toan tr wrote:thank you for the link. i find it fascinating.
regarding your reth qs., the name of greening might be a poor label tagged by the journalist (and maybe not ever even used by McD). i think the real intention is to improve standards of living while being sustainable. if you trying using no water from the tap for a month, you will probably feel this desire a little better.
I'm sure the whole project was built as a system and a lot of thought went into design. but the problem is not that the system does not work, it is that the system is a mismatch for these people. so why didn't they try to make a matching system? well, i guess that's the point.
Pam Hatfield wrote:Well. I suspect that a lot went on somewhere as his publicized plans for this project are entirely different from what this turned out to be. I first heard of this from his talk on TED
http://www.ted.com/talks/william_mcdonough_on_cradle_to_cradle_design.html and this clearly isn't at all what he had in mind.
Sometimes people just want someone's name and reputation and they don't much care about what he actually has to say or intends to do and have no intention of changing their own agenda to fit; this very much seems as though that might be the case here. At this point what could he possibly say? The builder even admits that he cut corners, used inferior materials and actually even changed the way the buildings were facing "because they didn't fit with Chinese Fung Shui" ( I probably spelled that wrong but whatever). It just sounds as though there were lots of mistakes made starting with the builder who was chosen. Perhaps he was the best of a bad lot. Perhaps McDonough should have turned away at that point but we all have made errors in judgement when hope took us somewhere we shouldn't have gone.
The idea was clearly to try to build something which would house several hundreds more families than are presently in the village, not just to disrupt and dismantle the farmer's lives for the joy of it. But when you are working with a society which appears to approve of if not encourage the making of fake cheap knockoffs of western products from shoes to Apple products then it is saddening but not surprising that such an unhappy farce took place. It's even sadder that everyone seems to be rushing to condemn the architect although he may well have had very little control over what went on. Once a government gets hold of something anywhere it can be very difficult to move it; I suspect in China even more so than usual. If you saw your dream being shattered and were unable to do anything but watch in horror then I doubt you'd wish to stick around or have your name associated with it either.