The official publicity loves to promote the Expo as an opportunity for the exchange of culture and ideas. In reality, while that might be happening at some level, for most of the 45-million and counting visitors it is not much more than an expensive but interesting circus. Many, especially those following the massive tour groups, don't really bother to read the explanatory captions or even listen carefully to what is being said; instead, they just shuffle around and gawk at all the bright new things around them. That being said, it doesn't mean there was nothing worth seeing. Not at all. In fact, there were too many things worth seeing to recount all of them. So instead only the Best (and the "Best") will be recorded here.
Best single exhibit
The animated 3D version of the 清明上河图 in the China pavilion was just cool. And to use it to showcase urban development in ancient China was rather clever, too. The violin-playing robot in the Japan pavilion would have been a strong contender, but the one time I visited it tripped and fell flat on its face when entering. D'oh!
Best visual effect
The
Hong Kong pavilion was pretty nifty, but not especially outstanding compared to the myriad of other pavilions in the Expo. Still, the crystalline pavilion design was very pretty to look at, even from the inside.
Best photo gallery
Lots of the pavilions at the Expo were really nothing more than glorified photo galleries: collections of photos and media which were nice to look at and all, but weren't really very interesting. The
Belarus pavilion, however, was a nicely-illustrated kaleidoscope of images. It may not have been as realistically informative as a photograph collection, but it was so much more fun to look at, and prettier, too.
Best video
Many other pavilions chose to feature prominently a video showcasing their country or organisation. Mostly, like the photo galleries, these videos turned out to be decent and showy but ultimately rather tedious and droll affairs. The one in the
Iceland pavilion, though, was actually exciting and didn't come across as self-congratulatory in any way. Though to some extent, much like the winner of the Best Single Exhibit, that owed as much to the sheer power and beauty of the source materials as anything the latter-day creators have done with it.
Masterstroke
The
Japan pavilion had a lot of cool exhibits. Water-purifying technology, electricity-generating floorboards, cameras with extraordinary zoom, extremely versatile multi-touch wall displays ... but there was more to it than just awesome technology. For the Show segment, the Japanese chose to express their message in the form of the prized local opera tradition of the host,
昆曲. And they didn't do it badly at all. We aren't just here to show off our best things, it says. We also understand you and what you are proud of, and respect that.
Cheapskate Award
The wall tiles on the exterior of the
Philippines pavilion look pretty decent. Once up close though, you'll realise they're actually just printed mounting boards. Wonder how durable that is.
Bang-head-on-wall award
Upon entering the
Benin booth in the African Joint Pavilion, you'll see nothing. Then you turn a corner, go down a passage, and there's ... a row of empty display cabinets! Oh, and a LCD screen displaying a screenshot of two random photos.
Best overall pavilion design
The
Hamburg House at the Urban Best Practices Area (UBPA) clearly incorporated passive design features in an edifying way. It did add to the queues though, because the passive design called for strict crowd control in order for the house not to overheat.
The
Netherlands pavilion, on the other hand, with its open design concept, maximised its capacity and minimised any queues leading into it---I never did see any throughout my 3.5 days at the Expo. The whole pavilion was designed as a "Happy Street" snaking through the air, with the ground level given to AstroTurf and plastic ruminants, and various "houses" along the street housing intriguing exhibits.
Clear Message Award
Many pavilions at the Expo tried to do too much at once, so that I walked out of them somewhat washed-out and with no clear overall impression or idea about what they were all about. There were some notable exceptions though. The
Porto Alegre pavilion at the UBPA was small and not particularly impressive, but clearly brought across its message that collaboration can lead to better outcomes. The
UK pavilion, colloquially also known as the pincushion, spoke clearly about the role of Nature (and greenery in particular) in cities: its centrepiece, the Seed Cathedral, was not merely a flash showpiece, but served to highlight its central message. The
USA pavilion, though it didn't have too much in the way of concrete exhibits, at least clearly brought across the inspiring message of how the American values of vision and teamwork can bring about a brighter future.
Best overall experience
There were a lot of things worth seeing in the Expo ... but many of them became much less worth seeing due to the overwhelming crowds. Sometimes the queues were just too discouraging---up to 6 or 7 hours for the Saudi pavilion at one point; more often the surging crowds would be far too distracting and mar any sustained appreciation of the exhibits. The
Taiwan pavilion was one of the few pavilions to implement measures to avoid this---by strictly limiting visitor numbers to perhaps 350 an hour, in groups of 25 at a time. As a result of this, plus the much warmer, more personalised reception they were able to give visitors as a consequence of it, the overall experience felt a lot better.
Maybe all the pavilions should have learnt from the Taiwan pavilion. But then I wouldn't have been able to visit nearly as many pavilions as I did either ... oh well. In conclusion: visiting the Expo can be like touring the world without leaving your own country (不出国门 游遍世界). But it's such a
poor substitute. Especially when the Expo is being held in China.