China already has its own copies of London’s Tower Bridge and Paris’s Eiffel Tower. But a replica of one of China’s own most famous historical landmarks is threatening national pride.
Hengdian Studios, a Chinese film company, is building a life-sized model of the Old Summer Palace, which tourists can visit for an entrance fee of $46 per person. Construction on the original palace began in 1707. It was to be a gift from Emperor Kangxi to his son. Over several decades, the surrounding 1.35 square miles was developed into lavish gardens and a complex of support buildings. The resulting Imperial Gardens were used for government affairs as well as housing China’s emperors. The complex became a symbol of China’s power and pride—until 1860. Then it became a symbol of Chinese humiliation.
The English and French were at war with China at that time. During the Second Opium War, China took prisoners from the European armies. In response, the British and French destroyed the center of Chinese imperialism. They burned the Old Summer Palace and most of the surrounding buildings.
Today, the ruined original site is open to the public. For a small fee, visitors can walk among the palace ruins. The current Communist government considers the site a valuable reminder to citizens of China’s “national shame,” when the country was weak in the world. By rallying people around the wound of destruction from outside forces, China hopes to secure national loyalty. Overseers of the original site belittle the new one, calling it a sell-out to tourism. The official Xinhua News Agency reported that administrators are threatening legal action. They want to stop further development of the theme-park styled reconstruction.
Wang Daocheng defends the replica. The former professor at Renmin University’s Qing History Institute says, "There is nothing left in the Old Summer Palace apart from ruins. If people can't see anything about the glorious architecture and gardens, then how can you educate the public?" The new construction would show off the luxury and building techniques of the past. But citizen and businessman Liu Yaming disagrees. He favors the sanctity of the ruins as a sort of patriotic graveyard. Rebuilding the site, he says, shows “a kind of ignorance of our national humiliation. . . . As a historical site, we’d better give it the respect it deserves.”
