Cross Cultural Currents in Early 20th Century Chinese Architectural Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers the transplantation of the Western concept of architecture to China set against the backdrop of Western colonization from the mid-19th century. With the increasing presence of foreign populations, the urgent demand for a considerable number of new building types greatly spurred the Chinese construction market. Beyond consideration of the physical artifacts, this paper focuses upon the story behind the scenes, the mode of architectural production, and particularly how the intricate relationships among different professionals helped to shape the physical world. The West China Union University, constructed from 1915 through 1940s in Chengdu, Sichuan Province, serves as an apt case study to exemplify this process. A cooperative product of five missionary organizations from the United States, Britain and Canada, this project was designed by a British architect whose practice was based in England, super-intended on-site by an American architect, and constructed by local Chinese workmen. How were these professionals able to communicate and cooperate over such a long distance and across huge cultural gaps in architectural and building practice? This case study demonstrates that the relations among different actors in the field of architecture, specifically the tripartite interactions among client, architect and builder, were far more complex and nuanced than we might otherwise assume. This paper offers critical insights into the dramatic changes in the system of Chinese architectural practice under the sway of Western influence during the first half of 20th century.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".