I happened across this gaudily titled article at a Taiwanese / Australian website about James Brearley's experiences in Shanghai / Shangri-La. Most of it is apparently a rehash of an Age article from June.
Instead of producing five designs for one building that never goes ahead, you design a piece of a city, you accommodate 10,000 people. You're appreciated here.
I'm unsure about that country's future and our role in its built environment. From this distance it appears that the speed of development is fuelled by the rapacious demand by other countries for goods produced by under regulated cheap labour in factories that would be too environmentally dirty to tolerate closer to home.
Then there are the other problems with wholesale demolition of hutongs, the social problems caused by accelerated urbanisation, not to mention Tibet.
But one of my other personalities is telling me I would take a job if I one came my way, that to express doubt with the pace of change in China is typical of the views of patronising post-industrial countries, and hypocritical considering the way the Australian government has been conducting itself recently.
In Brearley's opinion, there are so many good architects in Melbourne that there is very little opportunity for each of them. As a result, talents begin to flow overseas and Brearley finds himself living in Shanghai and designing large public structures such as shopping centers and city quarters.
Is the architectural profession so overstocked and under-utilised in the West that it will always need an overseas frontier town to keep it busy?