I’ve noticed that Western media has been on a real ‘China Miracle’ binge as of late. The Globe and Mail, one of Canada’s leading newspapers, gets in on the act with a special section titled, very originally, China: Rising. It seems to have been a while in the making, with dozens of articles covering the wild times in the ‘New China’ we know and love (and,yes, sometimes loathe). Here you will find the usual talk of China’s inevitable world dominance balanced out with much less sensational fare about nationalism, social unrest and even video games. Articles I found particularly interesting were Instant Modernity (looking at China’s urban hyper-makeover), and Wenzhou: Capitalism Unbound.Of course, no self-respecting China special would find itself without some article on Shanghai. China:Rising’s entry is one of the more balanced ones I have read, quite unlike the quasi-propaganda over at Time Asia.
Whenever talk of China’s boom/rise/infinite market is involved, Shanghai invariably surfaces to rear its oversized head. But is Shanghai really the best place to showcase the ‘New China’? I have my doubts.
Now, don’t start fretting: I’m not about to go off on a rant about how Shanghai doesn’t represent the rest of China. You could argue the city does represent China as most of the country’s wealth appears to have been spent building it, but most people wouldn’t: they would agree that Shanghai is not very representative of what the Middle Kingdom is. Cased closed.
However, you would likely find more favour by suggesting that Shanghai definitely represents what China wishes it could be. I can see how this makes a Western journalist’s job easy: “Story on ‘New China’? Ok. Ticket to Shanghai? Check. Huge skyscrapers, glitz, Ferraris, wild lifestyle, super rich, Pudong, vision of the future, China has no bounds? Check. Story submitted.” In much of this, they conveniently forget to mention that Shanghai, is..well…a completely engineered showcase.
I guess, as mere humans, we are quite easily fooled: bright lights, tall buildings and expensive cars are enough to do the trick. Substance is often too complex to handle, so we ogle the style and go home satisfied. If a place has tall buildings, it must be going somewhere (never mind if they are actually used for anything). I guess, as a result of my trademarked cynicism, my opinion on Shanghai lies much closer to this commentary (last article on the page).
Maybe I’m weird, but Shanghai just didn’t impress me all that much. Sure it’s huge, crowded and lively, but so is every other city in China (Chongqing, anyone?). And then there’s Pudong…ahh, Pudong, the beacon of capitalism rising. This faux Jetsons Manhattan was just plunked down out of nowhere, and it shows. The place for now seems resigned to being a large and garish light show for tourists gawking from across the river. It is not city so much as carnival attraction; once over there among the monumental skyscrapers, you sort of realize, well… nothing is really going on. It’s an empty shell of an urban landscape.
All that glitters is gold…or not
Think of a monumental World Fair display, letting us all in on what the future looked like in the 1950s. They could have saved a lot of money and trouble and built it on a slightly smaller scale. Like one that fits in a glass case, perhaps. A whole city rises with no other apparent function than to signal that China has arrived: this is Pudong as the world’s largest propaganda piece. Figuring out how untold millions are actually supposed to live and prosper in such a ‘model city’ seems to be of secondary concern.
Quite frankly, I find talk of Shanghai overtaking the likes of New York, London and Hong Kong (which it is likely most trying to best) quite ridiculous, at least in regards to the next 50 years minimum. What Shanghai hasn’t quite figured out yet is that you need something behind the facade. Being new isn’t an end in itself. Being ‘modern’ doesn’t quite cut it anymore… you also have to be interesting.
Maybe when we are done with these cranes, we can use them to build some culture
Ouch. Ok, I know I’m getting a bit harsh here. It’s just that Shanghai has always represented the worst of modern China to me: the complete triumph of style over substance (and often sanity), the obsession with flaunting wealth and how a few bright lights manage to hide much darker realities.
I know some will inevitably say: “You don’t understand Shanghai” or: “You haven’t visited the real Shanghai!” or still: “Shanghai isn’t just Pudong!”. But the point is, by being so superficial I am in fact celebrating the very essence of the city: its glittering superficiality. About 98% of the pictures of Shanghai I have seen in various media outlets are of…you guessed it…the Pudong skyline. I’m sure the planners would like nothing more than to recreate this skyscraper trophy case on the older side of the river as well (and judging by what Puxi looked like when I was last there, I’d argue they are succeeding).
I’ve seen a much better side of modern China among the multitude of smaller stories across the country. A kid whose family was too poor to buy shoes made it to university; a man who fought over a bag of rice during the Cultural Revolution now makes a decent life for himself and his family…these are the real success stories of the ‘new’ China, not a bunch of empty skyscrapers.
But, in the end, I guess stories of small, everyday miracles don’t sell newspapers. Ones about amazing wealth and flashy buildings trimmed in gold, however, do. So, unfortunately, I’m sure I’ll be hearing about Pudong and its neon glow for years to come. If only it wasn’t so damned forced.