As long as you keep asking ‘em, we’ll keep answering ‘em. Below, we’ve answered a third batch of reader-submitted questions. Can’t find the info you’re looking for? Keep sending your pressing Expo 2010 questions to cpappas@exhibitormagazine.com and check back frequently as we’ll continue posting answers to your questions throughout the duration of Expo 2010. |
 |
Q. What did it cost to produce Expo 2010?
A. The official Chinese government figure is $4.2 billion, but there is a general consensus that the actual cost for Expo 2010 is 10 to 15 times greater. The Washington Post, The Christian Science Monitor, The Brookings Institution, and other sources suggest that China expended a record $50 billion or more building rail lines, roads, and a variety of infrastructure projects as well as bulldozing 18,000 homes and moving 55,000 people to clear a space for the fair. Even a lowball estimate of $50 billion would be 25 percent more than the $40 billion total China spent on the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.
Q. What happens to the pavilions after Expo 2010 is over?
A. Once the fair closes its doors on October 31st of this year, the same destiny lies in store for the pavilions there that awaited buildings from all other world expos: razing or removal. For most of the world’s fairs’ 151-year history, the buildings they housed were designed to be as ephemeral as they were elegant. Almost all of the structures at the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago and the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition, for example, were deliberately engineered to last a maximum of a year or two, despite facades that resembled the centuries-enduring marble of the Parthenon or the age-defying limestone of the pyramids. In reality, the exterior materials were simply a mixture of plaster of Paris and hemp fibers called “staff,” spread over a wood frame. Similarly, buildings at the 1933 Century of Progress Exposition in Chicago crafted an illusion of permanence with half-inch-thick wallboard set over a steel framework.
While show organizers exhibited an early form of planned obsolescence with these edifices, a handful of buildings from world expos avoided the scrap heap, often because of their overwhelming popularity and strategic re-purposing. Here are a few examples:
• The main building at the 1876 Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia is now the Please Touch Museum.
• The Eiffel Tower, constructed for the 1889 Exposition Universelle, was originally slated to be torn down after 20 years. Now 121 years old, it’s received more than 250 million visitors.
• The Palace of Fine Arts, erected for the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago, later became the Museum of Science and Industry.
• The Atomium, a model of an iron crystal atom magnified 165 billion times and fabricated for the 1958 Brussels World’s Fair, is still standing and was renovated in 2004.
• The Space Needle, raised as the focal point of the 1962 Seattle World’s Fair, is a permanent tourist attraction with an observation deck and a restaurant 500 feet off the ground.
• The Unisphere, the stainless steel model of the Earth fashioned for the 1964 New York World’s Fair, was granted official landmark status by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission in 1995.
• The United States pavilion at Expo ‘67 in Montreal, a 250-foot-diameter geodesic dome, was transformed into a museum focusing on environmental issues.
Like all other fairs, Expo 2010’s pavilions will mostly be demolished. Partly this is because the Bureau of International Expositions (BIE), which governs world’s fairs, stipulates all foreign pavilions must generally be torn down when an expo ends. Partly it’s because the expo site itself is valuable industrial real estate in a development-hungry economy.
However, Expo 2010’s emphasis on eco-friendly solutions to the world’s problems is generating a growing backlash to the build-and-burn attitude. As a result, some structures will be relocated instead of bulldozed: The United Arab Emirates, for instance, plans to dismantle its 6,000-square-meter pavilion, transport it to Abu Dhabi, then reassemble it there, after which it will become a standing attraction. Thailand may move its pavilion to the city of Wuxi in China’s Jiangsu province, where it would become part of a Buddhist cultural park. Spain intends to deconstruct and recycle its exhibit, or find a way to move it to another location in China. Finland, too, will dismantle its pavilion and endeavor to sell it for reuse after Expo 2010 closes. Expect other countries to sell or recycle all or part of their pavilions in order to be as Green as they are grandiose.
Q. How much do individual pavilions cost?
A. They range from bargain-basement efforts to over-the-top extravaganzas that would humble a pharaoh. A quick survey shows that pavilion budgets varied as much as the attending nations themselves. At the low end, the Baltic republic of Latvia spent about $4.4 million on its exhibit, while neighboring Estonia allocated $2.7 million. Israel shelled out $6 million; Finland $18 million; Norway $23 million; and Australia $75 million. The United States spent $61 million for its pavilion, and Canada $41 million on its pavilion, which was concepted by Cirque du Soleil.
While certainly substantial, those sums don’t begin to approach Expo 2010’s true big spenders: Japan at $140 million; Saudi Arabia $146 million; and China itself, which spent $220 million.
How does that figure stack up historically against some of world expos’ most lavish architecture? The Crystal Palace, a 746,592-square-foot building erected for the 1851 Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry in London, would run approximately $19.9 million to construct today. The Soviet Union’s monumental pavilion from the Paris Exposition of 1937, which contained, as Arthur Chandler wrote in World’s Fair magazine, “a map of Mother Russia made of gold studded with rubies, topazes, and other precious stones,” would have had a price tag of $60.6 million today. Even accounting for inflation, China’s pavilion, a 207-foot-high inverted pyramid the color of a fire engine that can hold 35 football fields inside it, will likely stand as the most expensive — and expansive — in history.
Q. Are pavilions allowed to sell commercial merchandise?
A. Yes. According to rules established by the Bureau of International Expositions (BIE) which governs world’s fairs, exhibitors may set aside as much as 20 percent of each pavilion’s floor space for commercial activities. Those activities can encompass anything from gift shops selling souvenirs to restaurants serving haute cuisine.
Q. When did world’s fairs change their name to “expos”?
A. Although still known colloquially as “world’s fairs,” the global gatherings started becoming known as “expos” starting with Expo ’67 in Montreal.
At first, show organizers wanted to call it “The 1967 Universal and International Exhibition in Montréal.” Cecil Carsley, the deputy commissioner general for the show, cringed at the name’s cumbersomeness, but also shied away from term “world’s fair,” as that had overtones of commerce. Eventually Carsley and others settled on “Expo ’67.”
Since then, world expos have adopted that brief and memorable naming convention, including: Expo ‘70 in Osaka, Japan; Expo ‘92 in Seville, Spain; and Expo 2000 in Hanover, Germany. The current fair in Shanghai continues that nomenclature, with the official name of Expo 2010.
Q. What products made their debuts at world’s fairs?
A. From guns to gums, world’s fairs have been the launching pads for dozens, even hundreds, of products that rocketed into our lives.
At London’s Great Exhibition of the Works of All Nations in 1851, for example, visitors not only gaped at Samuel Morse’s telegraph, but also were privy to the comforts of the first major installation of public flush privies. Thomas Edison demonstrated the duclet tones of the phonograph at Paris’ Exposition Universelle in 1889. Chicago’s 1893 Columbian Exposition was literally a treat for foodies, with Cream of Wheat, Shredded Wheat, Pabst Beer, Aunt Jemima syrup, and Juicy Fruit gum taking their first major public bow there. The St. Louis World’s Fair of 1904 introduced the safety razor and rayon. RCA Corp. premiered television at the 1939 World’s Fair in New York, while 25 years later at the 1964 fair, also in Gotham, the Ford Motor Co. introduced the Mustang automobile. Expo ‘70 in Osaka, Japan served as the stage for first-ever IMAX film.
It doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes — or even Inspector Clouseau — to deduce why exhibitors chose world’s fairs to debut new wares. The reason was simple math: Millions of attendees meant millions in sales. Before television and the Internet could introduce products to the masses in one fell swoop, world’s fairs constituted the greatest concentration of consumers in one space at any one time. Indeed, the 10 million attendees at Philadelphia’s Centennial International Exhibition in 1876 represented almost 25 percent of the total populace of the United States. Additionally, the 27 million who showed for Chicago’s World’s Columbian Exposition in 1893 were the equivalent of about 42 percent of the country’s head count.
Even in this century, with a slew of ADD-inducing diversions, entertainments, and brand experiences, fairs are still people magnets. At the 1939 New York World’s Fair, 45 million attended, equaling nearly 34 percent of the country’s residents. Expo ‘67 in Montreal drew 50 million — 2.5 times Canada’s entire population, while Shanghai expects as many as 70 to 100 million visitors. Like trade shows themselves, these figures suggest that world’s fairs will continue to be a preeminent showcase of new products and technologies.
|
| |
| |
| Top of Page |
|
|
