葛丽丽,韩佳纹,伦济昀 编
Chinese architecture after reform and opening sprung from adiscussion of national style.Although we were finally able to liftthe veil placed over our eyes and gradually expose ourselves toWestern architecture,there was a dilemma.Would our architecturebe uniquely Chinese?Or would it be entirely Westernized?Facingthe transformation of our culture,we hoped to move forward byleaps and bounds,but traditional thinking made US hesitate.TheBeij ing Fragrant Hills Hotel,Qufu Queli Hotel,Lhasa Hotel,and others have a distinctly Chinese mood.Articles from 1 980seditions of Architectural Journal were titles as“Modern Style anda Link to the Past,”(by Qi Kang),“Using Architecture to Recordour Mighty Era”(by Yin Peitong).First published in August 1979,“The Architect”concentrated on translating architectural essaysand research papers.In 1 983,Peng Yigang’S“Unified Theory of Building Spaces”was published,marking China’S first formalinquiry into architecture.The rebirth of architectural discussionindicated that even as we were sweeping away the remains of the Great Leap Forward era,we were beginning to think rationally As nationalistic voices in the discussion gradually softened,the Chinese architectural world looked toward“foreign experience.”In“Thinking between History and the Future,”Tai Ning wrote,“Modern Chinese architecture is happening in the narrow alleysbetween tall buildings.If we don’t use reform and opening tobravely assimilate the outside culture of modem,which is Westernarchitecture,it will be impossible for modem Chinese architectureto achieve a breakthrough.”Indeed,with such a vast culturalhistory,innovation was not an easy task.With the Beijing PalacePenninsula Hotel and Asian Games Village,we attempted to fusetogether an exploration of Chinese spirit and modernism,but inpractice this was more the transplantation of foreign culture on amulti-coexistence foundation.