|
|
| 首页 | Master | 作品 | 招聘 | 招标 | 动态 | 热帖 | 杂志 | 帮助 | 搜索 | 注册 | 登录 | Blog 积分 简历 |
|
» ABBS 论坛 » 纯粹建筑论坛
动态 | 热帖 | 招聘 | 杂志 |
|
 |
  
|
| Re:看看Koolhaas的广州歌剧院方案——什么叫创造 [精华] |
human
发贴: 1829 
|
 2002-12-14 00:07 
       看广州歌剧院的方案，为Hadid的张力所震；为Coop Himmelb(l)au的活跃所动；也为gmp的美丽晶体所感染。但是再想想，他们都是传统的概念：传统的观演空间和舞台，只是在外面套了一层皮。至于皮的套法各有不同，各有各的视觉冲击。 Koolhaas提供的方案，是完全新的一种概念：把观众厅与舞台分离。这种分离有点无情，但细想下来，甚是有理。本来就是不同的使用者、不同的人流，为什么要把它们作成一体的，然后再他们的外头再做文章呢？Koolhaas把舞台跟其他的studio和workshops放在一起，成为“表演工场”。而观众厅则跟门厅、休息厅等连成一个折叠的整体。两个部分通过舞台向观众厅的开口实现互动。 极端的合理，但为什么从前没有想到呢？这就叫做创造。 你不得不佩服Koolhaas。 |
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:08
01 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:10
02 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:11
03 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:11
04 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:12
05 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:14
Koolhaas的说明： Typology It is a paradox of buildings for the performing arts that the space where the spectacle is consumed – the auditorium – tends to be overwhelmed by the factory-like accommodation where the performance is prepared and produced. A section through the Paris Opera reveals a Faberge egg in which finally the auditorium – the last egg – is tiny in comparison to the volume of the whole. In the classical opera the inflated areas around the auditorium – the galleries, foyers monumental staircases, grand entrances – accommodated richly texture, hierarchical social rituals. The opera remains a last refuge of bourgeois culture. In opera, spaces of representation exceed the space of presentation. Ranging from the naïve to grandiose, there have always been attempts to save the form from its social overgrowth – to liberate opera from its bourgeois associations. For greater intimacy with the performance, for an all-enveloping experience, for a sense of audience as a collective instead of a divided group, Wagner in Beyreuth abandoned galleries in favor of a single amphitheater. With numbers demanded in China, this solution would increase the distance from the public from the events on stage beyond the norm. It is painfully disappointing that the last three decades have completely failed to explore other models that could be popular and/or modern. The classical model is still repeated exhaustively – even though it no longer corresponds to the contemporary cultural and social mores. It is therefore largely robbed of its significance. Division Our project insists on an important division – between factory and auditorium – while it undoes an important separation – between auditorium and foyer. The program is ruthlessly separated into two parts; a performance factory that includes the entire apparatus of production: offices, rehearsal studios, workshops, stage and backstage facilities; and the space of public appearance – the architecture that allows the public to confront the opera. Interaction The factory and auditorium, one incomplete without the other, come to life the moment they are coupled. The sole area of interface is an opening in the performance factory. The opening is prolonged beyond the mere stage in order to put on display the production of opera. Only through this liberation from the adjunct volumes can the primacy of the theater itself – the room – be reasserted. Each step in production, rehearsal, assembly and the actual show configure the public plane in difference ways, reinserting a new richness to the public encounters. Fold Instead of an auditorium surrounded by a series of enveloping spaces, we propose a continuous public plane that, beginning at the entrance, proceeds to an enormous open antechamber – the foyer – then continues and spectacularly turns around itself to form the auditorium. The same territory is inhabited on two different levels: balcony and parterre. The balcony is not an afterthought but part of a continuous plane. It is sufficiently high to avoid a sense of enclosure and has an equally direct relationship to the stage. Uniqueness The compact layout prohibits shapeless proliferation across the site and allows the buildings to become a distinct urban intervention. Oriented east west, along the longer dimension of the site, the performance factory establishes a relationship with the high-rise buildings directly to the north, while the auditorium shell is exposed to the Linjiang Boulevard and faces the river. It will be a prominent feature in the skyline of Zhujiang New Town, marking its uniqueness through contrast. City as theme park The master plan for the arts – and culture square is conceived as scale-down version of Guangzhou, making the area into a theme park of the city itself. The footprint of the building leaves a large area of the site free to be landscaped. In this large plaza, the building will sponsor open-air performances; a screen from the side stage shows the opera event simultaneously to the outside. Performances in the multifunctional hall can be pulled out to the city theme park generating a field of events between the opera house and the Guangzhou Museum. |
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:16
分析图1 对于面积与形式的考虑 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:19
分析图2 形体与功能的考虑 前面的观众厅部分，是一种折叠。是Multifunctional hall / Box到Auditorium / Carpet的过渡。 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:20
分析图3 观众厅 楼座不是附加物，而是空间折叠/翻转的结果，是整体空间的一部分。 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:21
门厅/休息厅/观众厅 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:22
观众厅 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:23
多功能厅 
|
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 00:23
表演工场 
|
|
soapy
发贴: 21
|
2002-12-14 00:58
以造型的美丑，特别是传统的形式美标准去评价koolhaas们的作品好像没有什么建筑学上的意义
soapy edited on 2002-12-14 01:05
|
|
soapy
发贴: 21
|
2002-12-14 01:00
“表演工场”同时也是一个向城市展示内部活动的“剧场”。 |
|
soapy
发贴: 21
|
2002-12-14 01:03
据闻落选了，不知道是评委来不及看懂，还是有什么技术上的“硬伤”。 |
|
wasssup
发贴: 16
|
2002-12-14 01:05
概念很有趣，刚开始只看一张效果图是断不知道酷哈四葫芦里卖什么药的。 好话我不说了，只提两个问题： 1.观众厅和室外之间用什么界面作为隔断。这就涉及到与环境的关系问题，从现在这个概念方案来看，概念集中在观者与表演者的关系，甚少涉及与城市环境关系的说明，只看到一句“环境的延伸”草草带过，希望在方案深入时看到酷哈四同样精彩的环境处理概念。 2.原本的一个躯壳现在固然一分为二了，但是观众的观看方式，演员的表演方式，甚至他们之间的空间关系却是一点没变的----实际上在传统歌剧的表演限制下也不可能有革命性的变化。这就引出一个思考：那么，这个概念的价值到底有多大呢？只是在于思维的刺激么？若是这样，我想能做出更极端概念的建筑师大有人在。不客气地问一句，酷哈四在这个方案里面到底解决了什么问题？还是只是把他脑子里一个有趣的玩具搬来了广州？ 其实，在一个没多少人懂歌剧的地方花8.5亿建歌剧院本来就是个笑话。在这个笑话里，广州人需要的并不是一个歌剧院，只是一个城市标志而已。 |
|
soapy
发贴: 21
|
2002-12-14 01:07
广州需要的不是一个歌剧院，而是一个如毕尔巴鄂的古根海姆博物馆一样吸引全世界眼球的地标 |
|
wasssup
发贴: 16
|
2002-12-14 01:11
Soapy,you said it! 不过广州的确非常需要一个地标，非常需要。可惜他们选择了一个歌剧院 
|
|
soapy
发贴: 21
|
2002-12-14 01:16
呵呵，歌剧院在珠江新城啊，那里还有那么多空地，不找个项目刺激一下怎么行 |
|
barbar
发贴: 918
|
2002-12-14 01:28
很好很好，库哈斯这个真是不错 楼主的标题改成《看看Koolhaas的广州歌剧院方案——什么叫 建筑的 创造》就更好了 |
|
human
发贴: 1829
|
2002-12-14 01:29
回wasssup: 问题1：我也不是很清楚，但我觉得在这个方案中这不算是很重要的问题。概念前提被人接受了之后再考虑不迟。  问题2：以往的歌剧院，都是把观众厅于舞台作为一体而独立于其他功能部分进行设计，然后再在观众厅-舞台这个体的外面搞文章。而库哈斯则从功能和形式上都对此进行了颠覆/也就是创造。价值就在于，把歌剧院恢复到原本合理的状况——不同使用人流的空间分开处理，再使两者在功能的核心/观众厅+舞台处发生交互作用。他使建筑恢复到根本。 这是我按我的理解画的一张分析图： 
|
|
doubleface
发贴: 4784
|
2002-12-14 02:07
请问，这些投标资料是否在哪里公开展览呢？要是的话偶要去参观学习
|
|
掌门人
发贴: 4716
|
2002-12-14 02:20
human兄的分析图稍有不确，应如下图： 个人认为这样的创新是有利有弊。对于传统的歌剧院设计来说，其欣赏环境是最重要的，公共空间和服务空间都是从属性质的。观演大厅和舞台共同构成了一个神圣的“艺术”场所，是有一定的社会性和礼仪性的。在形式上，一个完整的观演空间在体量上和空间秩序上都是建筑的核心。这里面是有等级的。 Koolhass的这样的分离使得观演空间的整体性被破坏，而同时公共空间作为一个建筑表现的主体，完整而热闹，强调的是城市性。整个剧院建筑的等级秩序被颠倒，公共空间成为主，而观演空间成为辅，失去了观演空间的礼仪性和神圣感。这样的分离反叛了传统的将歌剧院作为艺术场所的社会价值观，歌剧院成为一个城市的以歌剧为主题的公园。更多的是作为一个城市的标志或者游戏，戏谑并荒诞着。 
掌门人 edited on 2002-12-14 02:33
|
|
已读帖子 新的帖子 被删帖子
|
|
|
|
返回ABBS首页 | 设计 | 室内 | 景观 | 建材 | 设备 | 卫浴 | 展览 | 照明
招标服务 | 广告服务 | 招聘服务 | 隐私政策 | 联系我们 | 设为首页
违法、有害信息举报：QQ 1764506 电话 028-61998486
Powered by Jute Powerful Forum® Version Jute 1.5.5 Ent
Copyright © 1998-2024 ABBS.com All Rights Reserved.