The Crossroads of Tradition and Modernity

As China experiences unprecedented urban development, renowned architect Wu Liangyong sounded an urgent alarm about the crisis facing Chinese architectural culture. In his seminal lecture “Research and Creation in Chinese Architectural Culture,” Wu analyzed how rapid modernization threatens to erase regional identities while offering a visionary roadmap for cultural preservation through innovation.

The paradox is striking: amid China’s construction boom—what Wu calls the “urban golden age”—many cities sacrifice their historical essence for generic modernity. From Beijing’s contentious urban renewal projects to the cultural erosion in historic cities like Shaoxing, the tension between globalization and local identity manifests in concrete and steel. Wu’s critique extends beyond aesthetics to confront deeper questions about cultural confidence in an era of architectural homogenization.

The Double-Edged Sword of Globalization

Wu identifies two interconnected crises plaguing contemporary Chinese architecture. First, the dominance of international design competitions has created an uneven playing field where foreign firms often overshadow local talent. The cases of Beijing’s National Grand Theatre and Capital Museum reveal how architectural decisions frequently prioritize foreign visions over contextual sensitivity.

Second, the “great destruction” accompanying China’s urban expansion has severed vital connections to cultural heritage. Wu lamented watching ornate courtyard homes—embodiments of centuries-old craftsmanship—disappear overnight in Beijing’s hutongs. Similar tragedies unfolded in Jinan, where lakeside high-rises shattered the poetic landscape of Daming Lake, and in Shaoxing, where modernist interventions disrupted the delicate water-town fabric that once rivaled Suzhou’s classical beauty.

These phenomena stem from what Wu diagnoses as a dangerous duality: ignorance toward indigenous architectural values coupled with uncritical worship of Western design paradigms. The consequence is what architectural historian Kenneth Frampton termed “critical regionalism’s” antithesis—buildings that could belong anywhere while speaking to nowhere.

Cultural Confidence in the Urban Golden Age

Countering this crisis requires recognizing China’s unique position in urban history. Wu draws upon Peter Hall’s “Cities in Civilization,” which identified fleeting “golden ages” when cities like Renaissance Florence or 19th-century Paris became crucibles of creativity. For Wu, contemporary China presents an extraordinary opportunity—multiple cities simultaneously experiencing their golden ages through massive infrastructure and cultural investment.

Historical precedents abound. The Tang Dynasty’s Chang’an (modern Xi’an) was the world’s largest cosmopolitan capital, while Song Dynasty Hangzhou pioneered urban planning innovations later admired by Marco Polo. Wu argues that today’s cities must channel this legacy by:

– Conducting deep research into regional architectural languages
– Synthesizing historical patterns with contemporary needs
– Developing protective policies for vernacular landscapes

The successful preservation of Pingyao Ancient City and the creative adaptation of Shanghai’s Shikumen (stone-gate) houses demonstrate this approach’s viability.

Five Pillars for Architectural Renaissance

Wu proposes a comprehensive framework to reinvigorate China’s architectural culture:

### 1. Regionalism as Foundation
Moving beyond superficial stylistic nods, Wu advocates studying how geography shapes built form—from Tibet’s cliffside monasteries to Fujian’s tulou earth buildings. His work in Qufu’s Confucius Research Institute exemplifies this, blending Warring States period motifs with modern functionality to create architecture “rooted in place but conversant with the world.”

### 2. From Artifacts to Theory
Chinese architectural scholarship has excelled in documenting historical structures (see Liang Sicheng’s pioneering work) but lags in theoretical innovation. Wu urges extracting timeless principles from ancient structures—like the incremental growth logic seen in the Potala Palace—to inform contemporary practice.

### 3. Prototypes and Paradigms
Identifying architectural “DNA”—whether courtyard house typologies or water-town planning principles—allows meaningful evolution rather than pastiche. The key lies in distinguishing between essential patterns and mutable expressions.

### 4. Aesthetic Intelligence
Wu emphasizes elevating design beyond technical proficiency to poetic synthesis. His analysis of China’s mountain cultures reveals how philosophical concepts like “borrowed scenery” (借景) can inspire modern landscape architecture.

### 5. Expanded Conservation
With urbanization threatening over 900,000 unprotected heritage sites, Wu calls for:
– Integrating vernacular architecture into preservation frameworks
– Developing adaptive reuse strategies
– Mobilizing public participation in cultural stewardship

The Road Ahead: Between Memory and Innovation

The challenge, as Wu frames it, is avoiding two traps: becoming “architectural museum-keepers” frozen in nostalgia or “cultural orphans” adrift in globalized sameness. His vision echoes philosopher Tang Junyi’s concept of “cultural consciousness”—actively shaping modernity through dialogue with tradition.

Recent developments suggest hopeful trends. The 2014 APEC summit’s “Yuanlin” venue demonstrated how contemporary timber structures can reinterpret ancient techniques. Shanghai’s West Bund project balances avant-garde architecture with industrial heritage preservation. Meanwhile, younger architects like Ma Yansong explore neo-traditionalism through projects like the sinuous Chaoyang Park Plaza.

Wu’s ultimate message transcends architecture itself. In an era when UNESCO warns that half of humanity’s 7,000 languages may disappear this century, buildings become crucial vessels of intangible cultural knowledge. The stakes extend beyond aesthetics to questions of civilizational continuity: How does a 5,000-year-old culture build for the future without erasing its past?

As Wu concludes with a scholar’s humility and a patriot’s passion, the path forward requires both the meticulousness of an archaeologist and the boldness of a pioneer—studying each brick of the Great Wall while dreaming cities yet unbuilt. The golden age need not be fleeting if China can forge an architecture that honors its “eastern sensibilities and aesthetic realms” while contributing fresh paradigms to world culture. The blueprint exists in scrolls and ruins; the will to build upon it belongs to the present.