Navigation – Plan du site
Varia

Ambivalent Modernity: Showcasing Colonial Architecture in Manchukuo’s Capital City in the 1930s

Liu Yishi

Résumés

Cet article propose une topographie des styles architecturaux présents à Changchun avant et après 1932, année de fondation de l’État fantoche de Manchukuo, et analyse les divergences, les ambivalences et les ambiguïtés en œuvre dans la politique de l’État et dans la construction urbaine. L’hypothèse développée est que l’idéologie étatique de la « Voie royale » de Manchukuo et le paternalisme japonais sont des facteurs non pas complémentaires mais concurrentiels, ce qui explique la diversité stylistique de la capitale.

Haut de page

Entrées d’index

Indice de palabras clave :

Arquitectura modernista, política colonial

Index géographique :

Asie, Asie de l'Est, Chine, Changchun, Japon

Territoires anciens :

Manchukuo, Xinjing
Haut de page

Texte intégral

  • 1 Eri Hotta, Pan-Asianism and Japans War 1931-1945, New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007.

1Sitting on the central plateau of Manchuria, Changchun provides a unique example of the twentieth-century relationship between Chinese urbanism and the history of Chinese politics. Despite its minor significance as a frontier garrison under the Qing and as a railway town of the first decades of the twentieth century under different regimes, it was only during its time as the capital city of the puppet state of Manchukuo under Japanese rule between 1932 and 1945, as the so-called Xinjing (New Capital), that Manchukuo’s modernity became evident. The previously fragmented urban sections were incorporated into a larger planthe 1932 Capital Plan (fig. 1)and various urban constructions were initiated according to the state ideology of Wangdaoism (the way of the king, or the Kingly Way), a specific form of pan-Asianism1 that embraced ethnic harmony and Confucian values such as filial piety and loyalty.

Figure 1: Xinjing Plan of 1932.

Figure 1: Xinjing Plan of 1932.

Source: Courtesy of Changchun Urban Planning Institute.

2The emergence and practice of the Kingly Way in Manchukuo beginning in the early 1930s was a logical consequence of contemporary Japanese foreign policy and rising anti-imperialist nationalism in the non-Western world. But because the ideology of the Kingly Way was never explicitly elucidated in governmental texts during the Manchukuo era, the manifestation of the ideology was far from consistent and oftentimes ambiguous and ambivalent. This vagueness allowed for various possible solutions in physical construction. The colonial regime’s practice of accepting and supporting a wide range of aesthetics meant that multiple imageries and aesthetic formulations represented Japanese pan-Asian ideology and were a part of its cultural system and its imaginary and aesthetic universe.

  • 2 Homi Bhabha, Introduction,” in Homi Bhabha (ed.), Nation and Narration, London ; New York, NY: Rou (...)

3Fraught with uncertainty in the act of composing its powerful image, the Japanese cultural authority was Janus-faced: a pan-Asian aura must be produced, whereas the substance of the legitimacy of leadership was Western knowledge.2 The Japanese justified their colonial project in Manchuria as bringing modern scientific and technological knowledge to this region. Indeed, some of modernism’s most ardent opponents routinely made effective use of the most advanced building methods and repeatedly wrote of the need to develop architecture appropriate to local conditions.

  • 3 Brian McLaren,Introduction,” in Brian McLaren, Architecture and Tourism in Italian Colonial Libya (...)

4Brian McLaren has used the concept of ambivalent modernism to analyze Italian colonial rule in Libya, giving a number of reasons why Homi Bhabha’s discussion of the ambivalence of the colonial relationship is pertinent to the description of the plurality of modernist architecture in the Italian colonies.3 The ambivalence of colonial discourse is a useful way to view the production of colonial space in Libya as a form of cultural hegemony that is neither uniform nor unchanging. It is this effect of uncertainty that afflicts the discourse of power in Manchukuo as well.

5In colonial Changchun, the dominant architectural style for governmental buildings, namely the Developing Asia style, displayed large sloping roofs redolent of Chinese tradition. These were imposed on functional plans that clearly belong to the twentieth century. Aesthetic pluralism, involving various ethnic, religious and cultural representations, was nonetheless omnipresent in the colonial capital. Changchun had witnessed the incorporation of different architectural sources since the turn of the twentieth century, as Neoclassicism and Art Nouveau, not to mention older Western building types such as bungalows, were introduced into the city, where they competed with one another in representing modernization. When Changchun was made the capital of Manchukuo in 1932 and transformed into Xianjin, however, indigenous elements were emphasized in keeping with Japans new foreign policy of pan-Asianism and its increasing hostility towards the West.

6This paper illustrates the ambiguity and ambivalence of the colonial regime and its agencies in developing Changchun as a capital city whose unique modernity differed from that seen in the West. It begins with a brief review of architectural developments in Japan and China, then analyzes the aesthetic plurality of colonial Changchun in order to define a specific vision of modernity that valued local culture over Western elements. Discrepancies and ambiguity in urban construction were, as we will show, at the core of the Japanese colonial project. As a backdrop to cultural pageantry, the city as a whole was manipulated to showcase competing colonial ideologies and rhetoric.

The Architectural Profession in Japan and China up to the 1930s

7The Japanese architectural profession was established in the 1870s as part of a broad program of modernization based on Western models, and since that time Japanese architects have been trained in the latest construction methods and in Western styles, which they used in the decades leading up to World War II to invent symbols of power and status that affirmed the newly emerging social order. However, the Westernization of the Japanese architectural profession did not go unquestioned. These concerns stimulated research into Japanese architectural history and led to the passage in 1897 of Japan’s first law on the preservation of historically significant buildings. This happened at a time when the Japanese were gaining confidence in their ability to preserve political autonomy in the face of Western colonial expansion.

  • 4 The earliest example of Japan Revival was probably the Nara Kencho governmental office building of (...)
  • 5 David Stewart, The Making of a Modern Japanese Architecture: 1868 to the Present, Tokyo ; New York, (...)
  • 6 Nagoya City Hall, built in 1930, was designed by Hirabayashi Kingowho, who added decorative gables (...)

8As a result, the image of a self-serving pan-Asian solidarity contrasted with the earlier equation of Western culture with technology and progress. The Japan Revival style was characterized by a skillful appropriation of various phases of the country’s architectural heritage. It began in the 1890s and became especially popular during periods of patriotic fervor, which inevitably had an effect on the use of Western architectural models in Japan.4 It was during the late 1920s that the teikan yōshiki (Imperial Crown style) became the recognized emblem of Japanese nationalism and, later, expansionism.5 Two typical examples representing the Imperial Crown style that merit attention because they later served as model in Manchukuo are the Kanagawa Prefectural Office (1926, fig. 2) and the Nagoya City Hall (1930), both of which resulted from competitions. In order to achieve monumentality, a massive square tower topped by a pagoda-like roof was added to a standard industrial frame.6 The Imperial Crown style was to exercice a tremendous influence over Japans urban planning in Xinjing.

Figure 2: the Kanagawa Prefectural Office.

Figure 2: the Kanagawa Prefectural Office.

Source: Jonathan Reynolds, Maekawa Kunio and the emergence of Japanese modernist architecture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2001, p.91.

9The rebuilding by Frank Lloyd Wright of the Imperial Hotel in Tokyo between 1916 and 1922 presaged an influx of modernism into Japan. In 1920 a group of recent graduates from Tokyo Imperial University formed the Japan Secession Group (Bunriha Kenchikukai), the first movement in support of modern architecture in Japan. All its members came under the influence of both Viennese Secessionism and German Expressionism. Later, young Japanese modernists such as Maekawa Kunio (1905-1986) and Sakakura Junzō (1904-1969) left their mark upon colonial Changchun in the 1930s and 1940s.

  • 7 Sicheng Liang, Corpus of Liang Sicheng (II), Beijing: Architectural Industry Press of China, 1984, (...)

10The architectural profession in China was established several decades later than that in Japan. After the Boxer Uprising, American missionary architects, such as Harry Hussey (1880-1967) and Henry Murphy (1877-1954), led the way in exploring the possibility of including traditional Chinese architectural elements in the design of missionary colleges. Liang Sicheng (1901-1972), a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania in 1927 and also a founder of Chinese architectural history, criticized the first Chinese-style buildings designed by American architects as they can only be viewed from afar because of the lack of research in details.”7 Beginning in the 1920s, Chinese architects, many of whom returned to China after being educated abroad, took the leadership from the Americans and built modernist Chinese architecture.

  • 8 See Yishi Liu, Nationalism: an Approach to Understanding Modern Architecture in National Chinese S (...)

11After the military success of the Northern Expedition, the Kuomintang (KMT) moved the national capital to Nanjing from Beijing in 1928 and carried out the Capital City Plan (Chinese: shoudu jihua) immediately. The plan stipulated that institutional buildings must employ a national style, including big roofs and exquisite ornamental parts, aiming at an architectural aesthetics consisting of a modification of the classic Chinese style.” In this way, broad roofs and other indigenous ornamentation were placed atop functional plans for many modernist buildings in the 1930s, including the KMTs Central Procuratorate in Nanjing (fig. 3) designed by Yang Tingbao (1901-1982), who graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 1925 and was a founding partner of the famous architectural firm Kwan, Chu & Yang (gitai gongchengsi).8 In this larger historical context of a nationalist movement (sometimes in the form of anti-Western and anti-imperial aggression) that called for a sovereign nation-state independent from Western imperialism, both Japanese and Chinese architects who has been trained under Western curriculums consciously looked back into history for traditional motifs that could be applied to modern buildings in order to represent cultural pride and national identity, painstakingly seeking alternatives to the architectural vocabulary that Western nations had brought to East Asia. It was upon this architectural current of the late 1920s and early 1930s in both countries that the emergence of a specific architectural style in the capital of Manchukuo was predicated.

Figure 3: the KMT’s Central Procuratorate, 1935.

Figure 3: the KMT’s Central Procuratorate, 1935.

Source: the author, 2004.

Architectural Plurality in Changchun before it became a Colonial Capital

12Nineteenth-century Changchun was a small trading town in central Manchuria until the signing of the Sino-Russian Secret Treaty in 1896. This agreement allowed Russia to construct the Chinese Eastern Railway (CER) across Manchuria, which in turn brought profound changes to Changchun and many other cities along the route.

  • 9 Such as ports, shipping lines, warehouses, telegraphic communications, urban planning, and other en (...)

13In the wake of their victory in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, Japan gained control over the southern half of the railway, and Changchun became the dividing point between the two halves of the line. The initial Japanese construction of modern Manchuria fell chiefly to the South Manchurian Railway Company (SMR, better known as Mantetsu), a quasi-official corporation created in the model of the British East India Company to foster the growth of a modern society in Manchuria (fig4).9

Figure 4: a “collage city” at Changchun before 1932.

Figure 4: a “collage city” at Changchun before 1932.

Source: redrawn from David D. BUCK, “Railway City and National Capital,” in Joseph W. Esherick (ed.), Remaking The Chinese City: Modernity and Nationality Identity, 1900-1950. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press, 1999, p. 71.

  • 10 Planners set aside twenty-three percent of the total area for streets. There were six classes of ro (...)
  • 11 David D. Buck, “Railway City and National Capital,” in Joseph W. Esherick (ed.), Remaking the Chine (...)

14Under the supervision of Gotō Shimpei (1857-1929), the first director of Mantetsu, Japanese planners produced a handful of settlement plans for Japanese-controlled railway towns based on Western technologies. These boasted efficiency and rationality, both emblems of progress. The high percentage of space reserved for roads to be used by automobiles was remarkable.10 The influence of both City Beautiful and American railway town planning was obvious in the making of Japanese settlements such as Shenyang and Changchun.11 These later also became the principles employed in planning Manchukuo’s capital.

  • 12 David Stewart, op. cit. (note 5); and Dallas Finn, op. cit. (note 4).
  • 13 All three buildings and the station were designed by Ichida Kichijiro, a 1906 Todai graduate who jo (...)

15Since the late Meiji era, the variety of building styles in large Japanese cities such as Tokyo had been striking.12 These developments in the Japanese home islands were introduced to Manchuria after Japanese influence grew in that region from 1905 onwards. In Changchun, the newly-built concrete railway station in the Renaissance style dwarfed the modest single-storied Russian station made of brick and wood. Along the main boulevard running southward from the station were the Neoclassical Mantetsu regional office, the Yamato Hotel in Art Nouveau style (fig. 5), and the library, post office, and police station, all of which were built in Western styles.13

Figure 5: Yamato Hotel in Mantetsu settlement, Changchun, 1915.

Figure 5: Yamato Hotel in Mantetsu settlement, Changchun, 1915.

Source: Mantetsu shomubu chosaka, Manshu kogyo rodo jijo. Dalian: Mantetsu, 1925.

16It is noteworthy that, except for Shinto shrines and statues of war heroes, Japanese elements were largely absent in the Japanese settlement in Changchun. The new Yamato Hotel, which embodied Japanese cultural prowess off the battlefield, demonstrated that the Japanese were capable of constructing in any style Russians could. But Art Nouveau did not captivate Japanese architects the way it did many of their European counterparts. It did not result from any cultural crusading or rebelliousness against the status quo, but simply reflected an eagerness to convey to an international audience, through both contemporary technology and architectural styles, that Japanese society was as culturally and technically sophisticated as that of any Western power. By the same token, it was because European architects at the turn of the century viewed different styles as representing modernity that Japanese designers felt compelled to master all of them.

  • 14 The first examples of developing a Chinese new town or commercial district within a traditional pol (...)
  • 15 Huiwang Changchun committee (ed.), Huiwang Changchun (Reviewing Changchun), Changchun: Changchun Pr (...)
  • 16 According to a statistics in 1928, the number of residents in the Japanese sector was 31,000, while (...)

17In the face of Japanese encroachment, the Chinese government began to build a commercial district in Changchun as well. This formed Changchuns fourth and last sector constructed before the 1931 Manchurian Incident that led to Japanese occupation of Manchuria.14 Western buildings in the newly developed district included a grandiose administrative complex (fig6), a Russian Consulate that still survives, a Japanese Consulate, and several light industrial plants.15 Although the Japanese settlement was the most dynamic part of Changchun, the population of the old city and new Chinese-run district far surpassed that of the Japanese.16

Figure 6: Chinese verandah office for the chief official at Changchun commercial district, built in 1909.

Figure 6: Chinese verandah office for the chief official at Changchun commercial district, built in 1909.

Source: Zhang Fuhe (ed.), Study and Preservation of Modern Chinese Architecture VIII, Beijing: Tsinghua University, 2003, p.501.

18Changchun was divided spatially, ethnically and administratively into four sectors before 1931; this architectural pluralism illustrated the complexities of power relations in the city. But be it Japanese, Chinese or Russian, the approach to expressing modernity was predominately a Westernizing one. Although various styles abounded in the city and competed with each other, few hints of Chinese or East Asian elements were part of the progressive images of Changchun’s modernity at the time. This changed when the city became a colonial capital.

Ideological Ambivalence of the Kingly Way

  • 17 Michael A. Schneider, “The Limits of Cultural Rule: Internationalism and Identity in Japanese Respo (...)
  • 18 Hong Kal, “Modeling the West, Returning to Asia: Shifting Politics of Representation in Japanese Co (...)

19The emergence of anti-imperialist nationalism represented one of the most important conditions for the transformation of Japanese imperialism. The refusal of Western powers to recognize Japan as an equal in the Washington Naval Conference in 1922 and the passage of anti-Asian immigration laws in the United States in the early 1920s disillusioned many Japanese. Under the slogan “Returning to Asia, the Japanese also experimented during the 1920s with a new policy of colonial development in Korea, instigated in response to the March 1919 nationalist uprisings. Japans new strategy of colonial rule in Korea emerged as Cultural Rule,” marking a shift from an approach based on coercion to one based on pacification.17 This policy was epitomized by the 1929 Seoul Exposition, an emblem of “Japan-Korea cooperation” that gathered “the spirit of the Far East” together in order to allow it to prosper on its own.18

  • 19 Cemil Aydin, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia, New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2007 (...)
  • 20 The roots of pan-Asianism go back to the Meiji era, when the Sinocentric world order collapsed and (...)

20In the rhetoric of Japanese imperialism in Manchukuo, an anti-Western pan-Asian sentiment was ubiquitous. As Cemil Aydin argues, pan-Islamic and pan-Asian thought was the product of a crisis of legitimacy of a single, globalized, international system, and both these alternative visions of world order were shaped by challenges to the underlying justifications of late-nineteenth-century imperialism, whether in the form of Orientalism or undisguised racism.19 Pan-Asianism emerged as an ideology incorporating Japan’s role as both victim and victimizer in the imperialist game, and it permitted the Japanese the conceit that they were obliged to lead the Asian nations against the West in a Holy War”.20

  • 21 See Sun Yat-sen. Sun spelt out the key political category of wangdao or the way of ethical monarchs (...)

21In Manchukuo, pan-Asianism came to play an important role in maintaining both the militaristic character of the regime and the legitimacy it claimed based upon adherence to the “Kingly Way.” The Kingly Way first appeared in the classic Confucian text of The Mencius, authored by Mencius (BCE 372-289), as an ideal form of governance. This conception in relation to pan-Asianism came from a famous 1924 speech delivered by Sun Yat-sen, the father of republican China, in Kobe, Japan, entitled “Greater Asianism” (Da Yaxiyazhuyi).21 Sun warned the Japanese audience that Japan would have to choose between becoming a willing handmaiden of Western imperialism or the great bastion of East Asias kingly way.” Sun’s conception of pan-Asianism was also centered on Confucian virtues of the “Kingly Way” (wangdao), an ideal that has long been used to designate virtuous governance based upon benevolence in contrast to despotic rulership (badao).

  • 22 Kōji Suga, “A Concept of ‘Overseas Shinto Shrines’: A Pantheistic Attempt by Ogasawara Shōzō and It (...)
  • 23 Homi Bhabha, op. cit. (note 2).

22The Japanese-Manchukuo state ideology of the Kingly Way was intended to compete against and surpass the West, and indicated a self-critical ambivalence located between two opposite poles: identifying with and differentiating oneself from Western colonialism.22 The formulation of the state ideology of the Kingly Way was part of a shifting cultural ground that transformed along with the politics of Japanese colonialism, which itself was by no means uniform throughout this period. As Homi Bhabha notes, the image of cultural authority may be ambivalent because it mirrors the ambiguities of the political structure.23 In arranging Manchukuos capital, Japanese architects attempted to affirm the states authority through the use of space and to create a new, specifically East Asian modernism that embodied the ideology of the Kingly Way. Nonetheless, despite a totalitarian state that patronized massive urban projects that were to be completed in a very short period of time, the modern façades of the colonial capital were not at all monolithic. As the following pages will demonstrate, stylistic diversity characterized the urban landscape, and the aesthetic overproduction in the city is possibly the strongest manifestation of the state’s ambivalent and ambiguous ideology.

Architectural Plurality in Changchun as a Colonial Capital

  • 24 Hideto Kishida, Tokyo no kindai teki kenchiku,” in Toshi bi kyokaihen (ed.), Tokyo no kenchiku, To (...)

23The Japanese occupied the whole of Manchuria after the Manchurian Incident of 1931 and used Changchun as its capital. Reflecting in a 1935 essay on architectural development in Japan and its colonies overseas, Kishida Hideto (1899-1966), a professor at the Imperial University of Tokyo who had strong connections to officials in Manchukuo, classified new Japanese buildings as belonging to one of three categories: those that employed a “Japanesque” style (often known as the Imperial Crown style), those designed in eclectic Western styles, and those built in new modernist styles.24 This classification can be applied to the architecture of Manchukuo’s capital as well.

24In January 1933, when the Five-Year Plan (1933-1937) of urban construction proposed by Xinjings Capital Construction Bureau was approved, a group of buildings for the central government immediately started to be built. However, despite a strong central state with a unified administration that carried out construction schemes quickly, various architectural styles were employed throughout the city. The modified Imperial Crown style appeared in the capital as theDeveloping Asia style (Chinese: xingya; Japanese: shin A), while Japanese Revival, Frank Lloyd Wrights prairie style, neo-classicism, expressionism, and modernism all also had a strong presence in Xinjing.

25The diversity was comparable to that of the previous decade, but now it was the ambiguous and self-contradictory nature of Japanese colonial ideology in Manchukuo, rather than the fragmented administration of the city, that prescribed architectural plurality. While previous constructions had boasted of equality with the West, the new and specifically modernist architecture in the capital city was now intended to represent superiority over the West.

The Developing Asia Style

  • 25 Makino Masato, “Kenkoku junen to kenchiku bunka, Manshu kenchiku zasshi, no. 22, October 1942, p.  (...)

26The distinctive Developing Asia style was used for governmental architecture in Xinjing. A tentative experiment in this style appeared in the capital’s first two major structures, the First and Second Government Buildings, upon which work began in 1932. Both were designed by Aiga Kensuke. They stood on the largest municipal plaza (Datong Plaza) and were completed in the summer of 1933. The first housed Xinjings Capital Construction Bureau and the Ministry of Culture and Education, and featured large sloping roofs and an ornamental parapet that was repeated as a motif atop the porte-cochere and tower (fig. 7). This was somewhat similar to Western precedents such as the Nebraska State Capitol designed by Bertram Goodhue in 1920 and an unbuilt scheme for the Finnish Parliament by Eliel Saarinen in 1908. The second, used as the municipal police station, had a distinctly Asian façade and a cluster of towers decorated with tiled roofs and mythical animals (fig. 8). Both buildings were symmetrical and two-storied, with square, high towers projecting from their center in a way that was also reminiscent of the Kanagawa Prefectural Office of 1926. According to contemporary critics, the First and Second Government Buildings were flawed because their ungainly proportions and hence failed to present a style that embodies an updated modernity in a newly born country.25 They were, however, experiments in appropriating shared East Asian architectural elements in Manchukuo, and exhibited the most conspicuous trademarks of the Developing Asia style: rigid symmetry, massiveness, verticality, and a square tower with tiled roofs at the center.

Figure 7: the CCB building at Datong Plaza.

Figure 7: the CCB building at Datong Plaza.

Source: Zhong Li. A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo. Changchun. Changchun Cultural and Historical Press, 2005, p.144.

Figure 8: the Policy Office at Datong Plaza.

Figure 8: the Policy Office at Datong Plaza.

Source: Zhong Li, A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo.

27In this sense, Developing Asia buildings provided an intriguing comparison with the modified Chinese architectural style called for in the Capital City Plan in Republican Nanjing, which also employed exquisite traditional decorations and simplistic lines on façades, boldly doing away with large sloping roofs in the traditional Chinese style. In contrast, central tiled-roofed towers were more often preferred in Xinjing than the palace-style buildings with large, sloping, hipped roofs favored in Republican Nanjing, as was the innovative combination of both Western and East Asian elements on front façades.

28A more mature iteration of the Developing Asia style can be found in the Hall of the State Council, constructed in 1933. It had a massive, three-story columned porte-cochere at the main entrance. The four free-standing columns that graced the entryways at either end of the central section and reappeared on each side of the central tower—more striking than the stone colonnades of the Kanagawa Building—served as a unifying motif. Overall, the repetitive effect of the columns enhanced the sense of verticality and monumentality, while the extravagant footprint of the building further communicated state power. While the plans of the Nagoya and the Kanagawa Buildings were square, the Hall of State Council had an H-shaped plan and occupied an even larger city block, on which it sat surrounded by lawns and trees.

29The strong presence of the porte-cochere suggests the influence of Wright’s Imperial Hotel on the Developing Asia buildings. This element was a focal point of several of Wright’s buildings, in which it merged visually with the repetitive horizontals that composed the front elevation. In the Imperial Crown buildings in Japan the porte-cochere was usually endowed with a diminutive Japanese-style roof, possibly in imitation of the covered exterior stair of many Shinto shrines, which also appeared in Xinjings Developing Asia buildings.

  • 26 For more detail of this building, see Manshu kenchiku zasshi, no. 16, August 1936, p. 8; see also B (...)

30Other Developing Asia structures in Xinjing included the Ministry of Justice, several blocks to the south of the Hall of State Council, and the Supreme Court, which sits at the southern end of Shuntian Street. The Ministry of Justice, built in 1935, was reported to be “the most successful application of this style,” characterized by a pyramidal tower at the center and a porte-cochere on the front (fig10).26 Although it was European in style, its roofing materials and decorative ridges were distinctly Chinese. Similarly, the focal element of the courthouse, completed in 1938, was once again the central roofed tower rising above the main entrance.

Figure 9: the Hall of the State Council, 1933.

Figure 9: the Hall of the State Council, 1933.

Source: the author, 2006.

Figure 10: the building of colonial Ministry of Justice, 1934.

Figure 10: the building of colonial Ministry of Justice, 1934.

Source: the author, 2006.

  • 27 Aisin Gioro Puyi (1906-1967) was the last emperor of Qing dynasty (rein 1909-1911), and was designa (...)

31The most grandiose building of Developing Asia style was to be Puyis palace,27 scheduled to be built on the northern plaza end of the street and intended to dominate this quarter, but the Pacific War suspended its construction. Apparently, the colonial regime expected to use this hybridized style arranged along both sides of Shuntian Street in Manchukuo’s administrative quarter to promote a positive image of the newly established state.

Modified Historicism

32The Developing Asia style was a hybrid aesthetic that combined Asian and Western elements in a single building, but historicist styles also abounded in both public and private buildings in Xinjing. In contrast to the nearby administrative quarter of Manchukuo where the Developing Asia style dominated the cityscape, along Datong Street, the ambitious extension of the former main boulevard that radiated from the railway station, a mix of various styles could be found.

  • 28 First Five Year of capital Construction,” Contemporary Manchuria, vol. II, no. 1, January 1938, p. (...)

33A conspicuous building comprising the new “civic center” at Datong Plaza served as the headquarters for the Bank of Manchukuo. Completed in 1938, this colossal four-storied structure was fronted with a Doric colonnade, evoking a classical air.28 The bank represented a distinctly Western taste (fig. 11). It seemed the directors of the Bank had a particular predilection for the West, as they built its club and employee houses in a Wrightian prairie style (fig. 12).

Figure 11: Central Bank of Manchuria.

Figure 11: Central Bank of Manchuria.

Source: Weilian YU (eds.) Changchun jindai jianzhu (Changchun’s modern architecture). Changchun: Changchun Press, 2001, p.117.

Figure 12: Plan of the club of the Central Bank of Manchuria, 1933, demolished.

Figure 12: Plan of the club of the Central Bank of Manchuria, 1933, demolished.

Source: Akira Koshizawa, City Planning of Manchuria under Japanese Colonial, (Huang Shimeng translation), Taipei: Dajia Press, 1986, p.186.

34As the seat of the real ruler of the colonial state, the headquarters for the Japanese Guandong Army was the most prominent example of historicism along Datong Street. Completed in 1935, it was a three-storied structure with three “crowns,” each reminiscent of the upper reaches of Japanese castles (fig. 13). Unlike the Developing Asia buildings, it thus boasted a motif that was very obviously foreign.

Figure 13: the headquarters of the GDA.

Figure 13: the headquarters of the GDA.

Source: Zhong Li, A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo, Changchun: Changchun Cultural and Historical Press, 2005, p. 98.

  • 29 Shinkyo tokubetsushi chokanbo shomuka, Kokuto Shinkyo, Shinkyo: Shinkyo tokubetsushi kosho, 1942, p (...)

35Another structure displaying typically Japanese elements was the Shenwu Hall (Japanese: Jimmu den) completed in 1940 and located in a park on the east side of Datong Street (fig14). Its 920 square meters provided a protected enclosure for fencing, judo, and archery.29 Both the Guandong Army headquarters and the Jimmu Hall are distinctive examples of the Japanese Revival style in Xinjing.

Figure 14: Shenwu Hall.

Figure 14: Shenwu Hall.

Source: the author, 2004.

  • 30 Weilian Yu (ed.), Changchun jindai jianzhu [Modern architecture in Changchun], op. cit. (note 15), (...)
  • 31 See David Vance Tucker, Building “Our Manchukuo”: Japanese City Planning, Architecture, and Nation- (...)

36Often frequented by ordinary citizens, another kind of building constructed in a historicist style was the public monument. The Monument to National Foundation (fig15) was erected at the far southern end of Datong Street on September 18, 1940, the tenth anniversary of the Manchurian Incident.30 A counterpart to Tokyo’s Yasukuni Shrine, the Monument was also a Japanese Revival building and could be reached through two large gateways.31

Figure 15: Entrance of the Monument to National Foundation (jianguo zhonglingmiao)

Figure 15: Entrance of the Monument to National Foundation (jianguo zhonglingmiao)

Source: the author, 2004.

Modernist Buildings

37The capital city of Manchukuo was an experimental terrain for Japanese architects, some of whom extended the grandeur of the Imperial Crown style to the Japanese colonial undertaking in Manchuria, while others who preferred modernism found the experience of working in Manchuria crucial for building in post-war Japan.

38Facing Datong Plaza, to the southwest of the Central Bank of Manchuria was the headquarters of the Manchuria Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (fig. 16). Completed in 1935, it was similarly modernist—a five story monolith with a smooth brick façade and a tower rising three stories above the central stairwell.

Figure 16: Manchuria Telegraph and Telephone Corporation Building at Datong Plaza.

Figure 16: Manchuria Telegraph and Telephone Corporation Building at Datong Plaza.

Source: Zhong Li, A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo, Changchun: Changchun Cultural and Historical Press, 2005, p. 77.

  • 32 Qiushi Wu, A Study on the French Architect Paul Muller in Tianjin, graduate thesis, School of Archi (...)

39Another exceptional modernist building was Manchukuo’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. After the long debate between the Southern Manchurian Railway (Mantetsu) and the Guandong Army over taking out foreign loans to develop Manchukuo, the Foreign Ministry building was designed by the Tianjin-based French firm of Brossard-Mopin32 and completed in 1936. This was a rare exception of a Manchukuo governmental building that was not adorned with an Asian tile roof (fig. 17).

Figure 17: the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Figure 17: the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Source: Zhong Li, A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo, Changchun: Changchun Cultural and Historical Press, 2005, p. 79.

  • 33 Yishi Liu and Fuhe Zhang, 1930 niandai changchun de xiandai jianzhu yundong [Modernism in Changchu (...)

40Two leading modernist architects left their imprint in the construction of Xinjing. Frank Lloyd Wright’s influence endured amongst his Japanese disciples following the construction of his Imperial Hotel in Tokyo. In the 1930s one of his Japanese assistants, Endō Arata, moved his office to colonial Changchun and settled down in the city. There he designed the Manchurian Central Bank Club, a large compound with residences and a spacious clubhouse built in a Wrightian style that gained immediate recognition.33

  • 34 David Stewart, op. cit. (note 5), p. 154.

41The other Western figure whose influence can be seen in colonial Changchun is Le Corbusier. Two young Japanese modernist architects, Maekawa Kunio and Sakakura Junzō came to Manchuria in the 1930s after returning from Le Corbusier’s office in Paris. Though frustrated by his failure to win competitions in Japan, Maekawa won two tenders in Manchuria for the Workshops of Showa Steel Corporation (1937) and the Civic Hall of Dalian (1938) respectively.34

  • 35 Jonathan Reynolds, Maekawa Kunio and the Emergence of Japanese Modernist Architecture, Berkeley, CA (...)
  • 36 Ibid.

42Maekawa opened his branch office in Shanghai in 1939, and in 1942 he worked on a series of designs for the Manchurian Aircraft Company. The projects in Manchuria and in Shanghai were essential to the office’s survival, because his Tokyo office had very little work.35 As Maekawa confessed, the years he worked in Manchuko were a period of growing ambivalence in Japan toward the principles of modern design and their significance for a national architecture.36 However, he concluded that modernism was not a threat to tradition and could be mobilized for nationalistic ends. This allowed him to establish his reputation through the Japanese colonial undertaking on the mainland. Indeed, in 1943, Maekawa for the first time prepared a competition entry in the ancient Japanese palace style. It was for a Japanese Cultural Center in Bangkok.

  • 37 It was not until the economic resurgence in 1951 that he got the chance to transform the design of (...)

43In the meantime Sakakura Junzō (1904-1968), who entered Le Corbusier’s office in Paris in 1931 and worked there for five years, also worked in Manchukuo. Particularly noteworthy among his projects for Manchukuo was his unrealized planning scheme for the South Lake Complex in Xinjing (fig. 13). Made in 1939 following an invitation from Manchukuos government, it inherited its main idea from two of Le Corbusier’s projects from the early 1930s: his city planning scheme for Algiers and a proposed plan for residential blocks in Antwerp. It was also influenced by Le Corbusiers Radiant City, whose plan was published in 1933 when Sakakura was working in Le Corbusier’s office. However, except for his Japanese Pavilion for the Paris International Expo in 1937 and the residential housing proposal in Xinjing, Sakakura had little work for a stretch of fifteen years.37

  • 38 Yatuska Hajime, The 1960 Tokyo Bay Project of Kenzō Tange,” in Arie Graafland (ed.), Cities in Tra (...)

44While Maekawa was working on the competition for Dalian Civic Hall in 1938, a younger architect, Tange Kenzō, entered his office upon graduation from the Imperial University of Tokyo. Tange stayed with Maekawa until returning to graduate school in 1942. For a period, however, Tange also participated in the production of the South Lake Housing Complex under the supervision of Sakakura (fig. 18). The architectural historian Hajime Yatuska suggested in his research into Tanges Tokyo Bay Project in 1960 that the younger architect’s apprenticeship with Sakakura in the 1930s was instrumental for the waterfront planning scheme (fig. 19).38 These three Japanese architects—Maekawa, Sakakura and Tange—became pioneering modernist architects in the postwar period, and the strong connection to their previous practice in the 1930s and 1940s in colonial Manchuria should not be overlooked.

Figure 18: the plan for South Lake Complex, produced in 1939.

Figure 18: the plan for South Lake Complex, produced in 1939.

Source: Akira Koshizawa, Shokuminchi Manshu no toshi keikaku. Ajia Keizai Kenkyujo, 1978, p. 144.

Figure 19: Tokyo Bay Plan, by Tange Kenzo in 1961.

Figure 19: Tokyo Bay Plan, by Tange Kenzo in 1961.

Source: Yatuska Hajime, The 1960 Tokyo Bay Project of Kenzo Tange,” Arie Graafland (ed), Cities in Transition. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2001.

45The tremendous diversity of what was built in Xinjiang often blurred the stylistic boundaries between modernists and those who were willing to quote historical forms and ornaments. Architects of all stripes working in Japan and Manchukuo shared a growing ambivalence toward the principles of modernist design and their significance for Japanese and Japanese colonial architecture. But despite their differences, these architects shared a keen sense of group identity; they were all engaged in a struggle to forge new architectural solutions appropriate to the East Asian “modernity. This accounts for the plurality of architectural styles in Xinjing as a showcase of Japanese colonial rule.

Architecture and Politics: the Rationale of Aesthetic Pluralism

  • 39 Itō Chūta is remembered as the first historian of Japanese architecture and as an important archite (...)

46In Europe many considered modernism threatening because they saw it as a radical and dangerous ideology. This produced significant rifts within the architectural communities there. In Japan, too, modernist concept and practice became suspect as the political climate in the late 1920s once again grew nationalistic. Some of modernism’s most ardent opponents, such as Itō Chūta (1867-1954),39 did not, however, portray it as a particularly dangerous threat but instead insisted that better architectural forms could be found that conformed to Japan’s climate, history, and culture. In the meantime, it seemed Japanese architects were cautious regarding politics compared to their German counterparts in order to avoid being attacked by nationalists. Though modernists such as Maekawa had extensive training abroad and a longstanding commitment to modernist architecture, they sometimes conceded to nationalistic pressure and turned to pre-modern forms.

  • 40 Zheng Xiaoxu, Wangdao jiangyan lu [Records of the lectures on Wangdaoism], Changchun: Changchun Mun (...)

47These architectural developments in Japan were introduced to Manchuria, where the range of styles was especially explicit in the capital of Manchukuo. In the nascent state, experiments with statecraft were omnipresent as part of efforts to construct the first nation in the world based upon the lofty ideal of ethnic harmony.40 Their scope encompassed architecture, particularly monumental Developing Asia buildings in Xinjing. Efforts in demonstrating egalitarian principles were made in Manchukuo’s state architecture. Combining Western, Chinese and Japanese elements in architecture, the Developing Asia style was one manifestation of the “spirit of ethnic harmony” (minzoku kyowa no seishin) that the Japanese claimed underpinned the colonizing project. Although the colonial regime boasted of ethnic harmony, it should be noted that no records of well-trained professionals of other ethnicities, be they Chinese or Korean or Mongolian, have been found.

  • 41 Thomas Metcalf, An Imperial Vision: Indian Architecture and Britains Raj, Berkeley, CA: University (...)

48Borrowing some major characteristics of the Imperial Crown style, Developing Asia buildings effectively donned the mantle of modernity in Xinjing. Designed to impress viewers with their grandeur and power, they demonstrated both technical innovation and the ideological message of returning to Asia.” The technological and cultural icons of this brand of non-Western modernity can be better understood in comparison to practices in Western colonies. For example, some of the most prominent features in Herbert Baker’s otherwise classical design of secretariat buildings in New Delhi were clearly indigenous. According to Thomas Metcalf, these “were meant to reinforce this sense of empire; for from these porches ministers could look out over the far ruinous sites of the historic cities of the Hindu and Mahomedan dynasties to the new capital beneath them that united for the first time through the centuries all races and religions of India.”41

  • 42 Cemil Aydin, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia, New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2007 (...)

49By the same token, the manipulation of local architectural elements to express state power and associative rule was also evident in Developing Asia buildings in Xinjing. The construction of the capital city was used to display Japan’s new leadership role in an Asia unified by cultural similarities to “protect the interests of all Asian nations to resist the invasion from the West.”42 Thus the Developing Asia style was widely used in governmental buildings as a means to compete against—and indeed triumph overWestern civilization.

  • 43 Yishi Liu, “Weiman xinjing guihua sixiang laiyuan yanjiu [A Study on the Intellectual Origins of Xi (...)

50The Developing Asia style was hardly seen in Manchukuo outside the administrative quarter in Xinjing. Instead, a plurality of architectural styles characterized the cityscape. The stylistic diversity was comparable to that before 1931, but it was achieved under the aegis of Japanese militarism rather than by the administrators of fragmented parts of Changchun. Moreover, the creation of modernity in the 1930s did not simply imitate Western models, but also incorporated various modified indigenous elements with the aim of expressing a superiority to the West. These included larger green space and broader avenues, as well as a propagandistic mix of various local elements in urban construction, as exemplified in the 1932 Capital Construction Plan (fig2).43

  • 44 Brian McLaren, op. cit. (note 3), p. 2-6.

51There are two reasons why, despite the presence of a powerful totalitarian government, architectural pluralism was nonetheless evident in Xinjing. First, both pan-Asianism and the Kingly Way were incomplete philosophical systems. Manchukuos pan-Asian ideology was no more than a web of ethical principles and aversions, held together by political and aesthetic glue. Unable to resolve the question of its identity by means of theoretical or technological utopias, pan-Asianism attempted, through the lavish patronage of traditionalist and modernist arts, to achieve “an aesthetic overproduction”—a surfeit of militaristic signs, images, slogans, posters, and buildings—to compensate for, fill in, and cover up its uncertain ideological core. This is one reason why the Japanese colonial regime of Manchukuo, like its Italian counterpart in Libya, tended, despite its authoritarianism, toward an “eclecticism of the spirit” in its cultural policies,44 thus encouraging a proliferation of competing modernist formulations among which the authorities felt free to choose according to circumstances.

  • 45 Barbara M. Lane, Architecture and Politics in Germany, 1918-1945, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University (...)
  • 46 Jonathan Reynolds, op. cit. (note 35), p. 119-121.

52Second, no public projects on the scale of the Berlin Olympic stadium or Albert Speers Zeppelinfeld were completed in Japan during these years. Even in Nazi Germany, Hitler endorsed vernacular houses and clubs as well as monumental public buildings, while Hermann Goering chose a modernist functional style for his Air Force ministry and institute.45 Architectural pluralism in Manchukuo was not uncommon because the intention of the various organs within the government was never clear in Manchukuo.46 Likewise, although Japanese castle-style crowned roofs were used for the Guandong Army Headquarters, the headquarters of the Bureau of Guandong Territory (fig20), sitting across the street, was a modernist building. With its flat roof and no tower, it appeared even more radical, bespeaking the fact that the Manchukuo government did not carry out a unified national building program.

Figure 20: The Bureau of Guandong Territory.

Figure 20: The Bureau of Guandong Territory.

Source: Yishi Liu, 2004.

Conclusions

53Invented ideas are not always as novel as they seem to be, and newness is oftentimes diluted by the past. The new so-called Developing Asia style in the capital of Manchukuo was a synthesis rooted in nationalist movements and architectural practices in both Japan and China. It marked a profound change in Japanese colonial policy and cultural attitudes towards modernist ideals. Under the slogan of “returning to Asia, the image of an independent, self-serving, pan-Asian solidarity nourished during the Japanese empires rapid formation stood in contrast to Japans prior equation of Western culture with technology and progress.

54It is clear that the ideological message of the regime was forged in the form of streets and buildings and further emphasized in the subtexts of their architectural details. Appropriating the eclectic historicist styles and Art Nouveau that were also popular in contemporary Europe, many styles gained popularity in Changchun before 1931. Reflecting developments not only in Japan but also in Europe and its colonies, Japanese expression in the built environment in a colonial capital city was part of a global discourse.

55Architectural and urban plurality continued into the Manchukuo era after 1932 though under different circumstances and with different modernist attitudes. In the capital city of Manchukuo, there was no single dominant mode according to which modernity and indigenous culture interacted. The aesthetic pluralism in Changchun and during the 1930s after the city was transformed into Xinjing reflected the inherent ambivalence and complexities of Japanese pan-Asian ideology in Manchukuo.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Eri Hotta, Pan-Asianism and Japans War 1931-1945, New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007.

2 Homi Bhabha, Introduction,” in Homi Bhabha (ed.), Nation and Narration, London ; New York, NY: Routledge, 1990.

3 Brian McLaren,Introduction,” in Brian McLaren, Architecture and Tourism in Italian Colonial Libya: An Ambivalent Modernism, Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press, 2006.

4 The earliest example of Japan Revival was probably the Nara Kencho governmental office building of 1895 by Nagano Uheiji. In the heterogeneous context of late Meiji Western architecture, however, it was just one more style. For more detail on the rise of Japanese nationalism and related architectural movements, see Dallas Finn, Meiji Revisited: The Sight of Victorian Japan, New York, NY: Weatherhill, 1995.

5 David Stewart, The Making of a Modern Japanese Architecture: 1868 to the Present, Tokyo ; New York, NY: Kodansha International, 1987, p. 51.

6 Nagoya City Hall, built in 1930, was designed by Hirabayashi Kingowho, who added decorative gables to the roof of the central tower, thereby suggesting the distinct application of Japanese taste in architecture.

7 Sicheng Liang, Corpus of Liang Sicheng (II), Beijing: Architectural Industry Press of China, 1984, p. 221.

8 See Yishi Liu, Nationalism: an Approach to Understanding Modern Architecture in National Chinese Style,” Huazhong Architecture, vol. 1, 2006, p. 5-8; also Charles Musgrove, Building a Dream: Constructing a National Capital in Nanjing,” in Joseph Esherick (ed.), Remaking the Chinese City: Modernity and National Identity, 1900 to 1950, Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press, 2002, p. 139-147.

9 Such as ports, shipping lines, warehouses, telegraphic communications, urban planning, and other endeavors. Between SMR’s new towns and the already extant Chinese cities, a new “commercial district” appeared, forming before 1932 the fourth section of Changchun.

10 Planners set aside twenty-three percent of the total area for streets. There were six classes of roads, the widest of which was 60 meters, and the narrowest 10.9 meters, or six ken. All but the smallest (the sixth class) had sidewalks. The basic grid was formed by eight east-to-west streets and ten north-to-south streets. Two diagonal streets radiated from the railway station and convergence at two circular plazas, upon which Japanese could erect buildings with impressive facades. See Akira Koshizawa, Manshukoku no shuto keikaku: tokyo no genzai to mirai o tou [The planning of Manchukuo’s capital: an inquiry into the present and future of Tokyo], Tokyo: Nihon keizai hyoronsha, 1988.

11 David D. Buck, “Railway City and National Capital,” in Joseph W. Esherick (ed.), Remaking the Chinese City: Modernity and Nationality Identity, 1900-1950, op. cit. (note 8), p. 65-89.

12 David Stewart, op. cit. (note 5); and Dallas Finn, op. cit. (note 4).

13 All three buildings and the station were designed by Ichida Kichijiro, a 1906 Todai graduate who joined Mantetsu the following year. See Bill Sewell, Japanese Imperialism and Civic Construction in Manchuria: Changchun, 1905-45, PhD dissertation, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 2000, Chapter 4, p. 99-133.

14 The first examples of developing a Chinese new town or commercial district within a traditional political center in the first decade of the twentieth century are the Xiangfang district in Beijing and new districts in Tianjin and Jinan under Yuan Shikai. Despite the presence of commercial interests, the primary concern for developing a Chinese district was to oppose Japanese economic and territorial expansion in Changchun. Yishi Liu, “Colonialism and A New Approach to Modern Chinese Architectural History,” Architectural Journal, no. 9, 2013, p. 8-15.

15 Huiwang Changchun committee (ed.), Huiwang Changchun (Reviewing Changchun), Changchun: Changchun Press, 1998. For buildings in different sectors during the Mantetsu era, Chinese literature includes Weilian Yu (ed.), Changchun jindai jianzhu (Modern architecture in Changchun), Changchun: Changchun Press, 2001. For English-language sources, see Bill Sewell, op. cit. (note 13). Sewell’s work did not include any reference to the Chinese sectors.

16 According to a statistics in 1928, the number of residents in the Japanese sector was 31,000, while the number in the old walled city and commercial district amounted to 66,000 and 44,000 respectively. See Akira Koshizawa, op. cit. (note 10), p. 86.

17 Michael A. Schneider, “The Limits of Cultural Rule: Internationalism and Identity in Japanese Responses to Korean Rice,” in Gi-wook Shin and Michael Robinson (eds.), Colonial Modernity in Korea, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 1999.

18 Hong Kal, “Modeling the West, Returning to Asia: Shifting Politics of Representation in Japanese Colonial Expositions in Korea,” Comparative Study of Society and History, vol. 47, no. 3, 2005, p. 507-531.

19 Cemil Aydin, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia, New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2007, p. 6.

20 The roots of pan-Asianism go back to the Meiji era, when the Sinocentric world order collapsed and a number of political associations were formed, advocating the ideal of solidarity with Asia and the notion of raising Asia (ko A) or developing Asia (shin A) and the notion of aligning with other Asian nations to establish a new world order under Japanese leadership. For the historical development of pan-Asianism, see Sven Saaler, Pan-Asianism in modern Japanese History,” in Sven Saaler and Victor Koschmann (eds.), Pan-Asianism in Modern Japanese History, London; New York, NY: Routledge, 2006.

21 See Sun Yat-sen. Sun spelt out the key political category of wangdao or the way of ethical monarchs and peaceful rulership, as opposed to the unethical and violent way (badao) of the hegemon (the way of the West), calling for a return to the previous Sinocentric world order. Duara Presenjit, “The Discourse of Civilization and Decolonization,” Journal of World History, vol. 15, no. 1, 2004, p. 1-5.

22 Kōji Suga, “A Concept of ‘Overseas Shinto Shrines’: A Pantheistic Attempt by Ogasawara Shōzō and Its Limitations,” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, vol. 37, no. 1, 2010, p. 47-74.

23 Homi Bhabha, op. cit. (note 2).

24 Hideto Kishida, Tokyo no kindai teki kenchiku,” in Toshi bi kyokaihen (ed.), Tokyo no kenchiku, Tokyo: Daitokyo kenchikusai kinnen shuppan, 1935, p. 10.

25 Makino Masato, “Kenkoku junen to kenchiku bunka, Manshu kenchiku zasshi, no. 22, October 1942, p. 10.

26 For more detail of this building, see Manshu kenchiku zasshi, no. 16, August 1936, p. 8; see also Bill Sewell, Japanese Imperialism and Civic Construction in Manchuria: Changchun, 1905-45, op. cit. (note 13), p. 214.

27 Aisin Gioro Puyi (1906-1967) was the last emperor of Qing dynasty (rein 1909-1911), and was designated by the Japanese as the Chief Executor of Manchukuo in 1932. He was then enthroned as the emperor of Manchukuo in 1934.

28 First Five Year of capital Construction,” Contemporary Manchuria, vol. II, no. 1, January 1938, p. 5.

29 Shinkyo tokubetsushi chokanbo shomuka, Kokuto Shinkyo, Shinkyo: Shinkyo tokubetsushi kosho, 1942, p. 202.

30 Weilian Yu (ed.), Changchun jindai jianzhu [Modern architecture in Changchun], op. cit. (note 15), p. 203.

31 See David Vance Tucker, Building “Our Manchukuo”: Japanese City Planning, Architecture, and Nation-Building in Occupied China, 1931-1945, PhD dissertation, University of Iowa, 1999, p. 360-367.

32 Qiushi Wu, A Study on the French Architect Paul Muller in Tianjin, graduate thesis, School of Architecture of Tianjing University, 2011, p. 16-21. See also David Tucker, “France, Brossard Mopin, and Manchukuo,” in Laura Victoir and Victor Zatsepine (eds.), Harbin to Hanoi, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, p. 59-82.

33 Yishi Liu and Fuhe Zhang, 1930 niandai changchun de xiandai jianzhu yundong [Modernism in Changchun during the 1930s]”, New Architecture, vol. 5, 2006, p. 59-62.

34 David Stewart, op. cit. (note 5), p. 154.

35 Jonathan Reynolds, Maekawa Kunio and the Emergence of Japanese Modernist Architecture, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2001, p. 119.

36 Ibid.

37 It was not until the economic resurgence in 1951 that he got the chance to transform the design of Kamakura Gallery into reality.

38 Yatuska Hajime, The 1960 Tokyo Bay Project of Kenzō Tange,” in Arie Graafland (ed.), Cities in Transition, Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2001, p. 179-191.

39 Itō Chūta is remembered as the first historian of Japanese architecture and as an important architect. He also designed the first modernist Japanese buildings combining Japanese and Western elements.

40 Zheng Xiaoxu, Wangdao jiangyan lu [Records of the lectures on Wangdaoism], Changchun: Changchun Municipal Library, 1934.

41 Thomas Metcalf, An Imperial Vision: Indian Architecture and Britains Raj, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1989, p. 227.

42 Cemil Aydin, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia, New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2007, p. 7.

43 Yishi Liu, “Weiman xinjing guihua sixiang laiyuan yanjiu [A Study on the Intellectual Origins of Xinjing Plan of 1932]”, Chengshi guihua xuekan (Review of City Planning), no. 4, 2015, p. 79-90.

44 Brian McLaren, op. cit. (note 3), p. 2-6.

45 Barbara M. Lane, Architecture and Politics in Germany, 1918-1945, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1968, p. 190-215.

46 Jonathan Reynolds, op. cit. (note 35), p. 119-121.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1: Xinjing Plan of 1932.
Crédits Source: Courtesy of Changchun Urban Planning Institute.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 488k
Titre Figure 2: the Kanagawa Prefectural Office.
Crédits Source: Jonathan Reynolds, Maekawa Kunio and the emergence of Japanese modernist architecture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2001, p.91.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 12k
Titre Figure 3: the KMT’s Central Procuratorate, 1935.
Crédits Source: the author, 2004.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 8,0k
Titre Figure 4: a “collage city” at Changchun before 1932.
Crédits Source: redrawn from David D. BUCK, “Railway City and National Capital,” in Joseph W. Esherick (ed.), Remaking The Chinese City: Modernity and Nationality Identity, 1900-1950. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press, 1999, p. 71.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 88k
Titre Figure 5: Yamato Hotel in Mantetsu settlement, Changchun, 1915.
Crédits Source: Mantetsu shomubu chosaka, Manshu kogyo rodo jijo. Dalian: Mantetsu, 1925.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 12k
Titre Figure 6: Chinese verandah office for the chief official at Changchun commercial district, built in 1909.
Crédits Source: Zhang Fuhe (ed.), Study and Preservation of Modern Chinese Architecture VIII, Beijing: Tsinghua University, 2003, p.501.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 16k
Titre Figure 7: the CCB building at Datong Plaza.
Crédits Source: Zhong Li. A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo. Changchun. Changchun Cultural and Historical Press, 2005, p.144.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 12k
Titre Figure 8: the Policy Office at Datong Plaza.
Crédits Source: Zhong Li, A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 12k
Titre Figure 9: the Hall of the State Council, 1933.
Crédits Source: the author, 2006.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 88k
Titre Figure 10: the building of colonial Ministry of Justice, 1934.
Crédits Source: the author, 2006.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 76k
Titre Figure 11: Central Bank of Manchuria.
Crédits Source: Weilian YU (eds.) Changchun jindai jianzhu (Changchun’s modern architecture). Changchun: Changchun Press, 2001, p.117.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 84k
Titre Figure 12: Plan of the club of the Central Bank of Manchuria, 1933, demolished.
Crédits Source: Akira Koshizawa, City Planning of Manchuria under Japanese Colonial, (Huang Shimeng translation), Taipei: Dajia Press, 1986, p.186.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 116k
Titre Figure 13: the headquarters of the GDA.
Crédits Source: Zhong Li, A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo, Changchun: Changchun Cultural and Historical Press, 2005, p. 98.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 12k
Titre Figure 14: Shenwu Hall.
Crédits Source: the author, 2004.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 68k
Titre Figure 15: Entrance of the Monument to National Foundation (jianguo zhonglingmiao)
Crédits Source: the author, 2004.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-15.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 88k
Titre Figure 16: Manchuria Telegraph and Telephone Corporation Building at Datong Plaza.
Crédits Source: Zhong Li, A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo, Changchun: Changchun Cultural and Historical Press, 2005, p. 77.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-16.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 128k
Titre Figure 17: the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Crédits Source: Zhong Li, A Study of the Postcards of Manchukuo, Changchun: Changchun Cultural and Historical Press, 2005, p. 79.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-17.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 120k
Titre Figure 18: the plan for South Lake Complex, produced in 1939.
Crédits Source: Akira Koshizawa, Shokuminchi Manshu no toshi keikaku. Ajia Keizai Kenkyujo, 1978, p. 144.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-18.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 300k
Titre Figure 19: Tokyo Bay Plan, by Tange Kenzo in 1961.
Crédits Source: Yatuska Hajime, “The 1960 Tokyo Bay Project of Kenzo Tange,” Arie Graafland (ed), Cities in Transition. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2001.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-19.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,3M
Titre Figure 20: The Bureau of Guandong Territory.
Crédits Source: Yishi Liu, 2004.
URL http://abe.revues.org/docannexe/image/2910/img-20.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 79k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Liu Yishi, « Ambivalent Modernity: Showcasing Colonial Architecture in Manchukuo’s Capital City in the 1930s », ABE Journal [En ligne], 7 | 2015, mis en ligne le 15 septembre 2015, consulté le 22 août 2017. URL : http://abe.revues.org/2910 ; DOI : 10.4000/abe.2910

Haut de page

Auteur

Liu Yishi

Professor, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Licence Creative Commons
La revue ABE Journal est mise à disposition selon les termes de la Licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.

Haut de page
  • Logo INHA
  • Logo CNRS – Institut des sciences humaines et sociales
  • Logo In Visu
  • Revues.org