Passage One

Modernity and Ruins

Modernity is a complex and much contested idea，but in this context it means，above all，the abstraction of social and cultural practices from contexts of local particularity，and their institutionalization and regulationacrosstimeandspace．Theexamplesofsuch institutionalization that most readily spring to mind are the organization and policing of social territory(the nation-state，urbanism)，or of production and consumption practices(industrialization，the capitalist economy)．But modernity also institutionalizes and regulates cultural practices，including those by which we imagine attachment and belonging to a place or a community．The mode of such imagination it promotes is what we have come to know as“cultural identity”—self and communal definitions based around specific，usually politically infected，differentiations:gender，sexuality，class，religion，race and ethnicity，nationality．Some of these differentiations of course existed before the coming of modernity，some like nationality are specifically modern imaginings．Since the beginning of the industrial era our world has been facing what some historians call an ongoing“crisis of modernity”．As fast as we adjust to new circumstances，the circumstances change again，and，the rate of change seems to be multiplying exponentially．Of all the demands imposed by twenty first century，perhaps the toughest is the ability of people to not only manage change but to instigate it，control it and to be it's master．Dealing with the ever increasing rate of change may be the century's most potentially overwhelming task．For example，how to deal with the crisis or discontents that appear in modern urbanspace?How to see the architectural ruins that feature modernity?

Modern architecture has failed to communicate with its users．Partly because it doesn't make effective links with the city and history:cheap prefabrication，lack of personal“defensible”space，and the alienating housing estate．Thus explosions became a frequent method of dealing with the failure of modernist building methods．But the 9/11 represents a watershed in world history in more ways than are obvious．The destruction of an architectural and symbolic icon of modernity has brought to a catastrophic climax a debate about the ways in which modernity，broadly conceived，seems to have invented，framed，and even produced ruins．The question whether international terrorism is a side-product of modernity or a historical development responding to，but independent of，modernity echoes discussions around a possible elective affinity between ruins and modernity．Indeed，ruins began to be perceived and preserved as ruins only during the Renaissance，when the awarenessofhistoricaldiscontinuities，thedemiseofancient civilizations，raised the status of traces from the past．These traces—architectural remnants that had long lost their functionality and meaning—couldbeinvestedwithvariousattributes，historical，aesthetic，political and otherwise．A desire for preservation in the interest of historical continuity barely concealed political exploitations of ruins as signs of past greatness that could be reappropriated．The ruin is a ruin precisely because it has lost the presence of meaning，while retaining its suggestiveness．It bespeaks a loss of something，while denying complete irretrievability of the absent object．It evokes an ambivalent break from and nostalgia for the past．More pointedly，it signals the imminent breakdown of meaning，and therefore fosters dizzying compensatory discursive activity．

Theoreticians of various stripes have considered the peculiar statusof ruins in modern culture．Georg Simmel^[23]thought that ruins embody the justice of destruction，the reintegration of human design into nature that counteracts human interventions and makes them right．For Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer^[24]，the process of ruination is an intrinsic component of the dialectic whereby modernity undermines itself and lapses into mythology and self-destruction．Walter Benjamin^[25]drew a parallel between the ruin in the realm of things and the allegory in the realm of thoughts，for both ruin and allegory speak of a disruption in the relationship between form and meaning，to the point that semiotics becomes a wasteland．Iurii Lotman^[26]has considered the ways in which ruins serve the project of cultural self-fashioning．Sigmund Freud framed the unconscious as a sort of ruin that needs to be excavated．W．G．Sebald^[27]referred to ruins as a trope of the trauma of modernity inseveral of his essays and fiction pieces．This rich body of approaches to ruins illustrates vividly the extent to which the ruin is predicated on a particular gaze cast upon it．The beholder is the one who defines the ruin，and the ruin could not exist without such creative appropriation．The ruin，in many ways，is a trope of reflexivity，the reflexivity of a culture that interrogates its own becoming．As a result，the ruin is often the playground of specular strategies that tell us more about the identity of the beholder than that of the ruin or its original environment．Poised at the symbolic end of the project of modernity，we will ponder the ways in which the ruin intersects with the two major axes of modernity:the divide between the east and the west，which has produced distinct variants of modernity，and the asymmetry between hegemonic and subaltern cultures，which continues to produce more ruins．Organized in a series of case studies grouped thematically and geographically，people from a variety of disciplines，including architectural design，architectural history，cinema，classics，culturalhistory，culturalstudies，anthropology，history，literary criticism，and sociology，as well as artists have taken their initiatives in studying ruins in the urban space，and their focus is interdisciplinary in method and global in reach．

True or False Statements

1．Modernity finds its way both in the global situation and the local communities in that the former promotes similarities while the latter protects its indigenous cultures．

2．Living in such a situation as modernity，people find it difficult to orient their goals and drives for life．So they begin to worry about their living space created by modern architecture．

3．The 9/11 tragedy appears to be a matter of terrorism，but it isrooted in the way people live—modernity．

4．Ruins in the metropolis are nothing but the demolitions and rebuilding because of the urgent need of the expanding urban space．

5．Even if the ruin of the modern urban space，in the light of some scholars，can be a trope，what it signifies is simply that the Westerners are experiencing the spiritual wasteland，which has nothing to do with other people in the world．