A Virtual Archive of Urban Villages 



[Objective]

Aggregate is a virtual ‘urban village’ archival platform founded by Danying Yu (PhD Candidate, CREAM, Practice-based Art Research) and Sunny Tang (MRes, SOAS, Social Anthropology). Through our art practices and fieldworks, we aim to delve into and document the contemporary social phenomenon of urban villages in China, and explore its interplay with migrant residents and the evolving dynamics of social spaces.


以艺术实践/研究和田野工作为推力,骨料「gǔ liào」是一个由小型艺术研究团体搭建的虚拟城中村档案。意在中国城/乡的建与拆之间,探索、记录并解读当代都市景观“城中村”及其居民和社会空间的变迁。

Urban village refer to the informal urbanisation phenomenon observed in cities like Shenzhen, Guangzhou, and Shanghai, among others. They took shape within the framework of Maoist policies, stemming from the urban-rural dual system, compounded by urban development encroaching upon rural surroundings. Corresponding to the nation’s call for modernisation, the rapid urbanisation that began at the end of the 20th century swallowed up vast tracts of agricultural land, while left intact agricultural population’s homesteads that are protected by national land policies. Hence, villages-in-the-city.

城中村是在深圳、广州、上海等城市中能够观察到的一种非正式城市化现象,它们在毛时代的制度框架内发展起来,简单来说是城乡土地二元制、城市发展包围农村导致的结果。20世纪末随著国家对现代化的呼吁,快速城市化吞没了大量农业用地,却没能消化掉受国家土地政策保护的农村人口的宅基地,从而形成城市中的村落。


Since the era of reform and opening up, spanning over 40 years of rapid urbanisation, urban villages have gradually emerged across numerous cities nationwide. Urban villages are commonly referred to as poor working-class neighbourhoods, and appear to be, by default, fail to form the ‘pleasant urban landscape’ in official narratives. Capitalising on policy gaps, these villages have experienced rapid growth in tandem with urban expansion, serving as vital sources of affordable housing for the tremondous influx of ‘floating populations’ that the government cannot fully accommodate. They were initially regarded as the ‘city cancer’, then to be re-evaluated in various cities. For instance, in Shenzhen, urban villages constitute a significant portion of the city's stock space and serve as a ‘resilient/flexible land resource’ for future real estate development. The pursuit of efficient resource allocation is a core principle of the market-driven resource distribution model, while the unidimensional aggregation stands as a characteristic of Chinese cities. 1 Since the late 1980s, urban villages have gone through multiple phases of evolution and social transofrmations, emerging and vanishing amid the grandeur of China's urban development, with some reinvigorating while others fade away. Thus, reading through urban villages is also reading into the ‘Labyrinth of Linkages’ climbing on the rapid transformation of contemporary China that streching far beyond than mere physical alterations, extending to the social, cultural, and political fabrics of everyday life.


改革开放后,在快速城镇化的40多年里,全国众多城市逐渐形成了城中村。这些地带常被视作工薪阶层社区,在官方叙事中通常没有为城市带来“宜人的景观”。利用政策的疏漏,这些城中村随著城市的扩张而疯狂壮大,为大量涌入城市的流动人口提供政府无法支持的基本廉租房。最初,城中村被视为“城市之癌”,而后其价值在不同城市被重新评估,比如在深圳,它是城市存量空间的一大主体,是未来地产开发的“韧性/弹性用地”。追求资源的有效配置是市场资源分配模式的精要,而单向度的聚集则是中国城市的特质1。自80年代末以来,城中村随著城市更新经历了多个阶段的演变和社会转型,在我国轰轰烈烈的城市建设中涌现又消失 、又或旧容焕新颜。因此,阅读城中村,也是阅读“链接的迷宫”,攀缘探索当代中国的快速转型,这种转型远不止单纯的物质变化,还渗透至日常生活里社会、文化和政治结构中。


[Constructions]

This site is a work in process, continuously loading our observations, fleeting impressions, analytical sketches, sound, related reference, actual making, etc. Here, we neither search for nor offer neat conclusions, but rather, relish in the meandering multiple pathways of understanding. As we amble through the process, conversation will flow, veering off into the realms of the unexplored, leaving dialogues unfinished, only to stumble upon new terrains of thought.


网站处于施工常态,我们会持续载入实时观察、瞬间印象、草图、声音、强关联文献、创作等。在这里,我们既不寻求也不提供简洁的结论,而是在多重理解路径上游走,任对话自然发生。



☗ Wip 1. - Improvisation Notes: Tune in Urban Villages (即兴笔记:收听城中村)
 
The definition of 'urban villages' bewilders people in much the same way as the definition of art. Yet, when we 'read/write' about art, we do not begin with ONE firm definition as the foundation but with matters at hand, i.e. what we see, talk, hear, smell, think... or in a single word: sense. Similarly, when we 'read/write' about urban villages, it is not the whirlpool of definitions we immerse in but the field. Thus, what is significant is what we have sensed and experienced in the field and how we can hone, expand, and refine our sensorium and attunement.

However, in this nascent phase where we are remote from the field, we will simply start with readings, searching for and collecting things that relate to urban villages in China, giving off-site matters equal weight, in hopes that the interlinkage between matters and the methods they demand will slowly reveal themselves as the work progresses. Therefore, what this work-in-progress will illustrate are notes of a process—the process of search and approach—rather than notes from the field.

「城中村」的定义同「艺术」一样,常让人感到困惑。然而,当我们「 阅读/写作」艺术时,我们往往不会囿于定义,更多是从事物/事件本身出发,谈及我们的所看所思,或干脆凭著感知一言以蔽之。因此同样的,当我们谈论城中村时,我们也无需过多纠结它的定义,争个对错。城中村就在那里,我们只需走进去,甚至住进去,去看去听。可以说,‘定义’并不是我们了解城中村的开始,更非唯一路径。重要的是在场,是实地的感知与体验,并在此过程中学着练习和调度自己的感官,使其变得更为灵敏。

但在项目初期,远离现场的我们,该如何“进入”城中村呢?最为简单的第一步是,我们打算给予场外同等的重视,先从阅读与短暂逗留开始,以相对独立的视角寻找并搜集与城中村有关的文本或事物。在项目推进过程中,捕捉事物之间及其所需/现有的研究方法之间的关联。因此,该项目—即兴笔记:收听城中村—将会是一个关于“进入”过程的记录,而非田野笔记的展现。



☗ Wip 2. - On-site (在场)

In the period between February and June 2023, we embarked on two month-long expeditions to China, revisiting the urban landscapes of Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Guangzhou. These journeys were both enlightening and poignant, especially given that our last time in China was at the end of 2019. The transformation we witnessed was both rapid and profound, with the urban fabric of these cities undergoing significant metamorphoses.

Shanghai, in particular, bore the marks of astonishing urban renewal. Areas that were once familiar have been replaced, with many streets in the inner city now characterised by vacant edifices and bustling construction sites. One cannot traverse these urban precincts without encountering bold red banners proclaiming the virtues of urban regeneration.

What we have seen instilled in us a profound urgency; an imperative to delve deeper and understand the forces at play. This was not merely due to the erasure of familiar landscapes and memories, but also because of the challenges we faced as researchers. The relentless pace of bulldozers and urban development threatened to eclipse our research sites. Notably, several of our chosen fields– prominent urban villages in Shanghai and Shenzhen – were visibly waning, both physically and socially.

Gaining access to these sites proved challenging. Although we could enter some areas, others were strictly off-limits, particularly those earmarked for redevelopment or already under the purview of urban regeneration initiatives. In Shanghai, we encountered individuals in plain attire who seemingly held authority over these sites, curtailing our endeavours to conduct interviews, interact with locals, film, or even make casual inquiries.

No doubt these urban villages were spaces of power. Here, intricate issues, often deemed 'sensitive' – such as eviction, resettlement plans, compensation, and land and property rights – were deeply enmeshed. Without the guides of pivotal gatekeepers, we found ourselves lingering on the periphery, garnering only fragmentary insights. Nonetheless, as we continuously sought new ways of entry, it is hopeful to bring in future updates.


在2023年二月至六月期间,我们先后两次回到中国,分别在上海、深圳和广州,进行了为期总共两个月的城中村田野调查。自2019年年底以来就未回过国的我们,看到各大城市(尤其是老城区)在短短几年间的“面貌”变化,竟觉得有些酸楚,甚至有些尴尬。因为作为调研者,我们调查对象的空间在不断萎缩、甚至消失。但在感叹之余,我们也有了一些新的在地发现。

上海作为我们的第一站,其城市跟新的速度让我们大感讶异。我们原先所选定的“城中村”,不是已夷为平地,就是被围了起来,等待搬迁与拆建。所到之处,皆能看到悬挂在墙上或建筑物上的大红色横幅标语,说明城市跟新的目的与好处,宣告迁移赔偿的大好消息,又或者警告劝退任何有心阻碍城市更新进程的举动。一些深圳有名的城中村,现也变得面目全非,如曾经最大的城中村,白石洲就已经拆迁过半。虽仍有人居住,但街道已变得空空荡荡。各大街区都围上比人高的蓝色铁皮,切断了原本四通八达的小道,让人走在其中,却不知所踪。

不管是进入原本我们所选择的田野,还是试图探索新的地方,真正的进入都显得艰难,甚至有些危险。因为这些场所,常常也是权力的鏖战之地,交织着各种各样,如拆迁、赔偿和房、地产权等,所谓敏感问题。要么是当地受影响的人,不想引来麻烦,不愿与我们多谈;要么就是穿着便服的政府公派人员,静静守候在这些地方,一看到可疑人士便赶走。我们的镜头,从一开始,就为我们引来了目光与麻烦。在未找到真正的局内人,为我们牵线搭桥,指引我们以前,我们其实是进入了现场,却又被排除在外。但无论如何,在不断调整我们的接触方式后,我们还是得以采访了一些人,收集到了些许零散的信息,并期待着下一次的尝试与“巧妙融入”,以此不断更新我们的田野调查。


☗ Wip 3. - Everyday ‘Making-Do’ (日常“应付”之计)

You can imagine that living in urban villages, the first question is how can you settle in such density?

In this ongoing project, we intend to anchor ourselves in the lived experiences and investigate transformations within urban villages as a process of spatial (re)production performed by residents through adaptive practices in their daily lives. Or as what Michel de Certeau called everyday ‘making-do’.

Here we ask in what ways residents in urban villages utilise any available resources and materials to adapt and respond to various spatial constraints and regulations? We care about what they are using, making, and talking about. As they are always making something out of something, what can we learn from them about issues of informal settlement, sustainable urban developement, and most importanly, matters of survival, resistance, and adaptive tactices? Is there a potential for the temporary "daily coping" within these spaces to transform into sculptures?


可以想象一下,在城中村生活,首要问题是怎样在如此高密度的环境中安居?

在这个持续进行的项目中,我们打算以生活经验为基础骨料,观察并研究城中村内/外的转变,将其视为居民自发的日常适应性实践下的一种空间(再)生产过程。又或塞托在日常生活实践一书中提出的,日常“应付”之计。

在这里,我们探究城中村居民如何因地制宜地利用现有资源与物料,来适应并应对各种生活空间的限制和规定?我们关心他们在使用、制作和谈论什么。居民似乎总有某种‘物生物’的能力,我们能否从这些生活经验中获得关于非正式住宅、可持续城市发展以及最重要的,生存、抵抗与适应之道的启发?这些空间中临时的“日常应付”又是否有转化为雕塑的可能?