Beijing – Debunking Myths of China

By M. Baker

When the selection of the city of Beijing as the host city for the 2008 Olympics was announced on July 13, 2001, it sparked a wave of excitement across China and marked a new period of change for the city. This period of change before the 2008 Olympics transformed the city in many ways, but perhaps the biggest changes for the city came in the form of a transformed skyline and new infrastructure.

Prior to the selection of Beijing as an Olympic host city, the physical landscape of Beijing was similar to many other cities across China. Buildings were either old holdovers from dynasties past or distinctly utilitarian high-rises built in the communist era when waste and extravagance was severely frowned upon. These communist-era buildings were often bland and made of brick or stone or other cheap materials.

For the Beijing Olympics, government officials strove to present Beijing as a truly international city. In order to fulfill this goal, Chinese government officials embarked on a huge campaign to change the landscape of Beijing in several ways. First, they set about improving the overall infrastructure of the city: hundreds of miles of subway lines were added, the airport was expanded and updated, and new facilities for the Olympics were built, including the Water Cube and the famous Bird’s Nest Stadium.

Next, the Chinese government decided to preserve—at least artificially—some distinctly Chinese structures from the pre-communist era as a tribute the China’s past. This move was vastly different from the previous actions of the government in the communist era, who tended to emphasize progress over cultural history—see the Cultural Revolution.

Finally, new development and architectural innovation was strongly encouraged as China attempted to turn Beijing into a truly international city akin to New York, London, or Paris. Buildings were made to impress and show “face” for China: the new National Theatre, the Bird’s Nest Stadium, the Water Cube, and the CCTV building are all examples of this new age of Chinese architecture that came about because of the preparations for the 2008 Olympics.

The Beijing National Stadium, a.k.a. “the Bird’s Nest” during the Olympic Ceremonies, 2008.
(“国家体育场,” by 老黄瓜/nPhoto.net/licensed with CCBY 2.0)

Overall, Beijing was radically transformed physically for the Olympics. These changes have had a lasting impact on Beijing, particularly because of the new infrastructure and new skyline filled with modern, architecturally distinct buildings. However, some argue that the changes made for the Olympics have not done much for the city. In an article for The New York Times, Michael Wines details how the flagship stadiums built for the Olympics stand mostly empty four years later: “By most accounts, the vendors hawking trinkets outside the stadium outnumber the foreigners who go there to gawk.”

On the other hand, most residents of Beijing had positive feelings for the changes brought about because of the Olympics: even Grandma Gao, a woman who had previously lived in a hutong village within Beijing and was forcibly relocated to make room for the new National Stadium, reported that her life had “changed for the better”.

The changes brought about by the Olympics have drastically transformed Beijing, even years after the Olympics. While the urgency for such change has slowed, today Beijing continues to change its landscape in its continuing quest to present the best “face” to the world.

A look at the different periods of architecture in China, mixed together: in the foreground, Communist high-rises are visible, with the Imperial Forbidden City in the middle, and the new, architecturally distinct skyscrapers in the background.
(“View of Beijing, China,” by ahenobarbus/Flickr/licensed with CC BY 2.0)

Before and After the Beijing Olympics: Political Change

Sources:

Beijing: Changed by the Olympics, Film. Directed by Duffy Wang (Oakland, CA: D3 Productions, 2008).

Curtis Ashton, “Beijing’s Museums in the Context of the 2008 Olympics,” in Cultural Heritage: Politics in China, eds. Tami Blumenfield and Helaine Silverman, 187-203. (New York: Springer, 2013).

Wines, Michael, “After Summer Olympics, Empty Shells in Beijing,” The New York Times, February 6, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/weekinreview/07wines.html (accessed March 3, 2014).

By T. Farnish and M. Baker

Thousands of Beijing residents celebrate the Opening Ceremonies in a park in front of TV screens broadcasting the show.
“2008 Beijing Opening Ceremonies @ Ditan Park,” by Kris Krug, Flickr, licensed with CC BY-SA 2.0.

The 2008 Beijing games were welcomed by 94% of the Chinese population. This is no surprise, because the Olympics are a great world tradition, and they provide a great opportunity to show off a country.

Many people believe that there is great economic opportunity in hosting the Olympics, and there is. The problem with hosting is that the country needs to be able to handle such a huge event. This requires an infrastructure that can handle an extraordinarily high volume of people, can handle all the Olympic events, and can house all the Olympians. This of course costs a very large amount of money. In China’s case the total cost of hosting the Olympics in 2008 was over 40 billion U.S dollars. Part of the process for raising this money were tax increases. Nothing drastic, but every increase was noticed for those citizens that struggled with money. The issue is that the host country needs to make it all back for the Olympics to positively affect the economy.

Also, after the Olympics have ended the facilities need to be put to use or they become bad investments. Some were bad investments from the start, like building a new airport terminal to handle all of the traffic. Beijing will not experience that very high volume of people regularly, but it was necessary for the few weeks that the games were taking place. According to Michael Wines in a New York Times article, these issues have greatly affected previous countries, like Greece, “where 21 of the 22 stadiums erected for the 2004 Olympics were reported last year to be unoccupied.” Also in Greece, “The $14.4 billion cost of that party is being cited by some as a source of Greece’s potentially destabilizing fiscal troubles.” After the 1976 games Montreal also experienced economic difficulty due to the Olympics.

The difference with China, however, is that most of its real estate is already vacant. The increase in jobs from building these structures is moreimportant for China than keeping them occupied. Due to China’s extreme growth, the building will eventually be filled. Even if they stand empty for awhile, the building process creates jobs, and raises GDP, which theoretically raises living quality. The lasting effect that the 2008 games had on China is yet to be seen, but so far the empty structures have not slowed the economic juggernaut down. The Olympics brought new development to China, which cannot be ignored.

Tag: Beijing

Before and After the Beijing Olympics: Physical Change

Before and After the Beijing Olympics: Economic Change