By Xuefei Ren

The Beijing Olympics demonstrated once and again the effectiveness of using mega-events for place making. This global spectacle moved Beijing one big step toward the centre of the world city network. In the community of urban China research, there has been much discussion on the shifting balance of power between the centre and the local. Some consensus has been reached about the rise of local states and the devolution of state power from the central to city governments. However, the nation-state is still by far the most sophisticated institutional architecture ever produced, and demonstrates great flexibility and adaptability when facing external challenges. The restructuring of the Chinese state is not simply one-way traffic of power from the central to local governments. Rather, it is a reshuffling of power among different geopolitical scales – a process of state rescaling. The spectacle of the Beijing Olympics can offer us some glimpses into the complex process of state rescaling taking place in China.

The geopolitical repercussions of the Olympics could not have been possible if state power was only contained within the central government or, for that matter, within the municipal government of Beijing. Rather, a ‘successful’ Olympics of this kind is only possible by simultaneously redirecting state power, authority and resources to the metropolitan and global scale. The national scale lacks the kind of flexibility required to interact freely with the wild forces of markets and globalization. Only at the sub-national level, especially the metropolitan scale, can governments and policy makers be entrepreneurial when courting global investment and media attention. Cities and metropolitan regions are therefore the critical scale for the restructuring of state power in the context of intensified global competition.

But the rescaling of state power has casualties. Art and cultural industries in Beijing are excellent examples to illustrate the point. In 2005 a few multi-million dollar auction sales of works by Chinese artists signaled the coming of age for the Chinese contemporary art market. Realizing the potential of cultural industries, the city government quickly usurped the control of private capital by designating creative industry clusters. In merely three years, art districts from 798 to Songzhuang went through a quick metamorphosis, transforming from grassroots artist colonies to mass tourist destinations. In the meantime, ‘creative industries’ has also become the new buzz word in the discourse of urban policy making. The concept is believed to have somehow a superpower to cure all the ills of the transitional economy. With the heavy involvement of the rescaled local state, art districts in Beijing exemplify an odd combination of horizontal networks, new hierarchies, and bureaucratic management. A rescaled Chinese state has thus inscribed a new logic in creative industries, making it the ‘creative industries with Chinese characteristics’, just like everything else in China.

But being an urban optimist, I find it hard to agree with the common perception on the conflict between state control and creativity. I see globalizing cities such as Beijing and Shanghai as fertile sites for creativity and new possibilities. They are strategic spaces for new actors to make a presence. The real creative talents can find inspiration in the tensions, contradictions, and dilemmas characterizing today’s creative industries in China. They are able to navigate freely, to bypass the creative control of the rescaled Chinese state.

In short, there are holes in the net.

Bio
Xuefei Ren received her PhD in Sociology from the University of Chicago in 2007. She teaches urban theory and sociology at Michigan State University.

网中缝隙？国家权力的尺度化与创造性统治

任雪飞 (芝加哥大学社会学博士，现于密执安州立大学教授都市理论与社会学)

北京奥运再一次展现了运用重大事件来进行空间再造的效率。这次全球性的壮观场面把北京往国际都市网络的中心向前推进了一大步。在研究中国都市的社群中，有许多讨论关注于中央与边陲之间权力关系的变迁；有些人认为地方政府日渐崛起、国家的权力已经由中央向都市政府转移。然而，民族国家显然仍是最高度发展的政治结构，当面临外来挑战时展现出极大的弹性与适应力。中国政府的重组并非是权力由中央向地方政府单向下放的简单过程，而是不同地缘政治尺度之间权力重组的过程，也是国家尺度化的过程。北京奥运这个重大事件让我们能一窥国家尺度化在中国发展的复杂过程。

如果国家权力仍然被限制于中央政府、或是北京市政府之内，那么奥运的地缘政治影响就不可能出现。甚者，这种「成功」的奥运只有将国家权力、权威以及资源同时导向全球都会尺度时才有可能产生。国家尺度缺乏面对市场与全球化这些不受控制的力量时所需要的弹性；只有次于国家一级、特别是国际大都会这样的尺度，能赋予政府与政策决定者引入全球投资与媒体注意的中介角色。都市与都会区因此是因应日益激烈的全球竞争中、国家权力重组下的关键尺度。

然而，国家权力的尺度化有其牺牲者；北京的艺术及文化产业就是最好的例子。二○○五年几个数亿元拍卖出的中国艺术家作品标示了中国当代艺术市场的来临。当理解到文化产业的发展潜力时，北京市政府迅速地藉由指定创意产业特区来取得控制权。在仅仅三年间，由798到宋庄，艺术特区经历了快速的质变，由原先的草根艺术创作转向了大众旅游的市场。同时，「创意产业」也成为都会政策制订论述中新的流行语。人们多少相信这个概念拥有超能力、能治愈经济转型中的各种沈疴。藉由重新尺度化后的地方政府的高度介入，北京的艺术特区展示了包含横向网络、新阶序以及官方管理的一个奇特组合例子。重新尺度化的中国政府在创意产业中注入了一个新的逻辑，使其成为「具有中国特色的创意产业」，就像中国境内其它所有事情一样。

不过，身为一个都会乐观主义者，我不认同国家控制必然与创意产生冲突这样一种普遍性的看法。我认为像北京与上海这样的国际化都市，能成为孕育创意与崭新可能性的摇篮，提供新行动者表现的策略性空间。真正的创造力能在今日充满张力、矛盾、与困境的中国创意产业中找寻灵感。他们能自由地行动，去克服重新尺度化后的中国政府对于创意的控制。

简而言之，在缜密的网中仍然有缝隙存留。