Xiaoyun Li
Xiaoyun Li shares his thoughts on the centrality of modernization in the development of the Chinese countryside. The decline in countryside population and the stagnation of income there demonstrate a decline in the countryside. Xiaoyun Li’s project in 13 ancient villages in Kunming, province Yunnan attempted to cope with such a decline and the challenge of preserving and developing countryside at the same time. In Lincang, for example, the team experimented on modernizing small farms by introducing the practice of processing walnut trees to walnut oil. Through the transition from the primary to the secondary sector, the farmers would be able incorporated into the market economy. At the end of the presentation, Xiaoyun Li stresses the need to 1) make small farms the subject of new industries 2) establish organizations led by small farms 3) transform the countryside into a more livable place.
In the panel discussion, Xiaoyun Li maintains that preserving the countryside as it was, is in fact a form of ‘city supremacy’. Modernization inevitably brings change, though China’s path of modernization would differ from those of the West. Changes would not always bring a good impact on the countryside and its residents, but by refraining from change, one denies the opportunity for countryside residents to enter modernization. Viewing the countryside in the context of ‘change’, one should stand with the farms and help them to modernize.
Letian Zhang
Letian Zhang points out that one of China’s biggest challenge today is “how do we transcend the boundary between city and countryside”. He raises the idea of “objectification fallacy”: since humans learned to use tools, human society has been evolving and developing. However, if one doesn’t not project evolution on the material level onto human society, “objectification fallacy” may occur. Such a fallacy treats the development of humans as parallel to that of objects, hence the farmers who continue to use ‘primitive’ tools are thought to be backward. Letian Zhang suggests that one should discard their stereotypes for farmers and work with them to narrow down the gap between city and countryside.
In the panel discussion, Letian Zhang builds on his previous argument and encourages people to focus on “the making of the new person” — erasing the difference between city and countryside and moving away from the influence of old tags and categorization. Yet Letian Zhang raises one concern on ‘counter-urbanization’. While more and more middle-class city residents visited the countryside, many of such projects are short-term. Zhang believes that the future of the development Chinese countryside lies in whether the Chinese government could make policies that encourage young people to come back to their home village after completing higher education.
Tiejun Wen
Tiejun Wen reflects on two of his previous projects on sustainable agriculture — 2003 in Hebei and 2008 in Beijing — and reached the conclusion that the middle class is the most suitable target audience for the promotion of sustainable agriculture. In comparison to the situation in Europe and North America, Tiejun Wen points out that in the west it is much more common for city residents to go to the countryside and start/take over a farm, hence the city and the countryside are more closely connected. A similar trend could be observed in contemporary China, where people started to realize the relative stability of the countryside and the importance of sustainable agriculture. To illustrate, the 2003 outbreak of SARS left most villages unaffected, for that reason the natural resources and environment of the country are way better than that of the city. Wen believes the middle class’ inclination towards green consumerism and sustainable living will facilitate the merging of city and countryside in the future.
In the panel discussion, Tiejun Wen indicates that the dynamic between city and countryside has changed in China: now it is in fact more difficult to gain the identity of a ‘villager’ than to become a city resident. While the focus of discussion on the relationship between city and countryside shifted from inequality to globalization, Tiejun Wen encourages people to view the countryside as the central actor in eco-friendly, sustainable modernization.
Shu Wang
Shu Wang’s presentation is titled “countryside construction starts small”. He recognizes that the recent dismantling and rebuilding projects both in the countryside and the city have resulted in the waste of construction materials and the loss of local culture. In contrast, existing ancient buildings demonstrate how our ancestors preserved materials from the previous dynasty into the new building. Similarly, the divide between countryside and side has not been so sharp until last century. Hence, according to Shu Wang, the focus of countryside construction is how to encourage young people from the city to enter villages and gain a unique understanding of the countryside. With a brief discussion of his project mobilizing professors and students from three universities, Chu Wang demonstrates how architecture would help villagers to recognize the value of agriculture and the countryside itself.
In the panel discussion, Shu Wang points out that the culture of the countryside represented the last remaining part of traditional Chinese culture, which one could no longer see in the city. At the same time, the countryside also represented a culture that is closely connected to nature, standing in contrast to the highly modernized and mechanized culture of the city. The former is greatly underestimated and should be paid more attention to. In addition, Wang suggests that what people learned in the city about the world is incomplete — one could find the missing part in the countryside. Therefore, going into the village should not be simply understood as an act of “helping the countryside to develop”, but rather a process to breakdown the barrier and mutually learn from each other.