“Let me look at your city， and I will tell you whatits residents pursue culturally.” In the eyes of American architect Eero Saarinen （1910-1961）， architecture not only provides dwellings for people， but also reflects the values of a city.
　　A first glimpse of the cityscape of China’s capital often turnsto the National Stadium， dubbed the “Bird’s Nest.” Designers of the 2.3-billion-yuan primary venue of the 2008 Olympic Games -aimed to build an iconic stadium， unique amongst its counterparts around the world. The “Bird’s Nest” is just one of Beijing’s awe-inspiring massive modern landmarks， along with the new headquarters ofChina Central Television （CCTV）， Beijing International CapitalAirport’s Terminal 3， National Center for the Performing Arts， and others. Astonished by the city’s dazzling skyline， deconstructionist architect Zaha Hadid asserted that any new concepts or designs could find a home in Beijing. Thanks to contributions from global architectural gurus， the ancient city of Beijing has undergone a fantastic facelift.
　　However， it remains unknown how many of these skyscrapers truly reflect Chinese cultural pursuits.


　　This topic has sparked debate between contrasting voices. Supporters feel that the galaxy of new landmark buildings add charm to the cityscape and spotlight the development of Chinese society. When explaining his design concept for the new CCTV tower， Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas stated， “This is the architecture China needs right now， and I’m bringing it here.” Advocates believe that these towering landmarks designed by foreign architects enhance the urban features of Beijing. Sharing the common characteristics of colossal dimensions， the “Bird’s Nest，” the CCTV tower， and the Capital Airport’s Terminal 3 building were noted by the British newspaper The Times as a few of the most ambitious construction projects in the world. Hong Kong architect Rocco Yim initially held strong reservations about Koolhaas’design for the CCTV tower， but eventually realized that the design won the bid because “it represents a certain spirit， which is also demonstrated in the new era： fearlessly challenging existing authority with courage and confidence.”


　　However， many disagree. Critics believe that instead of depending on titanic scale and grotesque design， impressive iconic buildings should serve as the soul of the city， or headline of history. China’s lengthy history has bestowed every Chinese city a singular spirit. The space between the watchtowers and city walls of the Forbidden City， for example， preserves evidence of hierarchical and safety considerations of imperial architecture. The embossed features of the White Pagoda Temple symbolize that Buddha saves all living creatures. Today， overshadowed by modern skylines， such traditional landmarks have become little more than shrubbery of the metropolis. 　　In the eyes of opponents， newly-emerging landmark buildings， mostly featuring odd appearances， hardly rival the aesthetics of Beijing’s traditional landmarks. On February 9， 2009， a fire broke out in the new CCTV headquarters， igniting extensive mockery of the strange-looking tower from the public. One opined， “Rather than demonize public outcry， it would be more beneficial to analyze why so many cities’ iconic buildings are so ugly.” Others criticized the new landmark buildings because they subvert fundamental outlooks on the universe： the National Center for the Performing Arts places the majority of its effective space underground， weakening the symbolic meanings of contrasting brightness against darkness， and the strange appearance of the CCTV tower seems to inspire doubt as to the functionality of the Earth’s gravity. “With gravity lost， is it possible for a city’s foundation to survive another thousand years？” some asked.
　　“As new buildings vie to stand out as modern urban landmarks， historical landmarks with traditional cultural characteristics have been marginalized，” explains Professor Yin Wen at the School of Arts， Southeast University. “Following the Manhattan model， nearly all Chinese cities are competing to erect skyscrapers that will squeeze onto the list of the world’s most impressive architecture， with height as the primary benchmark.” According to him， since height is considered the only necessary characteristic to create an “urban landmark，” many places are losing their local traits， exemplified by the mountain residences of Chongqing， aquatic homes on Taihu Lake in Wuxi， stilted houses of Hunan， and cave dwellings of Yan’an. “Urban constructions’ height competition reflects the one-upsmanship trend between local governments seeking recognition for their achievements and image building – a ladder to promotion for local officials，” Yin adds. “Architecture compiles the greatest accumulation of social capital， represents the political， economic and cultural development of present society， and embodies social systems and wealth distribution.”
　　However， such views are not shared by many who have warmly embraced the new buildings. Chinese architect Wang Shoucheng pointed out that in China， as well as many other places around the world， many landmark skyscrapers sacrifice functionality， or even prominence， in favor of aesthetic appeal， which is the only trait sought by some architects. Some buildings are so steeply inclined， with stairways spiraling up at such a sharp angle that the horizontal surface is impossible to visually inspect. Post-modernist architecture is by no means the thread of urban fabric， and its emergence aims to tear apart the original urban structure. The faster a city’s old face is destroyed， the quicker new capital can circulate. This is the reality of the era： buildings that stand out create the most memorable pieces of a cityscape. “The Eiffel Tower was also mercilessly criticized when it was first erected， but now it is Paris’s most treasured icon，” Wang added. “How can you say that CCTV tower will not become an icon of Beijing？”
　　Debate on the subject is far from settled， and newer， fancier buildings continue to emerge on Chinese horizons. Whether accepted or rejected， these buildings have crept into everyday lives， evidencing the diversity of Chinese architecture and even culture. In an age dominated by the fusion of old and new， contrasting ideas are perpetually clashing， opening a profound window into contemporary Chinese culture.