<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Future of the TVCC Fire</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/archives/1190/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/archives/1190</link>
	<description>The Kingdom from another angle.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 05:35:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vincent Brannigan</title>
		<link>http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/archives/1190/comment-page-1#comment-1576</link>
		<dc:creator>Vincent Brannigan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:55:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/?p=1190#comment-1576</guid>
		<description>It is now July 18 and I have seen almost no technical information released about the fire.  
Has there been much in the Chinese language press?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is now July 18 and I have seen almost no technical information released about the fire.<br />
Has there been much in the Chinese language press?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Pasternack</title>
		<link>http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/archives/1190/comment-page-1#comment-1239</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Pasternack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:54:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/?p=1190#comment-1239</guid>
		<description>Jim: Thanks for this lucid post and the photo, as always. I put some of my own quick thoughts about the fire from the architectural perspective down on my blog, and thought I&#039;d share. (And I hope we meet sometime!)

http://theflashmemory.blogspot.com/2009/02/rem-koolhaas-oma-beijing-tvcc-fire.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim: Thanks for this lucid post and the photo, as always. I put some of my own quick thoughts about the fire from the architectural perspective down on my blog, and thought I&#8217;d share. (And I hope we meet sometime!)</p>
<p><a href="http://theflashmemory.blogspot.com/2009/02/rem-koolhaas-oma-beijing-tvcc-fire.html" rel="nofollow">http://theflashmemory.blogspot.com/2009/02/rem-koolhaas-oma-beijing-tvcc-fire.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jg</title>
		<link>http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/archives/1190/comment-page-1#comment-1200</link>
		<dc:creator>jg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:12:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/?p=1190#comment-1200</guid>
		<description>Because the building that burned is called the Television Culture Center, therefore TVCC. It&#039;s an OMA thing. OMA, the Koolhaas architecture group, has a counterpart called AMO. Or as they say on their website: &quot;The counterpart to OMA’s traditional architectural practice is AMO, a design and research studio based in the company’s Rotterdam office. While OMA remains dedicated to the realization of buildings and master plans, its subsidiary AMO is a think tank that operates in areas beyond the boundaries of architecture and urbanism - including sociology, technology, media and politics.&quot;

So it&#039;s the yin-yang, part/counterpart thing. The big building is called CCTV (Headquarters) and the one that burned is called TVCC. I had nothing to do with it. Everyone is calling it the Mandarin Oriental, which is another name for it, though it was called the TVCC from the beginning, long before the Mandarin Oriental showed up. Go to the link I have to OMA&#039;s website and you&#039;ll see it referred there too as TVCC. Just keeping the vocab straight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because the building that burned is called the Television Culture Center, therefore TVCC. It&#8217;s an OMA thing. OMA, the Koolhaas architecture group, has a counterpart called AMO. Or as they say on their website: &#8220;The counterpart to OMA’s traditional architectural practice is AMO, a design and research studio based in the company’s Rotterdam office. While OMA remains dedicated to the realization of buildings and master plans, its subsidiary AMO is a think tank that operates in areas beyond the boundaries of architecture and urbanism &#8211; including sociology, technology, media and politics.&#8221;</p>
<p>So it&#8217;s the yin-yang, part/counterpart thing. The big building is called CCTV (Headquarters) and the one that burned is called TVCC. I had nothing to do with it. Everyone is calling it the Mandarin Oriental, which is another name for it, though it was called the TVCC from the beginning, long before the Mandarin Oriental showed up. Go to the link I have to OMA&#8217;s website and you&#8217;ll see it referred there too as TVCC. Just keeping the vocab straight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ??</title>
		<link>http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/archives/1190/comment-page-1#comment-1198</link>
		<dc:creator>??</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 16:16:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/?p=1190#comment-1198</guid>
		<description>Why do you keep calling CCTV &quot;TVCC&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do you keep calling CCTV &#8220;TVCC&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: China Journal : Best of the China Blogs: February 12</title>
		<link>http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/archives/1190/comment-page-1#comment-1196</link>
		<dc:creator>China Journal : Best of the China Blogs: February 12</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 07:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/?p=1190#comment-1196</guid>
		<description>[...] looking ahead at the future of the burned structure: Even if the structure is salvageable, the images of the building as a towering inferno (with an [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] looking ahead at the future of the burned structure: Even if the structure is salvageable, the images of the building as a towering inferno (with an [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

