Introduction

The relationships between the forces of globalization, capitalism, and postcolonialism that are at work in the architecture of the cities of East Asia today have received relatively little scholarly attention. This chapter rests on the general idea that certain types of architecture can be hegemonic in a class sense, just like other art forms (particularly literature and the plastic arts), and that certain buildings and spaces can and do serve certain specific class interests alongside their recognized use or aesthetic qualities.

This paper can be seen as a point on the trajectory of investigations I have been undertaking into the transnational capitalist class and the networks of global capitalism. The argument that certain types of architecture can be hegemonic in the class sense and that certain buildings can serve specific class interests is argued convincingly by Bentmann and Muller (1992) in their book on the villa as an example of hegemonic architecture. Their brilliant study examines how the villa, largely associated with the great Renaissance architect Andrea Palladio, faithfully reproduced the class structures and divisions of northern Italy in the sixteenth century. It also, of course, went on to become an immensely popular architectural typology and was widely imitated throughout the rest of Europe and then, via the Western European empires, propagated worldwide.

The construction of Hilton hotels in what would come to be known as the Third World after 1945, provides a more recent example of this phenomenon.