previous schemes, more attention was given to the harmony of new and old buildings, scraping the tall structure similar to the “Soviet Mansion” that appeared in the previous schemes and it was decided that the structures around the square should generally not be taller than Tiananmen, Tiananmen and Zhengyangmen should be preserved. Of the plans, five proposed to keep the width of the square similar to the distance from the Chang’an Left Gate to the Chang’an Right Gate (about 500 meters) and the length to about 860 meters from Tiananmen to Zhengyangmen. The northern part should be a square for parades and the southern part should be a green square and in between the two parts such public buildings as the Great Hall of the People and museums should be put in. Office buildings were designed for the two sides of the square. One of the schemes designed a three-sided enclosed colonnade inside the square, opening toward Tiananmen and closed in the direction toward Zhengyangmen, thus blocking the line of sight between Tiananmen and Zhengyangmen. The other five plans proposed to narrow the green square and put cultural buildings and offices in between the two parts of the square. As to the bridge over the moat at Zhengyangmen, some plans proposed one bridge put on the axial line and some proposed two bridges put on the two sides of the axial line. All the plans were put on show together with the master construction plan in 1956. People were widely divided. Most people held that the square 54 should be open and vast, maintaining its “T” shape. But the disputes were settled by what Mao Zedong said.

53 Dong Guangqi: Renewal and Expansion of Tiananmen Square, Beijing Historical Data, Issue No. 49, 1st edition, November 1994. 54 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:53:36 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

Ming Dynasty

371

The year of 1947

明代

Mao instructed Peng Zhen on the Tiananmen Rostrum that Tiananmen should be extended from the former Chang’an Left Gate and Chang’an Right Gate southward to the city wall at Zhengyangmen. The square was then rebuilt according to this instruction to make it 500 meters from east to west and 860 meters from north to south, measuring 44 hectares in the end. Then, another principle was fixed, that is, the Great Hall of the People and the Museum of Revolution and History were to be built flanking the square. Through repeated screening, Beijing chose 7 representative plans for

The year of 1993

Map of the plan for the transformation of Tiananmen Square in 1958 (Source: Selected Works of Zhao Dongri, 1998)

Evolution of the Tiananmen Square


10/15/2010 4:53:40 PM

372

BEIJING RECORD

review by the central authorities. These plans were produced respectively by Chen Zhi, Zhao Shen, Liu Dunzhen, Dai Nianci, Mao Ziyao, Zhang Bo and the No. 10 plan whose author could not be found. These plans were also divided as to the size of the southern part of the square. Liu Dunzhen’s scheme was to expand Zhengyangmen and Arrow tower to link them to55 gether. The Great Hall of the People capable of accommodating ten thousand people was a major project in the Tiananmen Square construction. It was a typical “Mao Zedong Project.” The Chinese character “万 (wan),” which means “ten thousand,” was a favorite number of Mao Zedong. In his poems, there are many phrases associated with the word, such as “Ten thousand years are too long; we must seize the day, seize the hour;” “An army of one million (100 ten thousand)” and “one who fails to reach the Great Wall is no hero and it is calculated that we have covered 20 thousand miles.” His passion as a poet, when expressed in architectural art, was also enumerated in “ten thousand.” When the liberation army moved into Beijing, he instructed to build a “one million people square.” He also determined that the conference hall must be able to accommodate ten thousand people. In September 1959, when Mao Zedong inspected the project, he asked Wan Li: “What do you call this building?” Wan Li replied: “The project is called the Great Hall of the People and some people proposed calling it ‘People’s Palace.’” Mao Zedong said: “It sounds very feudal.” Wan Li went on: “Some people call it the ‘National People’s Congress Hall.’” Mao Zedong said: “There must be a subject before our general line. But we have omitted it, so we say ‘Go all out, aim high and build socialism with greater, faster, better and more economical results.’ When the common people are asked: ‘Where are you going?’ The common people would say: ‘Go to the Great 56 Hall of the People.’ So let it be called the Great Hall of the People.” The buildings had thus got its official name. Architects poured all their energy into the design of the Great Hall of the People. In a short span of a little more than a month, 84 graphic designs and 189 elevation drawings were offered by 34 designing units in Beijing and architects, architectural teachers and students from all provinces and autonomous regions. Through repeated assessment, an integrated plan that

55 Ibid. 56 Liu Zhixian: Naming of the Great Hall of the People, Mao Zedong with the People of the Capital, Central Documentation Press , 1st edition, September 1993.


10/15/2010 4:53:40 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

373

Seven plans for the rebuilding of Tiananmen Square (Source: Selected Works of Zhao Dongri, 1998)

included all the strong points of various other schemes was adopted on 57 October 16, 1958. Zhao Dongri, head of the Technical Office of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration, and Shen Qi, deputy head of the General 57 The Great Hall of the People, compiled by the designing group of the Great Hall of the People of the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration, Architectural Journal, Issue 9–10, 1959.


10/15/2010 4:53:42 PM

374

BEIJING RECORD

Mapping Office, were entrusted by the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee to review all the plans for the “ten major buildings” and Tiananmen Square, with emphasis on the Great Hall of the People. The conditions raised by the central authorities were very simple: the Great Hall of the People must have a meeting hall able to accommodate 10,000 people and a banqueting hall for 5,000 people. Later on, the meeting hall for the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress was added. All the rest in addition to the three requirements was left to designers, without restrictions. At first, it was decided to have a floor space of 50,000 square meters and later on it was expanded to 75,000 square 58 meters. But when Liu Ren, Second Secretary of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee inspected the square and measured its size, he held that 75,000 square meters were not magnificent enough and did not reflect fully the spirit of the instructions of Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai and prompted the 59 planning Administration to expand it. Then, the Beijing Planning Administration produced a 170,000 square meter plan. But local units participating in the design competition did not know Liu Ren’s instruction and they still went on with their design according to the original 75,000 square meters. On October 14, 1958, upon his return to Beijing from an inspection trip, Zhou Enlai reviewed the plans for the Great Hall of the People the very night. Altogether three plans were submitted by Wan Li, Qi Yanming and Zhao Pengfei, with the approval of Liu Ren. One was designed by Qinghua University; another by the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design; and the other by the Beijing Planning Administration. In the end, Zhou Enlai chose the plan by the Beijing Planning Administration that had European classic columns. Liang Sicheng was opposed to the size of the Tiananmen Square fixed by Mao Zedong. He said that it did not conform to the dimension of man. 60 It was like man falling into a desert. He did not go along with the design chosen by Zhou Enlai, either. He held that the sequence of merits and demerits in artistic style should be: (1) Chinese but new; (2) Western but new; (3) Chinese but ancient; (4) West-

58 Tao Zongzhen: The Tiananmen Square Planning and Construction in Retrospect and Prospect, South China Construction, Issue No. 4, 1999. 59 Biography of Liu Ren, 1st edition, compiled by the Biography of Liu Ren group of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, Beijing Publishing House, July 2000. 60 Recollection by Liu Xiaoshi during an interview with the author, May 20, 1996.


10/15/2010 4:53:42 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

375

Overall plan of the Great Hall of the People by the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration adopted in the end (Source: Selected Works of Zhao Dongri, 1998)

ern but ancient. The plan chosen followed the Renaissance period, belonging to the category of “western but ancient,” one of the poorest designs. Liang Sicheng claimed that the elevation of the chosen plan had lost the sense of dimensions, like the failure of the St. Peter Cathedral, which committed simple enlargement error for the pursuit of greatness and solemnity, simply doubling the width of rooms and story height and so were the doors, windows, door panel and walls, making people feel very small, like in a state of giants. He called it “enlargement of a child,” which repeated historical mistakes. His views were put to discussion by the Architectural Society of China. All the participants in the discussion were unanimous about the formulation of “Chinese but new” and put “Chinese but ancient” in the second place. They all agreed that “western but ancient” did not conform to the national conditions and popular wills. After the discussion, six experts from Shanghai, namely, Wu Jingxiang, Feng Jizhong, Huang Zuoshen, Tan Yuan, Zhao Shen and Chen Zhi, filed a written report to Zhou Enlai, expressing their worries about the 500-meter wide square, saying that they were afraid that the square would be so vast that it would fall into disharmony with the structures around. They held that the plan chosen was similar to the one in the bid for the United Nations 61 in Geneva in terms of elevation, also assuming the western classic style. 61 Zhang Bo: My Architectural Creation Path, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, February 1994.


10/15/2010 4:53:43 PM

376

BEIJING RECORD

At the beginning of January 1959, Zhou Enlai and Peng Zhen, together with Qi Yanming, Zhou Yang, Zhao Pengfei, She Bo and Zhang Bo discussed the plan for the Great Hall of the People. Peng Zhen said: “Some people said that the Great Hall of the People is so tall that it dwarfs the people. Isn’t the sky very high? But why do we not feel ourselves overwhelmed when standing in the Tiananmen Square?” Zhou Enlai instructed to make the conference hall to have an interior ceiling dome so as to achieve the harmonious effect 62 between man and nature. On January 20, in view of differences of views, Zhou Enlai and Peng Zhen called a forum of architects, structural experts and fine artists at the People’s Committee. At the meeting, Zhou Enlai set the ball rolling, saying that “I heard that there are differences of views with regard to the design of the Great Hall of the People. If there are drawbacks with the design, it should be treated like a child who has fallen ill. The first thing to consider is how to treat the illness. There are two key issues. One is that whether or not it might collapse and the other is whether or not it looks good. The collapsing issue should come first. The service life of the Great Hall of the People should be at least longer than the Forbidden City and the Zhongshan Hall, not less than 350 years... Architecture must have its own style. It is hard to make everybody satisfied. So long as it would not collapse and it is useful and it looks as good as possible, we should not oppose it. We must reach unanimity on this point. 63 Otherwise, there would be no end to the disputes.” Liang Sicheng re-invoked the problem of “western but ancient.” Zhou Enlai replied: “Our Chinese people are great in that they can absorb all that are useful to us and make all the good things, Chinese or foreign, serve China. The problem for the present is not something about ancient or western. The problem lies in the fact that it must accommodate 10,000 people and it must have a banquet hall large enough to seat 5,000 people and it must be completed in eight months. We must make the final decision and start working at once. Suppose we set the schedule for two or three years, we can solicit more opinions. No matter who build it, our principle is useful and economical and beautiful when conditions permit. If there are people who hold that the building is not good enough, they may build better ones in the future. It is a law that new ones are always better than the

62 Zhao Dongri: My Recollection of the Great Hall of the People Designing Process, Beijing Historical Data, Issue No. 49, 1st edition, Beijing Publishing House, November 1994. 63 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:53:43 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

377

old. So our discussion should be based on the present design and adopt it 64 when it can be adopted and try to make it better.” Liang Sicheng noted down what Zhou Enlai said: “Paths are blazed by man and the revolutionary line has been found and proved in practice after many mistakes were committed. We have not found a path for construction and we are groping for it by constructing these big buildings. We are soliciting opinions under the current conditions. The Party leadership is to gather the opinions from all... The National People’s Congress is a political 65 factory and it pays off when it is used once every year.” It took just ten months to complete the Tiananmen Square and the Great Hall of the People. The People’s Daily issued an editorial, extolling the “ten major buildings” as the “children of the Great Leap Forward.” In his article titled Great Ten Years, Zhou Enlai described the Great Hall of the People as “having surpassed the level of all similar buildings in China and is of the first rate in the world.” The Great Hall of the People has since occupied an important position in the minds of the Chinese people. It has inspired special passion. Perhaps it would be more accurate to describe it in the words of writer Bing Xin: “Entering the Great Hall of the People, you would feel struck by awesomeness like a drop of water falling into a vast ocean. You would feel how small a 66 drop of water is and how boundless the vast ocean looks.” After the completion of the “ten major buildings,” Liang Sicheng met with an acid retort from Zhao Dongri. In its Joint Issue No. 9–10, 1959, the Architectural Journal published an article signed by Zhao Dongri, entitled The Tiananmen Square. The article said: There are a few comrades who are confined to the feudal pattern that the architectural art of Tiananmen Square is insurmountable and an unparalleled treasure, which is too long by adding one inch but too short to slash one inch. They refused to touch it. For instance, the original east 67 and west Sanzuomen in front of Tiananmen were exactly in the center of the east and west Chang’an Avenue. They not only obstructed parades but also seriously affected the traffic, bringing harm to the pedestrians. 64 Ibid. 65 Work Notes of Liang Sicheng, January 20, 1959, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 66 Bing Xin: Entering the Great Hall of the People, Beijing Evening News, September 25, 1959. 67 They refer to the Chang’an Left Gate and the Chang’an Right Gate.


10/15/2010 4:53:43 PM

378

BEIJING RECORD

The people all demanded their removal. But some people stressed their cultural and artistic values and their proportion to Tiananmen and the removal would spoil the original pattern. The feudal pattern, which used to guard the Forbidden City and suppressing the common people, must be broken. In 1952, the Municipal People’s Congress unanimously adopted a resolution to remove the obstacles to the satisfaction of the common people. ... On such minor issues as the size of the square, most people demanded to break the feudal pattern and the bondage by the bourgeois architectural theories and the intrinsic size of the square, broaden the mind and boldly go for the dimensions required by the collective activities of the people, to have a correct understanding of the spiritual outlook of the Chinese people. We must develop the open architectural distribution in the Chinese tradition and make the square more magnificent and spacious. But a few people said that if the square is made too big, “it would be so vast that it looks like a desert and it falls out of proportion to man.” On the issue of the size of new buildings, some people held that the new buildings should not be higher than Tiananmen. Why is it that the buildings of the era of the people cannot be higher than the palaces of the era of feudal rulers? The Great Hall of the People itself requires a big size in terms of its usage. The 10,000-people meeting hall and the 5,000-people banquet hall cannot be built by conventional measures. Of course, Tiananmen, as seen from the political significance, should retain a considerable status in the square. But some people held that as the square is made so big, it is therefore, not necessary to extend the Great Hall of the People to such a large size. This view is also distance apart from reality. On the artistic forms of new buildings, some people divided the legacy and creations of architectural art into several portions such as Chinese but new, western but new, Chinese but ancient and western but ancient. All those that are western but ancient, Chinese but ancient or western but new cannot be accepted. On the contrary, some people held that such views would likely ignore history and seclude ourselves in continuing the beaten paths and therefore restrict the development of Chinese architectural art. The views on these issues must be unified through practice. The square should not only satisfy the demand for parades and rallies but also demonstrate its openness and magnificence. The dimensions of a building should not only satisfy the needs of purpose but also must be well matched with the square and the structures in the square so as to strike a balance. In architectural art and technology, there should be no division of ancient and present, Chinese and foreign. It must include anything and everything, absorbing what is best and discarding what is bad. This must be achieved through debates, practice, debate again and practice again. The fact that a decade of disputes has reached a perfect


10/15/2010 4:53:43 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

379

conclusion, which was applied in the construction of the square is but a great victory in the architectural art and ideological front and a great victory for the Party’s policy of “letting one hundred flowers bloom and one hundred schools of thought contend.” To Zhao Dongri, the significance of the “great victory” in the disputes over the design of the Tiananmen Square and the Great Hall of the People lied not only in “break the feudal pattern and the bondage by the bourgeois architectural theories and the intrinsic size of the square” but also in the underlying fact that “a decade of disputes has reached a perfect conclusion.” This has reminded us of the past events in 1950 when Zhao Dongri and Zhu Zhaoxue collaborated against the “Liang-Chen Proposal.”

Elevation of the Great Hall of the People viewed from the east (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

Liang Sicheng also wrote an article, which had the same title The Tiananmen Square as that of Zhao Dongri’s. The article said: … There were heated discussions as to how wide the Tiananmen Square would be in the future. It was absolutely not wide enough to make it 100 meters. Doubling the width? 250 meters? 300 meters? Or 400 meters? City planners came out with more than 30 plans. 500 meters. This is the option after years of study and debates. At first, some architects used the dimension of European squares of the 18th and 19th centuries to boldly create such size. But they were afraid that it did not conform to the dimension of “man,” and the “dimension of architecture.” But after repeated discussions, we came to realize that, apart from considering the dimension of “biological man” and the dimensions of “physiological” architecture, we have to consider the dimensions of “political man” and the great collectives required by “man of the new society.” The new


10/15/2010 4:53:44 PM

380

BEIJING RECORD

social system and the new political activities require the change in the dimensional concept of Chinese architects. Of course, such new concept has not ignored the dimension of “biological man” or the dimensions of the magnificent Tiananmen in the square. With such new concept of size, Chinese architects collectively put up the two buildings flanking the square in September 1958. ... With regard to architectural form, these buildings have their creatively unique style. They are neither foreign nor the copy of traditional Chinese architectural form. They bear some of the features of Chinese tradition, especially the use of colonnades. Besides, glazed tiles which were favored in Chinese tradition are also used to decorate the eaves. These forms have been created on the basis of innovation and development on the materials, technology and tradition we have mastered according to the needs and favor of the people of socialist China today.

The Great Hall of the People viewed on the tower of Zhengyangmen (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

The huge dimensions of these square buildings have also brought us a new “sense of dimensions.” On the one hand, these buildings cannot be deviated from the man’s dimension of 1.80 meters and on the other hand, they cannot ignore the dimensions required by collective activities of 5,000, 10,000 and even one million people. Neither can they ignore the dimensions of Tiananmen. There are huge contradictions among them. We can only say that we have made herculean efforts, a bold attempt to break away from traditional concept. The new square is a square for traffic in ordinary times. It is the connecting point of the east/west trunk roads and the trunk roads on the south/north axis. During festivals, it serves as a meeting place. The greened part is also a good place for pleasure and rest. The planners


10/15/2010 4:53:45 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

381

have met fully the requirements of all functions. It is very vast and the dimensions are very appropriate. In this article, Liang Sicheng seemed to have given up his ideas he had persisted on. But on July 26, 1961, he wrote an article to the People’s Daily, entitled Architecture and Architectural Art, in which he invoked the problem of “enlargement of a child” and the “dimension of man.” The article said: A big building is not a simple proportional enlargement of a smaller one. Many things cannot be enlarged. Some may be enlarged to a certain extent, but cannot be simply enlarged proportionately... The relative proportions and absolute size give rise to the issue of dimensions. If not handled properly, the actual dimensions of the building would not be matched with the visual impression. This is something not easy to command in the artistic treatment in designing. There is the dimension problem with the entity of a building and all its local details, even with a square, a street and a group of buildings. Painters have similar problems in drawing a picture of a person. To draw an adult is not to enlarge a child proportionately. When enlarged proportionately, however large it is, it still looks like a child. Liang Sicheng’s comment on the design of the Great Hall of the People was soon politicized. On January 15, 1960, a teacher at the Qinghua University Department of Architecture made a self-criticism at a Party meeting, saying: “It is a negation of the Great Leap Forward to say that the National Day Celebration 68 projects are ‘western and ancient.’â•›” A student commented: “For a long time, there have been many discussions among some teachers and students of our department about the new buildings put up over the past 15 years, especially the Tiananmen Square and the ten major buildings. Some people hold that ‘Tiananmen is an image loved by both feudal emperors and the laboring people.’ This is an obliteration of the class nature of buildings. On the contrary, they taunted and jeered at the ten major buildings, making indiscrete remarks and criticisms, saying that ‘the Great Hall of the People is like a big child, 69 neither Chinese nor western, a great compromise.’” Some other students explained: “Why the teachers have devoted so much energy to giving lectures on western architecture, floating space and 68 Liang Sicheng’s work note, January 15, 1960, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 69 Selected Papers on the Discussion of Teaching Thought (1), compiled by the Qinghua University Department of Architecture, January 1965.


10/15/2010 4:53:45 PM

382

BEIJING RECORD

The Great Hall of the People and the Monument to the People’s Heroes (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

ancient Chinese gardens but not one who gives a lecture specially on the ten 70 major buildings?” During the Cultural Revolution, Liang Sicheng became a target of even fiercer attacks. He had to make self-criticism, admitting that the notion of 71 “â•›‘Chinese but new’ is, in essence, reactionary.” As is mentioned above, of the ten major buildings, six are in the old city district. To build such large-scale projects in the densely populated old city area, it would inevitable to displace a lot of people. The biggest relocation was that taking place in the Tiananmen Square. Beijing Vice-Mayor Feng Jiping was responsible for the dismantling and removal work. It took only one month to dismantle and remove 10,129 houses to make way for the Tiananmen Square project, in early October 1958, ensuring the timely start 72 of the project. Under the then economic conditions, it was hard to properly arrange the housing for the displaced people in such a short time. A considerable number of people were forced to move into make-shift bungalows, which were harsh in living conditions. These people were not relocated until the middle and late 1980s.

70 Ibid. 71 Liang Sicheng: “Confession” during the Cultural Revolution, November 5, 1968, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 72 Dong Guangqi: Strategic Thoughts on Beijing’s City Planning, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, May 1998.


10/15/2010 4:53:47 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

383

Some non-Communist Party personages criticized the Tiananmen Square project. Yu Xuezhong of the Central Committee of the Revolutionary Kuomintang even said that the Tiananmen Square project was like the building of the Great Wall by Qin Shi Huang, or the First Emperor of the 73 Qin Dynasty. Li Yunzhong of the Integrated Group leader of the General Office of the Northeast China Coordination Zone wrote a lengthy letter to Mao Zedong on June 9, 1959, listing a series of serious economic problems arising during the Great Leap Forward period, criticizing the building of too many luxury hotels and the construction of the ten major buildings. “Across the country, the spending on building ‘National Day Celebration projects’ this fiscal year totaled more than 800–900 million yuan, enough to build an iron and steel works with an annual output of 3 million tons or 16–18 millions square meters of housing for workers.” Mao Zedong wrote a note to the letter, saying that “Li Yunzhong’s views are erroneous, as he has negated almost everything.” But Mao expressed his 74 appreciation of his spirit of daring to speak up. Peng Dehuai, the then Defense Minister, did not have the luck of Li Yunzhong. After he sent a lengthy letter of similar accusation to Mao at the Lushan meeting in July 1959, he and his sympathizers Huang Kecheng, Zhang Wentian and Zhou Xiaozhou fell victims to criticism. The Lushan meeting was originally designed to sum up the experience and lessons of the Great Leap Forward movement and correct the “leftdeviationist” errors. Nobody had ever thought that Peng Dehuai’s letter made Mao Zedong so furious, so much so that the originally designed antileft-deviation was turned to just the opposite, which induced a greater “leap forward” in 1960.

Urban People’s Commune In 1960, a huge “Commune Building” sprang up at the northwest corner of the White Pagoda Temple, which was called a “Mansion of Communism”. There was no private kitchen in the eight-storey building. People had to go to the canteen to dine. If you say it was like a hotel, it was quite different from a real hotel. The difference lies in the collective concept, as more than 40 households were crowded in one storey.

73 Li Rui: Record of Lushan Meeting, 1st edition, Henan People’s Publishing House, June 1994. 74 Ibid.


10/15/2010 4:53:47 PM

384

BEIJING RECORD

Elevation of the Commune Building viewed from the south (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

When this author visited this building, many small kitchens had been put up in the corridors. When talking with an old resident, we had to stamp our feet repeatedly to switch on the light as they were sound controlled. After Chairman Mao praised Hebei’s Xushui for building people’s communes in August 1958, an upsurge of running people’s communes swept across China. On August 29, the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee met in Beidaihe and adopted a resolution on building rural people’s communes, declaring that “it would not take too long to realize Communism in China. We must actively employ this form of people’s commune to grope for a path to transit to Communism.” In just a few months, the waves of running people’s communes spread to all the rural areas and rolled on into cities. Henan Province, which was the first to set up people’s communes in all its rural areas, went on to set up people’s communes in urban areas. By the end of September 1958, nine cities under the direct administration of the provincial government set up 482 people’s communes. The movement got the approval of the 6th Plenary Session of the 8th CPC Central Committee in December 1958, which said that “the urban people’s communes are tools for transforming the old cities and building new ones,” “unified organizers of production, exchange, distribution and people’s welfare” and “social organizations that integrate industry, agriculture, commerce, schools and army and unify government administration with economic management.” The CPC Central Committee called for full mobilization of the people and organizing experiments in all forms of urban people’s communes.


10/15/2010 4:53:48 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

385

Elevation of the Commune Building viewed from the west (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

This resulted in an upsurge of urban people’s communes. By the end of July 1960, 190 large and medium-sized cities had set up 1,064 people’s communes, with a combined membership of 55 million people, 77 percent of the population of these cities. What did the people’s communes and the transition to Communism bring to the people? What was collectively and privately owned had been converted to ownership by the whole people. All the properties belong to the whole people. In the rural areas, houses became publicly owned; trees were publicly owned; even chickens, ducks and pigs became public. Iron cauldrons were smashed and put into the iron melting furnaces. There was no plume of smoke visible from the chimneys. All the people ate in collective canteens. There was really no private property except a pair of chopsticks and a bowl. Free meals without rations were the dreams of many. But the typical example in Xushui caused serious shortage of food grains in 1959 and 1960. There were even people who died of hunger. In less than three or four months, the free supply system came to its exhaustive end. Like rural people’s communes, those in cities also got involved in the drive of making everything public. Urbanites shared mixed feelings. Some were excited and some worried. There was a bank run and panic buying. Watches, jewelry and other luxury goods ran out of stock. Public canteen is a symbol of people’s commune. Refusing to eat in the public canteen was regarded as a serious political error. In the 1959 antiright-deviationist movement, some people who refused to go to canteens


10/15/2010 4:53:50 PM

386

BEIJING RECORD

The Commune Building with the momentum of suppressing the White Dagoba of Miaoying Temple of the Yuan Dynasty (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

met with fierce attacks under the name of great debate and they even had their food sources cut off. Some officials supporting and sympathizing with those who refused to go to canteens were designated as “right-deviationists.” Some provinces even went so far as to shout the slogan: “Long Live Public Canteens!” At the time, 400 million rural people or 72.6 percent of the total rural population ate in public canteens. Some provinces had all the people eating in public canteens. In 1960, in order to consolidate public canteens, the CPC Central Committee issued a series of documents, asserting that public canteens “are the bastions of socialism” and “where the acute class struggle exists in the rural areas” and calling on Party committees at all levels to arrange the life well and run public canteens well as a matter of 75 class struggle. But the acts that violated the objective law were at last paid in high prices. Soon, the people had bitter pills to swallow. Diseases such as edema resulting from hunger and shortages of grain spread. The whole country was thrown into difficulties that lasted three years from 1959 to 1961. People had to fight to eat. Then Qinghua University raised the slogan: “Health 76 first is a political mission.” The President of Qinghua University Jiang 77 Nanxiang called for efforts to “improve life and prevent edema” and “hope 75 Bo Yibo: A Review of Major Policies and Events (2), 1st edition, CPC Central Party School Press, June 1993. 76 Liang Sicheng’s work note, June 30, 1961, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 77 Liang Sicheng’s work note, October 6, 1961, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:53:52 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

387

that edema would not get worse... let us cooperate and join in a chorus 78 for health.” The frenzied wave for the transition to communism changed everything. At the National People’s Congress in April 1960, the sentence “urban people’s communes are very good” was on the lips of every deputy. Many deputies hailed it as a revolutionary mass movement of great historic significance and asserted that the development of urban people’s commune movement “is sure to bring about profound changes to the political, economic and people’s spiritual outlook of 79 Chinese cities.” All-China Federation of Trade Unions President Li Jiebo said: “At Commune Building built with remaining materials from the building of the Great Hall of the People present, all provinces, cities and au(photo by Wang Jun, 2002) tonomous regions have established people’s communes on a voluntary basis and the population joining the people’s communes has reached nearly 20 million. Most cities in Henan, Hebei and Heilongjiang provinces have set up people’s communes. Now the urban people’s communes are rapidly developing in a mass movement like towering waves. It can be expected that in a not too distant future, all the cities in the country will set up urban people’s communes. “At a time when the Chinese people are jubilantly celebrating the arrival of the upsurge of urban people’s communes, imperialists and their mouthpieces have launched vicious attacks against Chinese urban people’s communes just like they did with the rural people’s communes, wildly clam-

78 Liang Sicheng’s work note, November 1, 1961, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 79 People’s Deputies Hail Revolutionary Mass Movement of Historic Significance; Urban People’s Communes Are Very Good; Members of National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Firmly Believe the National Agricultural Development Program Is Sure to RealizeAahead of Time, People’s Daily, Page 1, April 9, 1960.


10/15/2010 4:53:54 PM

388

BEIJING RECORD

oring... Let them clamor. No force can obstruct the advance of the wheel of 80 history.” Urban people’s communes were incorporated in the list of projects that must be done with great efforts. In his report to the NPC, Vice-Premier Li Fuchun said: “At present, all the cities have gone all out to run people’s communes, launch neighborhood community industries and suburban agriculture, run public welfare undertakings and public canteens. They have organized well the economic activities of the people and made further efforts to get the urbanites well organized and liberate tens of thousands of urban housewives from house chores to participate in social labor.” Liang Sicheng also made a speech at the conference. He said: “A new problem that has been placed before us is how to plan our cities according to the requirements of the development of urban people’s communes. We should study this well... In city planning, we should consider the development of neighborhood factories for housewives to take part in social labor and the building of public canteens, kindergartens, nurseries and other welfare facilities. Besides, and I think it is more important, we are not familiar with such new ideas, new life, new problems and new things. We may not be used to the new way of life. It is, therefore, extremely important 81 as to how to remold our old ideas, old views and old way of life.” Liang Sicheng hoped that city planners may study the issue of urban people’s communes. But he had never expected that only six months later, he got the answer: “City planning should be suspended for three years.” In November 1960, the national planning conference was held. The conference severely criticized the problem of “excess in four aspects” and declared that “city planning should be suspended for three years.” What is “excess in four aspects?” It means that the city construction had gone to excess in scale, in the occupation of land, in seeking things new and in standards. This problem was discovered by Bo Yibo, Minister in charge of the State Construction Commission and Wan Li, Minister of Urban Construction, after making an inspection tour of Xi’an, Lanzhou and Chengdu in April 1957. But it did not receive enough attention and spread during the Great Leap Forward movement and in the high tide of going all out to run factories and make steel. The city had been expanded to excess; the city population

80 Ibid. 81 New Tasks of Architectural Workers; Liang Sicheng on New Urban and Rural Planning after the Setting Up of Urban People’s Communes, People’s Daily, Page 15, April 11, 1960.


10/15/2010 4:53:54 PM

FA Reading

Blueprint Revealed

389

had bloated; so much so that they had gone beyond the reaches of the financial resources of the state. City planning and construction had run out of control. In the context of serious economic difficulties, the CPC Central Committee put forward the principle of “making adjustments and consolidation, filling out and raising standards” in January 1961. It also issued the instruction of building the country with diligence and thrift and downscaling construction projects. It made the decision of not launching industrial projects and large construction projects in the following three years. It was against this background that the national planning conference was held. This was no doubt a heavy blow to the planners. For a time, people in the planning area were thrown into confusion. The organizations were streamlined and even dismissed. The planning contingent was weakened. Although Beijing made the decision of maintaining the master construction plan, it had to face up to the reality of downscaling capital construction. Many construction projects had to be stopped. Infrastructural projects were stagnated. The city construction was at a low tide rarely seen since 1949. From 1961 to 1965, Beijing adopted the measure of mobilizing 420,000 people to go to the countryside in five years. At a time when the national economy was on the verge of collapsing, Beijing’s 1958 plan of completing the old city regeneration in about ten years could not only help but run aground.


10/15/2010 4:53:54 PM


FA Reading

Chapter 9


10/15/2010 4:53:54 PM

Chapter Nine Clean Break between the Old and the New

Disputes over “Wide Roads” In 1964, after three years of economic difficulties, the tasks for the adjustment of the national economy were basically completed and a new stage of development was in the offing. In March, the CPC Central Committee approved for circulation VicePremier Li Fuchun’s report on Beijing city construction. The report said that “there are a lot of open space on the two sides of the East and West Chang’an Avenue after many houses were pulled down and new projects should be built. At the same time, in view of the international situation and the domestic conditions, the outlook of the capital should undergo some changes. If the CPC Central Committee agrees, we shall let Beijing map out a plan for rebuilding the East and West Chang’an Avenue... There must be more office buildings and large public structures. But other cities are not 1 allowed to emulate.”â•› According to the spirit of the CPC Central Committee instructions, Beijing decided to build a department store and an office building in the open space vacated on the Chang’an Avenue, that is, the northeastern corner of Xidan and the former site of Science and Technology Hall at Fangjinxiang and set out to plan the rebuilding of the Chang’an Avenue. The Beijing municipal government asked the Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration, the Beijing Institute of Architectural Design, the Industrial Structure Designing Institute, Qinghua University, the Architectural Science Institute and Beijing University of Technology each to produce a plan to be submitted between April 10–18, 1964 for review and assessment by experts. It was the first time for Beijing to have a fairly complete plan for the Chang’an Avenue following a considerably long period of disputes. 1 Li Fuchun’s report on Beijing City Construction, in Records of Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Founding of New China (Vol. I, City Planning), compiled by the Editorial Board of the Editorial Committee for the Book Series on the History of Beijing’s Construction, 2nd edition, November 1995


10/15/2010 4:53:55 PM

FA Reading

Clean Break between the Old and the New

393

Integrated plan for the Chang’an Avenue (1964) (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

In fact, the Chang’an Avenue planning started at the very beginning of the founding of New China, when the rebuilding of the Tiananmen Square started. But the width of the road did not meet the requirements of the plan because of the office buildings of the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Fuel, the Ministry of Textile Industry and the Ministry of Foreign Trade, which were built earlier. In September 1954, Beijing produced Key Points in the Draft Plan for Renovation and Expansion of Beijing, which propose that in order to facilitate traffic in the central area and closely link it with the other parts of the city, the south/north and east/west central axes would be extended and widened, with the width being no less than 100 meters. In June 1958, Beijing submitted to the Central authorities Key Points of the Tentative Master Plan of Beijing’s Urban Construction, proposing that all the major streets, such as the Chang’an Avenue, Qianmen Street and Di’anmen Street should be widened outward to 100–110 meters. In September of the same year, Explanations on the Master Plan of Beijing’s Urban Construction (draft) demanded the Chang’an Avenue, Qianmen Street and Gulou (Drum Tower) Street (S) to be widened to 120–140 meters and set the rule that the general trunk roads should be 80–120 meters wide and secondary trunk roads should be 60–80 meters wide. The State Planning Commission questioned the width of the roads on many occasions. Some people jeered at the practice of “five-storey buildings and 100-meter wide roads.” Some people mocked it as “wide-roadism.” But, Beijing was firm. On October 10, 1956, Peng Zhen said at the Standing Committee meeting of the CPC Beijing Municipal Committee: The traffic is very crowded in London, Tokyo, Paris and New York. It is said that automobiles move not as fast as walking in some places. There are some narrow streets in Moscow, which also have their problems. We must draw on these lessons. Roads should not be too narrow. In 1953, some people suggested that the avenue from Dongdan to Xidan should be 90 meters wide. But


10/15/2010 4:53:55 PM

394

BEIJING RECORD

some people mocked it as “wide-roadism.” Let wide-roadism be wideroadism. Don’t be afraid. We must see whether they conform to the needs of development. If a road is too narrow and a vehicle can only move 10 kilometers per hour, isn’t it a great waste? The problem in the future is not that the roads are too narrow but not too wide. We must not be blinded by the current situation in which there are less than 10,000 cars in the whole city. We must visualize that there would be hundreds of thousands and even a million vehicles running on the streets. One of these days, the number of vehicles would reach hundreds of thousands and even one million. When that comes, the 90-meter wide road is not too wide. Helicopters also need space to take off and land. The young people here will judge who is right and who is wrong 2 when you live to 80 or 90 years. You will arrive at a conclusion by then. As there were disputes over the width of roads, Beijing decided to start on the northern side of Chang’an Avenue. So the Telegraphic Mansion, the National Day Celebration projects such as the Cultural Palace of Nationalities, the Nationalities Hotel and the Aquatic Products Ministry Building (now the Commercial Service Center of the State Economic and Trade Commission) were all built on the northern side. The positions of the Xidan Department Store, the Science and Technology Hall and the Long-Distance Telephone Building were also determined. Household displacement was completed and land was vacated for some projects. Foundations had been laid for some projects. For others, the first storey structures were put up. But they were all suspended 1959–1961 due to economic difficulties. In 1958, the East and West Chang’an Avenue were widened and extended westward to Gucheng. The vehicle and non-vehicle lanes were linked without green patches in between. This was out of consideration of being prepared against war, according to Dong Guangqi, former vice-president of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design. The same was true with the demolition of the Twin-Pagoda Qingshou Temple. He said: Toward the end of the 1950s, wars were incessant in the world and the War against US Aggression and for Aiding Korea just ended. When soliciting opinions for the master construction plan, people from the army mentioned that the roads must be wide enough and the electrical wires should be put underground so that airplanes could land on any road during the time of war and helicopters can also land. If an atom bomb is dropped on Tiananmen, it could cause irreparable losses if the road is 2 Peng Zhen: On Problems of Beijing City Planning, October 10, 1956, in Selected Works of Peng Zhen, 1st edition, People’s Publishing House, May 1991.


10/15/2010 4:53:55 PM

FA Reading


395

narrow and the underground water pipelines are destroyed. If the roads are wide enough, there could be an isolation zone to prevent fires from spreading. It was no good to plant trees in the middle of the roads. Trees should be planted on the two sides of the roads, because people would not go to the middle of the road to rest and walk. This might be the main starting point for making the Chang’an Avenue a one-block road. As the trees had to be planted on the two sides, it is quite natural to remove the Twin-Pagoda Qingshou Temple in the middle of the road. It would be hard to explain why the temple was pulled down if we do not approach 3 the problem politically and militarily.

Chart of the road system of the Beijing city proper (1985) (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

While Beijing was planning wide roads, large cities in the west were developing one-way streets instead of widening roads. Beijing has long been following a model of “wide but sparse” two-way roads. The red-line plan fixed in the 1950s has been implemented till today. Roads for vehicles are usually 700–800 meters apart. In contrast, some western developed countries were then following the model of “narrow but dense” roads. In Washington, the vehicle roads are usually 100–150 meters



10/15/2010 4:53:56 PM

396

BEIJING RECORD

apart. Some western cities have made great efforts to develop one-way streets and put great efforts into building road networks and road systems. Technically, the raising of the drive-off capacity at road junctions is key to easing the traffic. The biggest problem of two-way traffic roads lies in the low drive-off capacity, because the traffic going straight is interfered by those turning left. There is no such problem with the one-way traffic. It is calculated that the capacity of one-way traffic roads is 50–70 percent more efficient than two-way traffic roads. After World War II, many western cities went for one-way traffic roads and traffic jams have been eased to some extent. New York created a miracle in 1949 when it introduced the one-way traffic; London also made great efforts to develop one-way traffic roads by taking advantage of its highly dense roads, converting two thirds of the roads into one-way streets. The roads are sparse in Beijing in that there are too many big “compounds.” Soviet experts once criticized the drive of building government courtyards in the 1950s. But the building of residential quarters inside the city was the creation of the Soviets. In the west, residential quarters are usually in the suburbs. Inside the cities are usually roadside houses, which occupy less land and meet the requirements of dense roads. But Soviet planners held that living quarters were better than roadside houses, because they were replete with all kinds of facilities that made life easier. A new contradiction cropped up. Residential quarters occupied large tracts of land and there was no way of making the road networks denser. It was therefore impossible to go for the convenient and economical one-way roads.

Chang’an Avenue in Beijing (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)


10/15/2010 4:53:58 PM

FA Reading


397

The red-line road planning is a regulation best executed to the letter in Beijing. The red-line referred to a warning line indicated in the planning chart on the distance between buildings on the two sides of a road. No new construction is allowed to go beyond the line. In the red-line chart, the roads are wide and straight, covering many cultural relics, hutongs or lanes, enclosed courtyards, historical streets and zones, which were planned to be demolished. Shichahai was also inside the red line and a road was planned to run through the “lung of Beijing.” The red line and the affected cultural heritage sites came into sharp conflicts. It was life and death, one or the other. In 1989, the famous Daoist temple of the Yuan Dynasty — the front gate to the Dongyue Temple — was demolished in road construction because it was inside the red line. For the same reason, the century-old Yuedong Xinguan — New Guangdong Guild Hall — was demolished in 1998. The red line plan was made by Zheng Zuwu, leader of the road group of the then BCCPC upon orders. In 1995, Zheng Zuwu, already advanced in age, told this author about the loss and gain in the city construction of Beijing, realizing that one-way road or dense road network was an effective way of solving the traffic problem. He said: The traffic in Beijing is very difficult at present. London has a population of 7 million and 2.8 million vehicles and the roads occupy 23 percent of the total area, the same as in Beijing. It is similar in Paris. Although London has so many people and vehicles, it has only several overpasses and only one kilometer of overhead road. But we have had more than 100 overpasses, yet the traffic has become more crowded. No country can make the growth of roads in positive proportion with the growth of vehicles. London has a dense road network, but our roads are wide. London relies on one-way road and automatic control. Two thirds of the roads in London are one-way roads. The central area of Beijing is so strained. Yet it has engaged in a large-scale renewal of the Wangfujing Street and wants to 4 build an Oriental Plaza. What’s to be done? How is the traffic to be 5 controlled?â•› At the 24th meeting of the Beijing Municipal People’s Committee on May 2, 1957, Liang Sicheng gave the following humorous comments on the width of the Chang’an Avenue: 4 Oriental Plaza was completed in 1999. It is situated on the northern side of the Chang’an Avenue in between downtown Wangfujing and the Dongdan Commercial Street. The massive buildings are very oppressive to the Forbidden City. It is one of the most disputed new buildings in Beijing. 5 Recollection by Zheng Zuwu in an interview with the author on April 26, 1995.


10/15/2010 4:53:58 PM

398

BEIJING RECORD

Many houses have been pulled down to make way for the West Chang’an Avenue. The result is that the avenue is so wide that the middle of the road lies idle and it has been made to park cars. I do not deem it proper to pull down houses to make way for a parking lot... The West Chang’an Avenue is so wide that it takes a short-distance runner 11 seconds to reach the other side and it would take me more than one minute to make it and 6 it would be more difficult for a women with bounded feet.

Final Demolition of the City Walls Into the 1960s, there was an unexpected turn in the relations between China and the Soviet Union. Once brotherly socialist countries, they came into sharp conflicts. The changes in the Sino-Soviet relations started in February 1956 when the Soviet Communist Party held its 20th National Congress. Soviet first Party secretary Khrushchev made a secret report at the congress, denouncing Stalin, and this touched off a great political storm in the International Communist Movement. Mao Zedong was agitated and raised the slogan of fighting against revisionism. On October 1, 1959, Khrushchev attended the celebrations of the 10th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. It was at that moment, he fell out with Mao Zedong on the issue of “peaceful coexistence.” By “co-existence,” Khrushchev meant to have a detente with the United States and sought support from socialist countries. Mao Zedong turned a cold shoulder to him. He held that Khrushchev came to China to act as a lobbyist for the United States to the detriment of the interests of China. He called appealing for détente with the United States “capitulationism.” Later on, Khrushchev dispensed criticism of China’s Great Leap Forward and the People’s Commune movement and that made Mao Zedong even more unhappy. In February 1960, Khrushchev called a political consultative conference of the Warsaw Treaty countries, continuing to sell his line of “peaceful coexistence.” Kang Sheng, who was sent by the Communist Party of China (CPC) as an observer, made a speech counter to the theme of the meeting according to Mao Zedong’s instructions. From then on, a debate of far-reaching influence between China and the Soviet Union and among Communist Parties of all countries started.

6 Xie Yong: Commemoration of the Centenary Birth of Liang Sicheng, Reminiscences Vol. II, 1st edition, China Workers Publishing House, January 2002.


10/15/2010 4:53:58 PM

FA Reading


399

At the beginning of 1960, while the border disputes between China and India were not eased, an anti-overseas Chinese drive spread in Indonesia. It was at that time that Khrushchev, in disregard of the persuasion by China, made a visit to Indonesia in February and stopped over in India for four days. In April, on the occasion of commemorating the 90th anniversary of the birth of Lenin, the Red Flag magazine and the People’s Daily published articles, giving a comprehensive, systematic and severe criticisms of the ideological line of the Soviet Party and its domestic and foreign policies by invoking the classics of Marx, Engels and Lenin. In June, a CPC delegation and 51 other fraternal parties attended the 3rd National Congress of the Worker’s Party of Romania. During the congress, Khrushchev launched an attack against the CPC delegation, which counterattacked immediately, giving him a tit-for-tat. In July, the Soviet government notified the Chinese government that it would withdraw all the Soviet experts from China and torn to pieces 343 expert contracts and supplementary contracts. The moves disrupted China’s plans of economic construction. It was at a time when China was in a three-year difficult period, just like adding frost to snow. Mao Zedong was indignant, saying: “(The Soviets) are not as good as French bourgeoisie, who has a sense of commercial ethics.” In October 1961, when the Soviet Party held its 22nd National Congress, Khrushchev launched another attack against Stalin for his personal cult. The congress decided to remove the remains of Stalin from the Lenin Mausoleum at the Red Square and cremated it. The CPC delegation headed by Zhou Enlai quitted the meeting in protest and made a special trip to the Red Square to present a wreath to the tomb of Stalin. Starting from March 1963, a debate of unrivaled scale between the two parties started, centering around the general line for the International Communist Movement. The debate did not end until October 1964 when Khrushchev was stripped of all his leading positions in the Party. But still, there was not a turn for the better in the relationship. On the evening of November 7, 1964, when the Soviet government gave a reception in celebration of the 47th anniversary of the October Revolution, Soviet Defense Minister Marshal Rodion Malinovsky said to Marshal He Long who was a member of the visiting Chinese Party and Government Delegation to the occasion: “Now that we have got rid of Khrushchev, you should follow our example to get rid of Mao Zedong so that we would come to good terms.”


10/15/2010 4:53:58 PM

400

BEIJING RECORD

Zhou Enlai, head of the delegation, protested right away. The Soviet Party’s first secretary Brezhnev had to apologize. The CPC Central Committee arrived at a conclusion that the Soviet Union was following a line of “Khrushchevism without Khrushchev.” The relations between the two countries became intense thereafter. The Soviet Union deployed a million troops along the Sino-Soviet borders and sent armies to the People’s Republic of Mongolia, all pointing to the possibilities of being ready to attack China. In China, voices were rising higher and higher against revisionism. China’s economic development, which had just rehabilitated, entered into a special period. According to a military geographical zoning conceived, China designated the coastal areas as the first line; the middle part, the second line; and the interior in West China, the third line. On August 19, 1964, Li Fuchun, Luo Ruiqing and Bo Yibo reported to the central authorities: all new construction projects should be undertaken in the third line, scattered in hidden areas close to mountains; important factories, key institutions of higher learning and research organizations should be moved in entity or in parts to the third line in a planned manner; no large and medium-sized reservoirs should be built; preparations should be made to constructing subways in Beijing and consideration should be given to Shanghai and Shenyang with regard to the construction of subways. The report, after approval, would be incorporated in the 1965 annual plan and the third five-year development 7 plan. It was implemented at an alarming speed. The ancient city walls of Beijing came to their end at last. They would give way to the new Beijing subway. In January 1965, engineering departments, in preparation against war, wrote to the central authorities on the construction of the subway. The report said that “the construction of the subway is to serve military purposes and solves the traffic problems. As most parts of the city walls have been demolished or collapsed, the subway would be built on the foundation of the city walls. This conforms to both military needs and avoids the dismantling of large number of houses. The engineering work will not obstruct the normal traffic of the city. It facilitates the construction and lowers cost.”

7 Song Yichang: Review and Reflection on the Third-Line Construction, Strategy and Management, Issue No. 3, 1996.


10/15/2010 4:53:59 PM

FA Reading


401

Chart of the Beijing subway (Source: Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1986)

The report was approved by the central authorities. Chairman Mao 8 Zedong gave the instruction: “Comrade Yang Yong , you are the commander of the (military) commission. (I) keenly hope you would have it meticulously designed and constructed. There might be errors and failures in the course 9 of construction. Just heed them and correct them.” On July 1, 1965, work started to build the subway. The subway engineering bureau and the railway corps were responsible for the engineering while Beijing was responsible for housing removal. The demolition of the remaining city walls and Gates was undertaken by the Railway Corps. In the first phase, the inner walls in the southern part of the city, the Xuanwumen Gate, Chongwenmen Gate and Xu Beihong Memorial Hall (removed) were demolished, vacating an area of 23.6 kilometers in length. The second phase involved the demolition of the city walls from the Beijing Railway Station, the Jianguomen Gate, Dongzhimen Gate, Andingmen Gate, Xizhimen Gate and Fuxingmen Gate, clearing space of 16.04 kilometers in length. Before the start of the subway project, Zhou Enlai drove around the city walls, giving the instruction to preserve the Zhengyangmen Gate and the 10 Arrow tower. Apparently, Zhou Enlai had seen the importance of this group of ancient structures to the Tiananmen Square. As early as in September

8 Yang Yong was the deputy chief of staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army and Commander of the Beijing Garrison and leader of the Beijing Subway Leading Group. 9 Selected Works of Mao Zedong since the Founding of New China, Vol. 11, 1st edition, Central Documentation Press, August 1996. 10 Recollection by Zhou Yongyuan during an interview with the author on November 16, 1993.


10/15/2010 4:53:59 PM

402

BEIJING RECORD

Zhengyangmen in 1915 when the barbican was removed and archways built on the two sides, (by courtesy of the library of the School of Architecture, Qinghua University)

1958 when the National Day Celebration projects were discussed, Zhou Enlai said that Zhengyangmen Gate and the Arrow tower could not be 11 demolished in the expansion of the Tiananmen Square. In May 1966 when the Cultural Revolution took place, there was a drive to eliminate all that were feudal and superstitious. The Observatory of the Ming and Qing Dynasty was listed among the targets for demolition. But Zhou Enlai issued an instruction on December 21, 1968, saying that the 12 observatory must not be demolished and the subway must bypass it. In March 1969, China and the Soviet Union clashed at the Zhenbao (Treasure) Island. In April, Chairman Mao Zedong called for readiness to fight. This was followed by a drive to dig air-raid shelters. From mid-October to mid-November, an average of 300,000 people participated in dismantling the city walls, and used the bricks to build air-raid shelters. Such activities for the preparations against war lasted for a number of years during the Cultural Revolution. That was the second drive to demolish city walls and city gates in a well-organized and planned way since the founding of New China. The 11 Liang Sicheng’s work notes, September 13, 1958, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 12 Records of Beijing Cultural Relics and Museums (1), compiled by the Beijing Municipal Cultural Heritage Administration, 1994.


10/15/2010 4:54:00 PM

FA Reading


403

Current view of Zhengyangmen and its arrow tower (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

Ancient observatory in Beijing (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

first took place in 1958. During the first drive, all the outer city walls were basically demolished, leaving only parts of it. But the second drive resulted in a complete destruction of the inner city walls. Xuanwumen Gate. Xuanwumen is located on the western section of the southern wall. It was built in the 17th year of Emperor Yong Le when Beijing’s southern walls were expanded. Before the Zheng Tong era the gate continued to use the original Yuan name of Shunchengmen, while it was referred to as Shunzhimen by the commoners. During the Zheng Tong era,


10/15/2010 4:54:01 PM

404

BEIJING RECORD

the gate tower was completely rebuilt, with a barbican, a gate bridge control tower, and an arrow tower added. Taking the new name Xuanwu (meaning 13 prowess demonstration) from Zhang Heng’s Verse to Eastern Capital, which means “the martial etiquette is to show off.” The gate was demolished in 1965. Chongwenmen Gate. Chongwenmen is located on the eastern section of the southern part of the inner city, and is commonly called “Hademen.” Built in the 17th year of the Yong Le era, and before the Zheng Tong era it was called “Wenmingmen” or Civilization Gate, which was the original name used during the Yuan Dynasty. After the Zheng Tong era, a name was 14 taken from Zuo Zhuan, or Chronicle of Zuo, which has the words meaning “upholding culture is a virtue.” It was also during the Zheng Tong era that a barbican was added, a gate bridge control tower and an arrow tower were built. It was demolished in 1966. Dongzhimen Gate. Dongzhimen is located on the northern section of the eastern inner city wall. It was built on the location of Chongrenmen during the Khanbaliq period of the Yuan Dynasty. In the 17th year of Emperor Yong Le, it was given the current name. The demolition of the gate was mooted in 1957 when an airport was built in the eastern outskirts of the city. As it stood in the way of the road leading to the airport and if it was not removed, the rebuilding of roads

Tower of Andingmen ready to be dismantled (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969)

13 Zhang Heng (78–139 AD), was a famous scientist and man of literature. He invented the world’s first hydraulic-powered armillary sphere — Tr. 14 Zuo Zhuan, or Chronicle of Zhuo, traditionally attributed to Zuo Qiuming of the Warring States Period, is the earliest Chinese work of narrative history and covers the period from 722 BC to 468 BC — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:54:02 PM

FA Reading


405

Andingmen arrow tower soon to be dismantled (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969)

would cost a lot more money. On May 2, 1957, at the 24th meeting of the Beijing Municipal People’s Committee, there was a heated dispute over the destiny of the city gate. Liang Sicheng stuck to his ground when he said: I heard that there is the intention of demolishing Dongzhimen Gate in order to build a road. I think it needs a second thought. The city gate is the only structure built with Nanmu wood left over from the Ming Dynasty. In 1934, when Yuan Liang was Mayor of Beijing, a Japanese carpenter offered to donate 20,000 yuan for repairing the gate. We should not treat these ancient things as antiques. They play the role of decorating the city. Many cities in foreign countries pay great attention to decorations in order that they would not look monotonous. We should pay attention to this. Of course it is not necessary to spend much money on building such gates. We should make better use of the existing structures to serve 15 the city. However, Liang Sicheng’s success was short-lived. In 1965, Dongzhimen Gate was demolished.

15 Xie Yong: Commemoration of the Centenary Birth of Liang Sicheng, Reminiscences Vol. II, 1st edition, China Workers Publishing House, January 2002.


10/15/2010 4:54:02 PM

406

BEIJING RECORD

Young people resting by the moat near the arrow tower of Andingmen which will be dismantled soon (photo by Luo Zhewen,1969)

Arrow tower of Deshengmen and the Beijing Second Ring Road (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

Andingmen Gate. Andingmen is located on the western section of the northern inner city wall. It was built when Khanbaliq’s Anzhenmen was moved south during the early Ming Dynasty, subsequently renamed Andingmen, meaning “peace and tranquility under heaven.” General Xu Da of the Ming Dynasty built the second defense line 2.5 kilometers from the old city wall when he was repairing the Yuan’s city walls. In 1371, the city walls were rebuilt and the northern city wall and the original Anzhen and Jiande gates were abandoned and the city wall built by Xu Da was heightened and the eastern side gate was called Andingmen gate. In 1969, Andingmen Gate and the arrow tower were pulled down. Then, 31 years later, cultural heritage expert Luo Zhewen published an article Dismantlement of Andingmen Gate. In the article, he said: Of all the city gates, except Qianmen, only Xizhimen and Andingmen, together with their arrow towers, were preserved till the heyday of the Cultural Revolution. In the summer of 1969, when I was trying to get a photo of the scenes of dismantling Xizhimen, I soon thought of the destiny of Andingmen. So I immediately went there by bike. I rode along the outer side of the moat and sometimes I walked, viewing the quiet moat. The water was clear


10/15/2010 4:54:04 PM

FA Reading


407

Arrow tower of Deshengmen (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

and the trees on the banks were waving in the winds. Occasionally, I saw boys and girls not interested in the Cultural Revolution sitting by the river. When I first came, there was no action. The city gate, the arrow tower and most of the barbicans were there. When I went there the second time, the scaffolding was put up. When I went there the third time, only half of the city gate was left and scaffolding was put up around the arrow tower. As I was very busy, it was quite a long time before I made my fourth journey 16 there, when I was surprised to see everything gone. Deshengmen Gate. Deshengmen is located on the western section of the northern inner city wall. Its name was changed from Khanbaliq’s “Jiandemen” to “Deshengmen” after the Ming army took the city, meaning the Ming “triumphed over by virtue.” The barbican and bridge control tower were removed in 1915 when a round-the-city railway was built. The city tower was demolished in 1921 when the bridge frame was decayed. The platform and the archway were removed in 1955 to expand the opening of the gate. In 1979, when the gate was on the verge of total destruction, Zheng Xiaoxie, member of the CPPCC National Committee, wrote a letter that changed the gate’s destiny. The letter read:

16 Luo Zhewen: Dismantlement of Andingmen Gate, China Cultural Relics News, 4th edition, February 21, 2001.


10/15/2010 4:54:06 PM

408

BEIJING RECORD

Vice-President Chen Yun, I heard that Beijing is soon to demolish a structure of the Ming Dynasty, the arrow tower of Deshengmen. I propose that the move should be stopped immediately as this was an ancient building. 1. Beijing is a time-honored city known in the world for many scenic spots and historical sites, with many ancient structure having their unique styles and features. For the present, apart from protecting well the scenic spots and historical sites in the city districts and suburbs, it is necessary to preserve some medium-sized and small scenic spots and cultural heritage in the whole city districts and suburbs, which form a harmonious whole with the main part of the scenic spots and historical sites. Deshengmen’s arrow tower is the only architecture of the Ming Dynasty that has been left along the new round-the-city ring road in addition to Qianmen’s arrow tower. If it is not dismantled but repaired instead, it will add to the landscape of the new round-the-city ring road and the northern part of the city. 2. Deshengmen is situated at the end of the road to and from such scenic areas as the Ming Tombs, which is the only and the most important matching scenery along this tourist circuit. It is also a borrowed scene for the Shichahai in the south, as well as an important scenic spot echoing the drum and bell towers. It would come into view from different angles whether you are on the new round-the-city road or on other roads on the left. With this ancient structure of the Ming Dynasty inside the new groups of houses, so long as the space and environment are well planned and controlled, it would add to the beauty, giving great prominence to the Beijing style. It makes a big difference to preserve it or to dismantle it as seen from the landscape effect of the whole city. 3. The dismantling of the arrow tower might be necessitated by the traffic. But the Arc de Triomphe in Paris was not removed due to traffic reasons. This is worth our learning. Scenic spots and historical sites are resources, very important tourism resources. So it should not be destroyed. 4. There are two ways of destroying scenic spots and historical sites: One is to dismantle them or rebuild them. The other is not to dismantle them but put up buildings in disorder around them and sabotage the spatial environment. The White Dagoba (built in 1096 and rebuilt in 1271) is a lesson to learn. Foreign countries such as Japan strictly forbid the indiscriminate building of houses. Some cities in Europe have even listed buildings of over a hundred years old as targets for protection to serve tourism. There is an urgent need for city planning, cultural heritage protection and woods and gardens work to cooperate


10/15/2010 4:54:06 PM

FA Reading


409

with each other and make concerted efforts to protect scenic spots and historical sites. The city planning department should take the lead. 5. On such problems as the dismantling of the arrow tower of Deshengmen and the buildings around the White Dagoba, it is necessary to hold a forum of leaders, experts and professors in such areas as tourism, cultural heritage, construction, gardening, traffic and city planning to hear their views. What is stated above is my own opinion. Criticism is welcome if anything is wrong. Zheng Xiaoxie Member of the National Committee Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) 17 February 14, 1979â•›

Scaffolding put up for dismantling the tower of Andingmen (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969)

Xizhimen Gate. Xizhimen is located on the northern section of the western inner city wall, built on the site of Yuan Khanbaliq’s Heyimen. During the 17th year of Emperor Yong Le it was changed to its current name from its western location. The city gate was opened once every midnight after the gate was closed in the evening, to allow the water wagon to pass 17 By courtesy of Zheng Xiaoxie.


10/15/2010 4:54:07 PM

410

BEIJING RECORD

through to deliver Jade Spring water from the western hills to the imperial palace. It is therefore also known as “water gate.”

Xizhimen in the process of being dismantled (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969)

The barbican of Xizhimen Gate is the only one in the shape of a square and the only one preserved completely before the subway was built. In 1953, for the convenience of traffic, Beijing intended to demolish the city gate and arrow tower of Xizhimen, but it met with strong opposition from Liang Sicheng. Liang Sicheng proposed to open archways on the two sides of the city gate for the traffic and the city gates, arrow tower and the barbican should be preserved inside the roundabout. The proposal was adopted and Xizhimen Gate stayed intact. But it did not last long.

Heyimen sorted out (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969)


Fillings in the Heyimen cleared (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969)

10/15/2010 4:54:09 PM

FA Reading


411

In 1969, Xizhimen, together with its arrow tower and bridge control tower, was totally demolished. In May of the same year, when the arrow tower was being dismantled, a thin-bricked gate of barbican of the Yuan Khanbaliq’s Heyimen was unearthed, together with the remaining walls of the barbican about one meter high. Some stone equipment against fire attack was also unearthed. This discovery provided precious materials for studying the city gate structure and the history of the Yuan Dynasty. In the third month of the 18th year of Emperor Zhi Zheng of the Yuan Dynasty, a rebel army known as “Hongjinjun” (Red Scarf Army) led by Mao Gui entered Hebei from Shandong and pressed close to the capital. The Yuan ruler issued orders to amass all troops around to strengthen the defense of the city. Then this peasant uprising army was met with a surprise attack by the Yuan army at a place about 50 kilometers from the city and gave up their plan to attack the capital and returned to Shandong. The Yuan ruler, fearing the return of the rebels, issued orders to add barbicans to all the 11 city gates and build bridges over the moat. It took a year to complete all the projects. The unearthed barbican was poor in quality and there was even no foundation laid. This shows that they were built in a hurry. The archaeological team unearthing the barbican at Heyimen reported to Guo Moruo, the then president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and an archeologist himself, hoping that he would come out to call for protection. But the report received no response. Soon, Heyimen was pulled down. It turned out that Guo Moruo was at the time in a very difficult position, because he was subject to criticisms at any time as he confessed many times and still did not pass. After the end of the Cultural Revolution, Guo Moruo 18 said: “How can I protect Heyimen since I could hardly protect myself.” In July 1971, with the approval of Zhou Enlai, Guo Moruo added a comment on a story released by the Xinhua News Agency on the archaeological findings in various places: “The discovery of the barbican of Heyimen is attributable to the workers who were dismantling the city 19 walls.” This shows that Guo set much store by the discovery. In fact, he was not praising the workers for dismantling the city gate. Rather, he was commending the act of reporting this to the department in charge. Luo Zhewen took a group of photos of Xizhimen while it was being pulled down. He recalled: 18 Luo Zhewen: Dismantlement of Xizhimen, China Cultural Relics News, Page 4, January 3, 2001. 19 Zhou Changnian: Report on the Archaeological Findings 26 Years Ago, Journalism Studies, Issue No. 20, 1997, Xinhua News Agency Research Office.


10/15/2010 4:54:09 PM

412

BEIJING RECORD

Heyimen of Khanbaliq discovered in the process of dismantling Xizhimen (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969)

In the summer of 1969, Xizhimen met its destiny. In order to build a subway, the barbican of Xizhimen must be removed. Xizhimen, which had already become a target of criticism as something feudal, was left intact during the Cultural Revolution as it was very hard to dismantle the gate. In addition, the Ministry of Culture collapsed and no one was in charge and it had to be left alone. At that time, I had no work to do. What I could do was to show some concern over the protection of cultural heritage together with some of my colleagues, trying to contribute what we could, such as the protection of the ancient observatory and the protection of the Bingling Temple in Gansu. One day, when I was passing by Xizhimen, I saw scaffolding had already been put up, apparently not for repair. I found out from the workers that they were going to pull the gate down. I could not do anything, because it was unlike the ancient observatory, which had its scientific value and I could report to Premier Zou Enlai. So, I could only take up my camera to take some photos as a memory. First, I took the photos of the scaffoldings. Some days later, I went there again to take some photos of the remaining pillars. Then, I took the picture of the bridge control tower. Lastly I took many photos of 20 the ruins of this Heyimen of the Yuan Dynasty. 28 years later, Guo Yuan, a “rightist” who had his disgraced title stripped later and was involved in the labor of the dismantling, had this to recall: 20 Luo Zhewen: Dismantlement of Xizhimen, China Cultural Relics News, Page 4, January 3, 2001.


10/15/2010 4:54:10 PM

FA Reading


413

Barbican of Heyimen of Khanbaliq restored (by courtesy of Fu Xinian)

At the turn of winter and spring in early 1969, I was working at the No. 3 workshop of the Xindu Radiator Machinery Plant at Xinfeng Street, outside Deshengmen. I was forced to labor in the plant for one and a half year, and stayed in the plant for nine and a half years, in the capacity as a temp, a “rightist” with the label taken off and a person released from forced labor. One day, we suddenly received an order, demanding all the workers, totaling 60 to 70, of the No. 3 workshop to dismantle the barbican of Xizhimen. The barbican had four walls in the shape of a jar. The east and west walls were made of bricks and the south and north walls were made of earth. The east wall was already removed, leaving only the west, south and north walls. It did not cost much to remove the north earthen wall, which took about several days to remove. Then some people withdrew. The remaining people began to dismantle the south wall. It was not so pressing and so more people withdrew, leavInner structure of the bridge control tower of the barbican revealed ing only 10 to 20 people. when Xizhimen was being dismantled (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969)


10/15/2010 4:54:11 PM

414

BEIJING RECORD

The south wall looked like earth plus lime. But when we cut it, we found that we were unable to do so. As it was difficult to remove the south wall, we shifted to the west wall. ... Then spring came. We took off our woolen sweaters. There were only two persons assigned to dismantle the west wall. One was me and the other was Jiang Ying, an artist who drew the illustrations for the book Changes of 60 Years. Both were former “rightists.” We were free from control and worked as we liked and no one cared about us even if we did Ancient architectural expert viewing the inner structure of nothing at all. We were like Heyimen (photo by Luo Zhewen, 1969) two captive birds released from the cage, flying freely over the dilapidated city wall. We threw bricks down the west wall. They were made in the Ming Dynasty, smaller than normal. As the work went on, we found that the bricks at the bottom layer did not feel the same. I called Jiang Ying over to observe it carefully. We found that the bricks underneath were of yellowish blue, not like the pure blue bricks of the Ming Dynasty. It was one third longer and one third wider than the Ming bricks, but half thinner. Jiang Ying said: “Don’t bother. Just work on.” But I said: “We should just remove the bricks layer by layer and not dig too deep. Otherwise, if it were hollow beneath, we would fall into it.” Jiang Ying agreed. After throwing a few bricks, Jiang Ying went to buy ice-sticks. I saw an expanse of thin and fragile yellowish blue bricks. I did not know that layer was the Heyimen of the Yuan Dynasty... In the afternoon, we were sent again to dismantle the city wall. It was a great mess at the foot of the city walls, bricks, big and small, complete and broken, piling up like a hill. Although it was a thoroughfare, traffic was banned. Pedestrians also bypassed it. Working in the barbican were only Jiang Ying and me. After throwing a few bricks, Jiang Ying went up to the top of the city wall to see the sight of spring, when trees were turning green. The spring breeze was very pleasant. I went on throwing the bricks. It was about a little over two o’clock in the afternoon, a crescent-shaped hollow cave was revealed from under the bricks, about


10/15/2010 4:54:12 PM

FA Reading


415

more than one meter from the ground. I jumped into the cave and push it, the wall collapsed eastward, revealing a small city cave, which was the barbican gate. I was surprised. What was it? I was the first to get into the cave, which had been hidden from the sun for nearly 600 years. The cave was very damp. Suddenly I spotted some inscriptions on the south wall. Though I liked history, especially the history of the Ming and Qing dynasties, I read books simply out of interest and had shallow knowledge about the official system of the Ming Dynasty... The inscription was the official titles of those who led the building of the wall and I could ascertain the characters of “east” or “west,” although I was not sure if they were referred to “east garrison commander” or “west garrison commander,” or other titles. Following them were seven or eight names. I presumed that they were the leaders commanding the construction of the city walls. These names absolutely could not be found in the history of the Ming Dynasty. I still remembered the last few words, which read “10th year of Emperor Hong Wu of the Great Ming Dynasty.” I thought that Ming was founded in 1368 and the tenth year of Emperor Hong Wu would be 1377. This inspired in me the sense of nostalgia and the numerous historical events in the past 592 years. I found the writing on the wall very wet, just newly written. This aroused my curiosity, which drove away my nostalgia. I ran out of the gate and called: “Jiang Ying, come and see, be quick!” But Jiang was nowhere to be found. I shouted again. From a far distance came the reply: “Guo, what’s up?” I said: “Come over here. I found a city gate passageway!” Jiang was very fat. He tried to run as fast as he could, but still he moved very slowly. When he came near me, I pulled him to the cave, saying: “There are written characters in the cave.” We entered the cave. But it was a pity that all the characters were gone. Jiang asked me: “Where are the characters?” When I turned around and I found that the characters were really gone. I was quite perplexed at the time. But later on, I thought that it was already nearly 600 years and the dampness of the cave had made it possible to preserve the characters. When they came into contact with the air and the light, they were sure to disappear. I told him: “There were really written characters there. But where have they gone?” Jiang Ying smiled: “You are lying.” I vowed that I had seen them. There had really been there a while ago. Then we found there was a heap of earth in the southeast and northeast corners of the cave, each covering about 4 or 5 meters. The traces of ramming in the northwest corner were very special. It was in the size of a bowl. Now it was near the off hour and we left. Back home, I thought that the barbican surrounded the small city gate and it was really a city in the city.


10/15/2010 4:54:12 PM

416

BEIJING RECORD

The second day, more people were sent to dismantle the wall. Jiang and I went, too. When we got to Xizhimen in the morning, I first entered the small city gate passageway. I found two people from the city cultural heritage administration (I presumed that people on duty at the nearby neighborhood community reported it to the administration). There were only two heaps of earth in the cave and nothing else. But the ramming trace aroused the attention of the cultural heritage workers. People said that it was done by the ram of the Yuan Dynasty, because the ram of the Ming dynasty was bigger. I thought that it was just ten years after the Yuan Dynasty was conquered when Emperor Hong Wu came to the throne and I’m afraid that there were no rams in the Ming Dynasty and so the Yuan ram was used instead. I should have told the cultural heritage administration about the characters that were gone and that would be very significant in dating the city wall. But, as I was a just released forced-laborer, it would be very awkward when they asked my capacity. In addition, I saw such disorder in the country and everything was dilapidating to the extent of bankruptcy, I would not take the trouble to report this. As more people came that day, work proceeded fast. By noon, a small city gate was revealed on the ground, which looked familiar as if I had seen it before. Suddenly Zhang Zeduan’s painting Along the 21 River During the Qingming Festivalâ•› came to my mind. The thing in front of me was the same as that in the picture. The city gate was narrow in the upper part but wider in the lower part and over the passageway, there were three characters: “He Yi Men”.

Southeast corner arrow tower in the inner city surviving the subway project (photo by Wang Jun, 2002) 21 Along the River During the Qingming Festival, a 5.28-meter long panoramic painting attributed to the Song Dynasty artist Zhang Zeduan (1085–1145), which captures the daily life of people at the time in the capital of Song, in today’s Kaifeng in Central China’s Henan Province — Tr.


10/15/2010 4:54:14 PM

FA Reading


417

A remaining section of the inner city wall at the Chongwenmen Dongdajie (photo by Wang Jun, 2002)

At that time, archaeologists Xia Nai and Su Bingqi and architect expert Liang Sicheng were down and out in the Cultural Revolution. I only heard that Guo Moruo came over in the afternoon. The cultural heritage administration sent people to take pictures and the work of dismantling the city wall continued non-stop. The bricks were thrown everywhere on the ground. In just one day, the Heyimen, a rare and fairly 22 complete structure of the Yuan Dynasty, was flattened. Similar to the discovery of Heyimen, more than 10 other sites of the Yuan Dynasty were discovered at Houyingfang, Houtaoyuan, Huokou or Breach of the old Gulou Street, a coal depot at Andingmen, east of Deshengmen and the site of the Beijing No. 106 Middle School. Among them, the site at the Houyingfang Hutong were the most important. It was a large residential house, elegantly built. It had a main courtyard and two 23 flank courtyards, totaling 2,000 square meters. “Treasures” hidden in the city walls were also found when an opening was made in the city wall at Andingmen in the eastern district in 1952. Unearthed was a tablet erected in the Yuan Dynasty in memory of Wang Dechang, an official in charge of grain transport. The tablet recorded the system of grain storage at the time, having a very high historical value.

22 Guo Yuan: Mr. Liang Sicheng did not see the Discovery of Heyimen, 1997, on the Er’xiantang Library website. 23 Forty Years of Archaeological Finds in Beijing, 1st edition, compiled by the Beijing Institute of Cultural Heritage, Beijing Yanshan Publishing House, January 1990.


10/15/2010 4:54:16 PM

418

BEIJING RECORD

Unearthed together with the stone tablet were many logs and beams bearing 24 intelligible profiles of color paintings. Fuchengmen. Fuchengmen is located at the midpoint of the western inner city wall. Its original site was Yuan Khanbaliq’s Pingzemen. It was still informally known as Pingzemen by the commoners even after its name changed to Fuchengmen. It was mended during the 14th year of Emperor Hong Wu era of the early Ming Dynasty. Rebuilding started in the 1st year of Emperor Zheng Tong and was completed in the 4th year. Taking its new name “Fucheng” from a chapter titled Zhou Guan, or Offices in the Zhou Dynasty, in Shangshu, or Book of 25 Documents , which described the then official system that were divided into six departments and each having its Sothern end of the western inner city wall rebuilt in March 1988 (photo by Zhang Yanhui) own responsibilities and they coordinated with each other for the benefit of the common people. As it was the gateway leading to West Hill, where coal reserves were crucial to warming Beijing’s homes during winter, many carts carrying coals would enter the city through Fuchengmen. Fuchengmen’s barbican gate’s archway had the symbol of a plum flower engraved (plum flower, which pronounces Mei in Chinese, identical with the pronunciation of coal in Chinese). This gives rise to the old Beijing saying “Fuchengmen’s plum blossoms announce the arrival of the warming new spring.” It was dismantled in 1965. Arrow tower at southwest corner of the inner city. It was situated at the meeting point of Fuxingmen Street (S) and the Xuanwumen Avenue (W). Similar to the arrow tower in the southeast corner of the city, it was built between 1436 and 1439 or the 1st year to the 4th year of Emperor Zheng Tong of the Ming Dynasty. The top of the tower was broken in 1920 and the whole tower was removed in the 1930s, only the platform was preserved then. 26 The remaining platform was demolished in 1969. 24 Shu De: Historical Heritage Sites Unearthed in Beijing, Beijing Daily, Page 3, December 24, 1956. 25 Shangshu, or Book of Documents, is known as the earliest historical records of ancient China, dating nearly 3,000 years — Tr. 26 The classic story about Beijing comes from Beijing City Walls and City Gates of the Ming and Qing Dynasties by Zhang Xiande (not published).


10/15/2010 4:54:16 PM

FA Reading


419

Through all the historical periods, especially after the Beijing subway was built, only two city gates have been left, that is, Zhengyangmen and its arrow tower and the arrow tower of Deshengmen. The arrow tower in the southeast corner of the inner city also remained. There are only two sections of the city walls remaining, in between Chongwenmen and the southeast arrow tower and the southern part of the western inner city wall. They have been left because they are situated at a turn of the subway. Regretfully, however, the remaining section at the southern The bastion tower built on the watch tower after the part of the western inner city wall southern section of the western inner city wall was rebuilt (photo by Wang Jun, 2002) has been made an out-and-out fake antique. Most of the rammed earth had been removed and the surface was renewed. But the form became quite different. The repairers seemed to attempt to design it as a bastion tower at the meeting point of the inner and outer city walls. Yet the original bastion towers were connected with the watch towers of the inner city instead of being on the watch towers.

Connection of the bastion tower at the joint of the southern section of the western inner city wall and outer city wall and the inner city wall watch tower


10/15/2010 4:54:18 PM


Xuanwumen

Chongwenmen

Zhengyangmen

Railway passages on the two sides of the Passages opened on the two sides of the city gate barbican and the remaining barbican to make way for a road

May 1950

Dec. 1932

1920–1921

Arrow tower

Barbican

1965

City gate tower

Road construction

Demolished as a dangerous structure and timber sold

Railway construction

Arrow tower platform demolished together and bricks were used to line the hidden ditches at Nanheyan

Railway building by the British army, with two archways opened on both sides of the barbican

1901

Barbican

Destroyed by the Eight Allied Forces

1900

Arrow tower

Subway construction

1966

City gate tower

Destroyed by the gun fire of the Eight Allied Forces in 1900; rebuilt in 1903; rebuilt again in 1915; retained in 1965 upon the instructions of Zhou Enlai; overhauled in 1978; listed in the third group of cultural relics for national priority protection on Jan. 13, 1988

Burnt by the Eight Allied Forces in 1900; rebuilt in 1903; preserved in 1965 upon the instructions of Zhou Enlai; listed in the third group of key cultural heritage sites for national protection on Jan. 13, 1988; overhauled in 1991

Notes

1915

Road construction

Causes for dismantling or destruction

Barbican

Arrow tower

City gate tower

Time of demolition or destruction

The following table lists the city gates in the inner and outer cities that were dismantled or destroyed:

420 BEIJING RECORD

10/15/2010 4:54:18 PM

Inner City


1915 1921

Barbican

City gate tower

Ibid. Ibid.

Barbican

1969

City gate tower

Arrow tower

1915

Barbican

Arrow tower

Ibid.

Arrow tower

1969

1915

City gate tower

Barbican

1965

City gate tower 1927

1915

Barbican

Arrow tower

1958

Arrow tower

Oct. 1956

a

Ibid.

Ibid.

Subway construction

Round-the-city railway construction

Platform and archway dismantled in 1955

Means decayed and dismantled as dangerous structure

Heyimen and barbican discovered while dismantling was going on

Preserved upon the appeal in 1979 by Zheng Xiaoxie, CPPCC National Committee member

Bridge control tower also dismantled

Zhenwu Temple south of the arrow tower demolished in 1958

All the wooden materials are nanmu


Ibid.

Subway construction


Dismantled as dangerous structure and wood sold

Subway construction

Construction of round-the-city railway

Demolished as a dangerous structure when building an underground sewage pipeline

Falling in disrepair and materials preserved


Inner City

a The Beijing round-the-city railway started in June 1915 and was completed on December 24. It started at Xizhimen and through Deshengmen, Andingmen, Dongzhimen and Chaoyangmen to end at Zhengyangmen to link up with the Beijing-Zhangjiakou and Beijing-Shenyang railways. After the New China was founded, the railway was demolished.

Xizhimen

Deshengmen

Andingmen

Dongzhimen

Chaoyangmen

City gate tower

FA Reading

421

10/15/2010 4:54:19 PM


Inner City

Outer City

Zuo’anmen

Yongdingmen

N/W corner Arrow tower

N/E corner Arrow tower

S/E corner Arrow tower

S/W corner Arrow tower

Fuchengmen

1969

Tower platform

Subway construction

Destroyed by the Eight Allied Forces

Road construction and the use of bricks and earth

Dismantled for disrepair

Subway construction

Dismantled for disrepair

Road construction

Dismantled for falling in disrepair

Subway construction


1953

Barbican

1950s

City gate tower Ibid.

1951

Barbican

Arrow tower

Ibid.

Arrow tower

Ibid.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Road construction

b

Road and waterway construction

City gate tower Toward the end Road construction of the 1950s

1900

Arrow tower

1969

Platform

1953

1930s

Arrow tower

Platform

1953

Barbican

1920

1935

Arrow tower

Arrow tower

1965

City gate tower


Collapsed in half in 1950

Only platform left

Escaped from dismantling as the subway makes a turn at the place and if it was dismantled, it would affect the operation of the subway. Listed among the second group of cultural relics for national priority protection in Feb. 23, 1982

Only platform left

Arrow tower platform also dismantled

Only platform preserved. Bridge control tower also dismantled

Notes

422 BEIJING RECORD

10/15/2010 4:54:19 PM


Mar. 1955 1955 Aug. 1957 Ibid. 1930s 1953

Barbican

Arrow tower

City tower platform

Arrow tower

City tower platform

1956

City gate tower

Arrow tower

Ibid.

Barbican

1952

City gate tower Ibid.

Dec. 1951

Arrow tower

1950s

Barbican

1958

City gate tower

Arrow tower

1950s

Barbican

1950s

City gate tower 1930s

Dec. 1953

Barbican

Arrow tower

Mid- 1950s

End of 1950s

Arrow tower

City gate tower

Road construction and use of bricks

In disrepair

Ibid.

Putting up overhead wires

Road construction

Demolished as dangerous structure

Road construction

Ibid.

Ibid.

Road construction and the use of bricks


Road construction

Construction of Beijing Railway Sation

Road construction, use of bricks and earth

Beyond repair

In disrepair, demolished to make way for Most part collapsed in 1950; turn-up eaves damaged a road

Demolished as dangerous structure

Ibid.

Ibid.


Outer City

b Wang Dongcen said in his manuscript in December 1954: “The barbican of Yongdingmen was dismantled in 1951 when the traffic there was improved. For this, Mr. Liang Sicheng expressed great indignity with the city government.”

S/W corner Arrow tower

N/W corner Arrow tower

Guang’anmen

Xibianmen

Dongbianmen

Guangqumen

You’anmen

FA Reading

423

10/15/2010 4:54:19 PM


Outer City

Imperial City

1930s Ibid. 1955

City tower platform

Arrow tower

City tower platform

Aug. 1952

Ibid.

Chang’an Left Gate

Chang’an Right Gate Ibid.

Road construction

Expansion of Tian’anmen Square

1959

Zhonghuamen

Destroyed by fire

Dec. 1, 1950

Xi’anmen

Burnt by Cao Kun

Road construction

Road construction and the use of bricks

Collapsed


Destroyed by Eight Allied Forces

1912

End of 1954 to Feb. 1955

1900

Arrow tower


Dong’anmen

Di’anmen

Tian’anmen

S/E corner Arrow tower

N/E corner Arrow tower


Original site occupied by Chairman Mao Memorial in 1977

Ministry of Culture made a Nanmu model in its memory

Cleared in 2001 and a park built

The Emperors Tower rebuilt in Dec. 15, 1969 and the work completed on Apr. 7, 1970. It was heightened by 87 cm and inside were installed with water pipelines and sewage line, radiators, TV and radio broadcast equipment and photo shooting facilities for journalists

Notes

424 BEIJING RECORD

10/15/2010 4:54:19 PM

FA Reading


425

Sources: Zhang Xiande: Beijing City Walls and City Gates of the Ming and Qing Dynasties (not published); Osvald Siren: The Walls and Gates of Peking, 1st edition, translated by Xu Yongquan, Beijing Yanshan Publishing House, August 1985; Archive of Beijing City Construction Committee, Beijing Archives; Shen Yurong: Protection and Demolition of Beijing’s City Walls, in Beijing Planning and Construction, Issue No. 2, 1999; Shen Yurong: Demolition of Beijing’s City Walls, in Beijing Planning and Construction, Issue No. 5, 2002; Records of Beijing’s Cultural Relics Museum (Part 1), compiled by the Beijing Cultural Heritage Administration, 1994; Wang Dongcen, Manuscript, December 1954, by courtesy of the library of the Qinghua University School of Architecture; Beijing’s Urban Construction since the Birth of New China, 1st edition, complied by the Beijing Construction History Editorial Board, April 1986; Chaoyangmen Demolished to Ensure Safety of Pedestrians, Beijing Daily, Page 2, October 16, 1956; Kong Qingpu: Events of the Repairs and Demolition of Beijing’s City Walls and City Gate Towers of the Ming and Qing Dynasties, in Beijing Cultural Heritage, Issue No. 3, 2002; Kong Qingpu: How Beijing’s Archways Were Repaired and Demolished, in Recollection of Chinese Architects, 1st edition, China Architecture & Building Press, December 2000; Zheng Tianxiang: Recalling the Past 17 Years of Beijing, Records of Travel, 1st edition, Beijing Publishing House, August 1994; Luo Zhewen: Dismantlement of Xizhimen, Dismantlement of Andingmen, China Cultural Relics News, January 3 and February 21 2001; Shack Houses Easy to Catch Fire; Xi’anmen on Fire; Slum Dwellers Learning Lessons, People’s Daily, Page 2, December 3, 1950; Barbican of Chongwenmen Obstructs Traffic; Work Starts to Remove It, People’s Daily, Page 3, May 27, 1950; Liang Sicheng’s diary, April, 1966, by courtesy of Lin Zhu; Old City of Beijing, compiled by the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, 1996; Hou Renzhi et. al., eds.: Beijing’s History in Atlas, 1st edition, Beijing Publishing House, May 1988; Wu Tingxie et. al.,: Records of Beijing (1), 1st edition, Beijing Yanshan Publishing House, March 1990; Chen Zongfan eds.: Study of the Capital, 1st edition, Beijing Ancient Books Publishing House, October 1991; Tang Yongbin eds.: Cultural Heritage of Old Capital, December 1935; Wang Tongzhen: Old City of Beijing, 1st edition, Beijing Yanshan Publishing House, May 1997; and notes from the author’s interviews.

Years later, a middle school student who had a hand in dismantling the city walls had the following to confess: Sky covered with clouds; a sea of people; and a cloud of dust. At the turn of winter and spring in 1969; by the Fuxingmen city wall. The city wall was like a giant string of haws. A dark mass of people was like a colony of ants, crawling on the string of haws. In the dusky sunshine, Beijing citizens went for the city walls from every corner of the city, trying to dissect this long dragon with spades, picks and steel bars. The one-meter long square bricks peeled off from the body of the long dragon were carried away by trucks, tricycles, carts, horse-drawn carts or wheelbarrows, which streamed to and fro in all corners of the city for building air-raid shelters. “Dig tunnel deep” was a supreme instruction that could not be disobeyed. The city wall became a target to be trampled down upon. The people of Beijing seemed to have gone mad. All units vied with each other. They seemed to have been locked in a competition in equipment and contingent. In this dusty city and amid the mad battle cries, these people swayed by the lust of destruction compatible with the times knew nothing but the cruel and callous competition. They had never thought that what they were digging was the flesh and bone of Beijing and the soul of the nation. I was only a middle school student at the time and I too, was intoxicated in the frenzy of pulling down the walls, just like others. I did not know anything about Liang Sicheng. To my mind at the time, the city walls were absolutely not more valuable than any earth hummock. To middle school students at the time, history started from the red flagstudded Tiananmen Square...


10/15/2010 4:54:19 PM

426

BEIJING RECORD

Years later after the city walls disappeared, I learned from a book by Beijing historian Professor Hou Renzhi that more than 50 years ago how a young student was so awed-inspired when facing the Beijing city walls — “As a young student, I had longed to see Beiping which was known as an ancient cultural city. At last, I arrived at the Qianmen Railway Station by train during dusk one day in early winter. When I walked out of the station with the crowds, the towering Zhengyangmen and the massive city walls suddenly appeared in front of me. In an instant, I seemed to feel the real history. From then on, a seed was planted in my heart. In the years that followed, the tiny seed was germinating, leading me through the halls of history, despite the vicissitudes of life.” ... Under relentless pounding and digging, day and night, the city walls, though unexpectedly solid and firm, collapsed in the end. After the surface bricks were peeled off, the city wall was like an aging old woman stripped of her skirt, revealing the scarred and toohorrible-to-look-at body. Beside it were hills of bricks, marked with the names of certain units or individuals. The bricks were left there, watched over day and night. When the air-raid tunnels and residential houses were all built, the brick fever cooled down. People no longer cared about the debris. Only one old man on the campus of Qinghua University was weeping quietly for the fate of the city walls. In 1950, Liang Sicheng wrote an article, stating the gains and losses in preserving and dismantling the city walls. He said that there were about one-meter thick of bricks on the walls of the inner and outer cities and inside the walls were lime soil of 300–400 years old and even 500–600 years old, which had become as hard as rocks. They were estimated to weigh 12 million tons, enough to make 12 Jingshan Hills and to take 20 railway cars 85 years to carry 27 them away. However, what the master architect dared not imagine was that for the Chinese, with the spirit of moving mountains, this seemed nothing at all, only that they did not know that it was their blood they had dismantled with their minds in a haze. They could do nothing but to pay homage to the remains of the Beijing city walls in books written by foreigners. In 1924, a book entitled The Walls and Gates of Peking 28 which ran up to 130,000 words was published in Paris. â•‡ It has become the most complete record of the Beijing city walls in the world. The author of the book is a Swedish by the name of Osvald Siren. In the book, the author says:

27 The figure is slightly different from that stated by Liang Sicheng in his article On the Discussion on Whether to Have Beijing’s City Walls Preserved or Torn Down. Liang Sicheng said in the article that there were about 11 million tons of lime soil inside the city walls and the volume was equal to 11 or 12 Jingshan Hills. If the walls were cleared, it would take 20 train cars, each with a loading capacity of 18 tons, to carry 83 years if once a day. 28 It should be London.


10/15/2010 4:54:19 PM

FA Reading


427

“The origin of this book is the beauty of the city gates of Peking; their importance as characteristic elements in some of the finest views of the Chinese capital; their wonderful setting amidst old buildings, fresh trees and decaying moats; their decorative architectural character. Some of these gates may still be called landmarks of Peking, historically as well as topographically; they reflect, together with the adjoining walls, much of the early history of this great city, and they form, together with the streets and landscapes in which they are set, the most relevant spots of 29 characteristic and beautiful scenery.”â•› After the walls were pulled down and bricks taken away, the rammed earth was dumped... In 1966, the Lotus Pond was filled in by 4.9 hectares due to the earth 30 dug from the place for building the subway. In 1970, the Taiping Lake outside the northwest city walls was filled 31 up. And three years before, the famous writer Lao She, who was unable to stand the humiliation during the Cultural Revolution, drowned himself in the lake. Tiantan (The Temple of Heaven) and Ritan (The Temple of the Sun) also became a dumping ground for the soil from the city walls. ... “Getting prepared against war” was the overwhelming reason for dismantling the city walls. During the Korean War in 1950, in order to disperse people during possible air raids, Beijing cut six openings in the inner city walls: The No. 1 opening was at the Dayabao Hutong; No. 2, at the Beimencang or Dongsi Shitiao; No. 3, at old Gulou Street; No. 4, at Xinjiekou; No. 5, at Guanyuan; and No. 6 at Songhe’an Hutong west of the Picai Hutong. Subway Taiping Lake car depot (photo by Wang Jun, 1993) 29 Su Xiaokang and Cai Yuanjiang: The Last Ancient Capital, in March Wind journal, 1987. 30 Major Events of Beijing City Water Resources Planning, Major Events of Party History, 1st edition, Beijing Municipal City Planning Administration and the Party History Soliciting Office of the Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design, December 1995. 31 Ibid. and recollection of Zhou Yongyuan during an interview with the author on November 16, 1993.


10/15/2010 4:54:21 PM

428

BEIJING RECORD

This drive to get prepared against war marked the end of the city walls. Also coming to an end was the moat. For building the subway, the moat in the eastern, western and southern sides of the inner city was covered up to become hidden ditches. This was apparently associated with the plan of evacuating people toward the hilly areas westward at wartime. Zheng Zuwu, who sponsored the planning and designing of the subway, recalled: The first phase of the subway was designed to start from the Beijing Railway Station and bypass Chongwenmen and Zhengyangmen. At the time, Zhengyangmen was about to be repaired. The scaffolding was put up already. People said that it was not necessary to repair it, because it was about to be dismantled. At this time, the Premier appeared, demanding the repair work to continue. Mr. Hou Renzhi was then a member of the City People’s Committee. He demanded that pictures be drawn of Chongwenmen and Xuanwumen and the planning Administration sent people to do the job. When the Cultural Revolution started, we were all down and out. So was Peng Zhen, Yang Yong and Wan Li. The leading group in charge of the subway construction no longer existed. A new one was formed. I was labeled as “a pawn of the black gang” and “member of the Black Gang of the City Party Committee.” We were then sent down to Miyun to do forced labor. I moved stones all day long, almost breaking my waist and back. I was released in 1971, when the second phase of the subway and the second loop line had already started. All the city walls were pulled down. By mobilizing the masses of people, the ditch for the subway was already dug. The first phase of the subway was of third grade protection. It was not deep under the ground. But under the extreme leftist line and for preparedness against war, the second phase was 4 or 5 meters deeper to become a project for second grade protection, rather in a muddleheaded way. How costly it was? Who took the decision? No one has admitted it till now. My biggest objection was that it was too costly, far more than the first phase. The stops were too big, with too many ancillary facilities, a big waste, a waste not fractional. When I returned, I was still treated as one who had committed mistakes, belonging to the side of the enemy. At that time, the second phase of the project had not been designed. But the depth was fixed. All 32 engineering units were vying with each other to do the job.

32 Recollection by Zheng Zuwu during an interview with the author, April 26, 1995.


10/15/2010 4:54:21 PM

FA Reading


429

Zhou Yongyuan recalled: The slogan of “Digging tunnel deep, storing grain everywhere and seeking no hegemony” was raised in 1965. Then we started building subways, starting from the basement of the city walls and filling in the moat. Before that, almost nothing was left of the outer city walls. Of the inner city walls, Chaoyangmen was on the verge of collapsing and decision was taken not to repair it. So it was demolished. In fact, if it was repaired, it can be preserved. Only a small part of the inner city walls was dismantled. They were removed mostly due to the construction of subways. Before the dismantlement, Premier Zhou Enlai went around the city walls and sighed in the end: Let Qianmen stay. Deshengmen was left for the time being due to insufficient work force and it was to be dismantled when there was a surplus work force. By the end of the Cultural Revolution, the subway was about to be finished. Decision was taken to dismantle Deshengmen. But experts opposed it. Vice-Premier Gu Mu was responsible of handling the matter. He said: No, let it stand and make it a museum of weapons. Why was the southeast corner arrow tower left intact? This was because the subway would make a turn at the place. So it escaped being dismantled. So did the city walls in the southwest, because the subway would make a round turn and so it bypassed the walls. Later on, repairs were done very poorly, making it unlike the original. The weather in Beijing was dry and there should be more water surface in order to improve the mini-climate. But the earth from the city walls was used to fill in the Taiping Lake and one third of the Lotus Pond. 33 Ridiculous! It’s anarchy!â•› What was about Liang Sicheng? He was denigrated in the storm of the Cultural Revolution. A cartoon was drawn of this “reactionary academic authority” with the Beijing city walls hung on his neck, with the caption: “Our Beijing city walls should be made a dazzling necklace of jade and pearls.” There were only two records of Beijing subway in 1966 in the diary and work notes of Liang Sicheng: April 3, Sunday, Clear Poll box sent to home for voting district delegates.

33 Recollection by Zhou Yongyuan during an interview with the author, November 16, 1993.


10/15/2010 4:54:21 PM

430

BEIJING RECORD

At 10:00, Peng Jiajun and two others who were responsible for building the subway came to discuss about the foundation of Zhengyangmen, agreeing to have a look on the morning of Tuesday. 34 Blood pressure: 190/90... April 5, Tuesday, Clear Went to Zhengyangmen and Chongwenmen in the morning to see 35 the foundation of the city towers; took back Zhu’s wrist watch from repair on the way. Today is the Qingming Festival, peach trees are blossoming... took a 36 walk at 5:00 in the afternoon, feeling dizzy. At that time, the clouds of Cultural Revolution was gathering. Liang Sicheng was of course willing to see the foundation of Zhengyangmen as it would be preserved. But, there were only two places that mentioned subway in his diary, seemingly not to turn a hair. But Lin Zhu left a precious record: When Sicheng heard about the dismantling of the city walls, he was like sitting on pins and needles. His pulmonary emphysema seemed to have become more serious, breathless even while sitting motionless. When he read from the newspaper about the discovery of a small city gate of the Yuan Dynasty inside Xizhimen, he showed great interest. “Do you think that they would preserve the city gate of the Yuan Dynasty?” he said to me, with a streak of luck. “Can you go and see Xizhimen and take a picture of it?” he begged me like a child. “What for? Going there to take pictures and you let me, the wife of a ‘reactionary academic authority,’ be exposed before the people? Now that we are trying our best to hide ourselves and then you ask me to go there, isn’t it asking for trouble?” I said, without thinking. Suddenly, I saw his face painfully tightened. At once, I changed my tone and said lightly: “I tell you, what I am concerned about is the health of my beloved husband, nothing else.” I bowed my head and gave him a kiss. But it was too late. He was sitting there speechless for a long time, just like a child that received a dressing down. Perhaps no one could understand how regretful and painful I felt from this event, as no one saw the moment of his painful facial spasm. In that instant, I thought I understood more of what Sicheng thought.

34 Liang Sicheng’s diary, April 3, 1966, by courtesy of Lin Zhu. 35 It refers to Lin Zhu. 36 Liang Sicheng’s diary, April 5, 1966, by courtesy of Lin Zhu.


10/15/2010 4:54:21 PM

FA Reading


431

But no. When I read again the articles On the Discussion on Whether to Have Beijing’s City Walls Preserved or Torn Down and Beijing — the Best Example of City Planning, I felt that I did not understand him enough. If I had had the understanding like now, I would have courageously gone 37 to Xizhimen to see for myself. That is for certain.

Paris Tour — A Day like A Year On June 28, 1965, two days prior to the day when work on the Beijing Subway were to start, Liang Sicheng set off on a tour of Paris. He led a seven-member Chinese architects delegation to attend the 9th session of the 8th International Architects Association. This was the second time Liang Sicheng visited Paris, following the one in 1928 together with Lin Huiyin. It was also his last visit to a foreign land. It can be imagined how Liang felt during the tour. That year, Paris produced the Greater Paris Region Planning and a Guide to Rectification Plan after experiencing a painful process of decision making. The plan was similar to the “Liang-Chen Proposal” for Beijing in terms of purpose. That year, the wall-dismantling drive countering the “Liang-Chen Proposal” was going full steam ahead. It was at this time that Liang Sicheng went to Paris. The essence of “Liang-Chen Proposal” was the separation of what was ancient from what was present and organic decentralization for the benefit of both the old and the new. In Beijing, Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang became the targets of attack while in Paris, the same idea was guiding the development of the city rationally. In 1965, the Paris city government formulated a Grand Paris planning under the guidance of the organic decentralization theory. It set the time for development up to the year 2000. The plan will accommodate a population of 14 mi