Special economc zones [SEZ], experiments in capitalism whose invests spill over into neighboring states as population densities shift due to market cycles is an interesting condition. [Shenzen and its spillage in Dongguan] Risky, privatized investment in building post-industrialized conditions is stunning. Investments in infrastructural building; the open, blank, empty spaces, that promote future occupation and reclamation is a stunning condition in urban development. It is built “emptiness”, constantly in a state of change. Possibly Miami’s vacant condo development reminds me of this investment craze. How does a designer design for a state of constant change?
I am a bit confused if the architectural production in this condition of expediency is “image” based; one of tabula rasa, with a singular iconic vision and collective function or infrastructural; a framework for future development.?
Also, I don’t fully comprehend the “village to a city” development model where decentralized individual town leaders harness foreign investments to generate competition resulting in individual power and profits. How do investors profit when there is no guarantee. I don’t understand the "socialist market economy" either; “that became national policy in October 1992 and has accounted for the tenfold increase in China's gross national product from 1978 to 1994.” Privatization of state/public owned enterprises?
I presume more questions than discussions from this weeks readings.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment