Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05

    • Exendin-3 (9-39) amide Regardless of the connotation of the

    2018-11-14

    Regardless of the connotation of the future in the terms ‘avant-garde’ and xianfeng, or that of the past in the term houfeng, they are all related to time. In fact, the phrase ‘avant-garde’ is regarded by Calinescu as ‘a face of modernity’ because self-consciousness and change are the core values of the idea of modernity (Calinescu, 1987, 1977: 3, 264). Calinescu’s argument implies a Euro-American-centric understanding of a linear, progressive model of modernity. Such an understanding has also been adopted by a number of architectural historians. The most representative example is Banister Fletcher’s ‘The Tree of Architecture,’ which emphasizes the evolution of the Exendin-3 (9-39) amide western architectural culture in the overall historical development (Fletcher, 1924: iii). A linear view of modernity having a universal significance was also depicted by Sigfried Giedion in his canonical Space, Time and Architecture (Giedion, 1967: xxxvi). Similarly, Charles Jencks’s declaration of the death of Modern Architecture, which is signified by the demolition of the Pruitt-Igoe public housing project in the USA on 16 March 1972, is another example of a singular, teleological model of modernity based on a linear notion of time (Jencks, 1977: 9). Although the term houfeng does not imply a Euro-American-centric, universal development of modernity, this term is still confined to a linear model of understanding. Are the terms ‘avant-garde,’ xianfeng, and houfeng appropriate to describe these three Chinese architects?
    ‘Avant-garde’ comes from the French phrase l’avant-garde, meaning ‘advance guard’ or ‘vanguard,’ i.e., ‘the foremost part of an army’ (Simpson et al., 1989: 813). The avant-garde is responsible for reconnoitering the unknown terrain ahead and exploring a path for the subsequent army to follow. This military metaphor is now used to describe pioneers or any ‘advance group’ whose work can be characterized chiefly by unorthodox and experimental methods. The Chinese translation of the phrase ‘avant-garde’ can be xianfeng or qianwei (前衞). Both xian (先) and qian (前) convey the meaning of ‘advance,’ whereas feng (鋒) and wei (衞) denote ‘guard.’ The term xianfeng can be traced back to 285 CE and conveys a military meaning, whereas the term qianwei was considered new in China in the 1930s. The word feng has multiple meanings, ranging from ‘sharp, acute’ and ‘cutting edge’ to ‘influential.’ Therefore, xianfeng is a better term to use in this paper than qianwei. The word Hou (後) means ‘rear’ or ‘back,’ so houfeng signifies ‘rear-guard.’ Similar to the relationship between the phases ‘avant-garde’ and ‘rear-garde,’ xianfeng and houfeng are a pair of antonyms that convey a linear model of understanding. Unlike xianfeng or houfeng, youfeng is not related to time. Because you (有) means ‘possession,’ the newly created phrase youfeng denotes the possession of feng, being ‘sharp, acute, cutting edge, and influential.’ In this paper, we aimed to identify notable attributes of the western architectural avant-garde through the theoretical analysis of western discourse and to develop a tentative framework for testing its validity and usefulness in a non-western context. On the one hand, the three selected Chinese architects will be analyzed via a two-way test based on the tentative, yet partially modified framework. On the other hand, analysis of the western architectural avant-garde discourse will be re-examined by using the case of the three Chinese architects. The appropriateness of labeling the selected Chinese architects as ‘avant-garde’ will be reviewed, and the use of an alternative term for them, such as xianfeng, houfeng, or youfeng, will also be discussed.
    Analysis of western avant-garde theory The initial effort of theorizing the avant-garde is the article “Avant-Garde and Kitsch” (1939) written by Clement Greenberg. According to Greenberg, the avant-garde should have the courage to maintain a critical position against the prevailing standards of society to carry out experimentation, and to explore a path to keep ‘culture moving in the midst of ideological confusion and violence.’ In opposition to the proliferation of popular, commercial art leading to the production of ‘kitsch’ for consumption, neuromuscular junction criticizes kitsch as a deceptive commodity that promotes superficial stylistic fashion and provides ‘faked sensations.’ Facing the threat of kitsch production, he considers that the avant-garde as a minority group should maintain the high level of art by retiring from public altogether to the level of ‘art for art’s sake’ (l’art pour l’art) (Greenberg, 1961: 5–6). Similar to Greenberg’s advocacy of the retreat of the avant-garde from the public and the majority, Renato Poggioli considers the avant-garde as a minority culture in ‘combating and denying the majority culture.’ By defining the avant-garde as ‘antagonism,’ he highlights the opposition to the general public and old generations (Poggioli, 1968: 25, 36, 108). According to Matei Calinescu, the notion of the avant-garde is associated with self-consciousness and the ‘restless desire for change,’ which are also characteristics of modernity (Calinescu, 1977: 3).