In defense of the wrongly convicted—Ernst Börschmann’s Chinesische Architektur and the controversial synchrony of the Chinese architecture survey

Abstract

ABSTRACT Writing the architecture survey remains one of the biggest challenges in the field. Nineteenth- and twentieth-century Western scholars usually followed a synchronic approach (literally “with-time”) and described Chinese architecture without reference to its development and evolution over time. Although synchrony (attention to a particular moment in time) is not incorrect in principle, it is all too often attached with a negative connotation. A possible reason is that Liang Sicheng, and the generations after him, have understood all facets of synchrony as expression of the old dichotic worldview that once glorified Europe and deprived Asia of its history (non-historical timelessness) as formulated by the German philosophers Hegel and Herder and codified in Fletcher’s and Fergusson’s authoritative textbooks. Challenging the previous misconception of the generalization of synchronic textbooks, the paper attempts to examine the multiple facets of synchrony and identify the writing style of Börschmann’s Chinesische Architektur, the prime example of the German-language survey on Chinese Architecture. In doing so, the paper hopefully can provide basis and arguments in defense of the work, presenting a reconciliation to the biased, subjective presentation of Chinese architecture once afflicted with prejudices and misapprehensions. The paper values Börschmann’s Chinesische Architektur as a distinguished work different from other synchronic writings through its pioneering, value-neutral and formal approach.