九个盒子
发贴: 1225
|
2005-08-25 17:05
EL MVRDV 1991-2002 前沿部分
MVRDV的视界
THE SPACE OF OPTIMISM
( a conversation with MVRDV) LUIS MORENO MANSILLA+EMILIO TUNUN 积极的空间 (和MVRDV的座谈)
In Rotterdam, opposite the Kunsthal, our car is waved to one side at a police checkpoint. While an officer courteously asks us for our papers, we have time for a glance back at the building by Koolhaas, the architect who has managed to revive the history of the Dutch architectural avant-garde. (One never knows how fortuitous this type of event really is.) After a quick, almost routine identification of the passengers and the vehicle, we set off for the port area where prominent tablet of glass and metal on the front line overlooking the canal houses a group of offices and architects’ studios. On the third floor of this curious building from the 1960’s is the playground of the firm MVRDV— a complex agglomeration of objects and people in constant movements. The three people who keep the office going, Winy, Jacob and Nathalie, move about like electrons, giving instructions on one side and another ( Everything has to be set in motion before start the discussion! ) 在鹿特丹,在KUNSTHAL的对面,我们的车在警察的检查站,当一个警官有礼貌地问我们拿通行证的时候,我们才有时间看了KOOLHAAS的建筑物后面一眼,这个建筑师他复兴着荷兰建筑史前卫风格,一个人从来不了解怎么会有这种偶然真正结果的类型。 几乎所有乘客和车辆的日常证明,我们动身到港口那里有些显著的用玻璃和金属的牌匾在前面排成一行可以俯瞰在运河的房子那是一些办公室和建筑师的工作室。 在这个古怪的建筑物第三层从1960年是MVRDV的操场,一个综合凝聚在一起的物体,人们在持续的移动。这三个人看守着主个办公室的情况,WINY,JACOB,NATHALIE,他们的移动就象电子,给这边和那边指导。在讨论之前所有东西都要被设定。
这段引子把读者带到建筑师生活的城市并且描述了他们的事务所中工作场所的氛围。(翻译从略) For a few minutes while the machine is start to warm up, we wait for the architects in a small 10 square meters room which is full of so many things that one is incapable of recall them clearly: aluminium screens alongside wooden frames, table with differing aspects and qualities, a sample of increasingly varied chairs, rare objects that look like translucent minerals with opalescent colors, fragments and more fragments of “FORMAX”, the book that the office is drafting at the moment, sales catalogues mixed up with publications by the firm, coffee and chocolate, plastic cups and spoons, letters, job applications and a multitude of faxes, bits of models in wood, resin, cardboard, cork, atc. 只是几分钟当机器开始运行,我们等候的建筑师在一个10平方的房间里,这里充满了很多事情,铝的屏风旁边靠着木架,桌子用不同的样式和材质,各式各样的椅子,特别的物体看上去象乳白色的透明矿石。“FORMAX”的片段和更多的片段,这本书是在这个时候起草的, 销售目录被公司混合着出版,咖啡和巧克力,朔料杯和匙,信,工作申请和多数的传真,一些木的模型,树脂,纸板,软木塞,等等。
这段文字描述了作者在接待室中看到的景象,大量的模型材料,食品和饮料,这是和国内设计院接待室不一样的,国内有些事务所有类似的陈设。(翻译从略) While we take in the objects in this space one by one, the clouds are pushed by the wind across the horizon, a helicopter circles ceaselessly over the building and our eyes are led by the hypnotic, continuous flow of barges on the canal. From this small room, each instant, each glance, seems different to us. From this small room, in this agitated world where phenomena and multiplicities overlap in continuous movement, we perceive an air of optimism breathed in this office, perhaps the same one that is breathed in the city, the same one is breathed in the nation. 当我们拿着这些物体一个一个的在这空间里,这些云推开风穿过地平线,一架直升机在建筑物的上面不停盘旋,我们的眼睛象被催眠了。川流不息的船在运河上从这个小房间,每一瞬间,每匆匆的一眼,看上去和我们不同,从这间小房子,在这个兴奋的世界上现象和多样性交迭着在不停的运转,我们能感到在办公室里面的乐观的气氛,可能同样的气氛洋溢在城市里面,同样的气氛洋溢在国家里。
和这个喧哗的世界比起来,这家事务所的空气中洋溢着乐观向上的气氛。也许同样的氛围同时洋溢在这个城市,这个国家。(翻译从简)
ASK: Walking underneath the WOZOCO’S APARTMENT, the air we breath is full of optimism. Is this impression real? What has happened in recent years in the Netherlands that has given young people such fast access to big projects? What has changed in the Dutch public service the nation’s architecture? 问: 当我们在WOZOCO老年公寓的下面散步时,感到充满乐观情感,是这样的吗?这些年来,什么使得荷兰的年轻建筑师在大型项目上取得这么快的进步?荷兰公众的何种改变支持了建筑的发展? ANSWER: Holland has a specific situation—it has an enormous population density, quite healthy economy and a big demand for housing that leads to a large building production at relatively low coasts. So in absolute terms, within that growing amount there’s also a big chance of finding interesting projects. Besides, people are starting to realize that it’s worthwhile investing in architecture in general. And that’s were the young architecture come in. In Holland you are allowed to do something before you have proven yourself, and so obviously that help to experiment and prove yourself. Amsterdam-Osdorp, the site for the WOZOCO’S project, is a typical example of a Dutch post-war neighborhood, where the pioneering spirit of the fifties and sixties is still around although at first sight the area looks depressing. The optimism of the project fits in well with this atmosphere where the new is considered normal. 答: 荷兰的建筑形势很好,人口密度大,经济运转良好,大量的需求产生了大量的建设,同时造价也比较低。因此你可以找到有趣的项目。同时,投资商对于建筑上的投资普遍觉得值得。这正是年轻建筑师成长的好环境,在荷兰,你可以在得到证明之前就可以获得实践的机会。 WOZOCO项目实施的环境是阿姆斯特丹的Osdorp,这是一个典型的战后的社区,源自五六十年代的先锋主义的精神依然活在这个看似低迷的地方。在我们的建筑中的乐观主义和这里的乐于接受新事物的氛围相当协调。
IN THE NAME OF PROGRESS(为了前进) Ask: We were speaking yesterday about the extraordinary, the unusual… how can the government accept this degree of uncertainty, of surprise? 问: 我们总强调特别,不寻常,等。政府部门怎么能够接受这种不确定的方向呢?出于好奇吗? Answer: In order to differentiate themselves from other administrations or cities…! Because there are lots of things going on, there is a danger that they might all look more or less the same, and the government is aware of that. Different in architecture starts to pay off, almost in such a way normality becomes special again. Holland seems to have a demand for progress. It’s almost as if the Erasmian background for that progress is considered as something positive. And although we don’t exactly know what progress means, it does provide space for experimenting and argument, for renovation and for ideas. It’s a very optimistic culture, and the reason why it’s here is perhaps it’s part of a tradition. There is no fear of progress, of the new. 答: 政府希望建筑面貌不同于其他的地区和城市。因为建设量大,所以存在千篇一律的危险,政府能正视这个问题。建筑的求变取得成功,反而常态如今变得特别起来。 荷兰需要前进。这种伊拉斯莫学派的人文环境为追求进步的实践提供了背景。尽管我们并不知道方向究竟是什么,但是这促进了实践和争论,为变革和新观点提供了机会。 荷兰的文化非常乐观主义,它之所以如此也许是因为这是传统的一部分。对于前进,对于新事物,我们无所怀疑。
CHEST WORDS(核心词) Ask: How do ideas transform themselves into things and vice versa? For you, real work seems to begin with the definition of the program which you re-elaborate… 问: 观念是如何变成实物的呢,而实物又是如何反映观念的呢?你们的设计似乎是从精心地对问题重新定位开始的…… Answer: Yes, a redefinition of the question. In the VILLA VPRO the program start off as a traditional brief by a professional adviser in building management for the client. So at the beginning we had to take into consideration this very general brief, which didn’t reflect much of the special nature of this company. We had to explain to the company and the building manager that they would had to rewrite and rearrange their thinking about the project. So they a introduced a pre contract, a pre-design phase, which created the opportunity to criticize the brief and to develop a concept. 答: 是的,对问题的重新发现。就像VILLA VPRO项目那样,业主首先给我们的是一个职业建筑顾问公司的报告,就像一般的项目一样。我们发现这份报告没有能够充分考虑到这个公司的特性,因此我们不得不说服业主和顾问公司,他们必须重新对这个项目进行考虑。是他们的前期工作和我们对其的批评激发产生了新的概念。 Ask: Each project seems to be linked to a type of “chest word”, that is neither an abstraction nor a form. In the VPRO building in Hilversum, we discovered the qualities of the villas where the company used to be located; a folded up strip of paper with diagrams is enough to explain the MEENT DEPARTMENT STORE BUILDING; in the MOLENSLOOT housing, the word carpet is able to give shape to the whole construction. On the other hand, we are not exactly speaking about form, nor are we speaking about concepts; it is a threshold between the two, absorbing from both sides. But don’t you think that the set of techniques used to produce architecture is more decisive than describing facts again? Do you have a way, a model of conversation amongst yourselves, or is it a model of overlapping things? 答: 每一个项目似乎都对应一个核心词,它既不是抽象的描述也不是具体的形式。在Hilversum的VPRO项目中,我们发现了这个公司以前的地址的某种特质;一张折叠的小纸条就足以解释MEENT DEPARTMENT STORE BUILDING; 在MOLENSLOOT,地毯一词足以给整个建筑赋形。我们并非在说形式,也不是概念,而是介乎之间的能从两方面都有所因借的某个门槛。但是,难道你们不认为技术手段在建造过程中比一再强调一些论据更加有决定性吗?你们是如何在思考中运用核心词的,还是说这是一种统筹问题的手段呢? Answer: A “chest word” tries to summarize the possible tool or medicine for the found situation through an architectural proposal. In this way it wants t communicate with the client, the situation, the users, the observers; it goes through drawing and through what you describe as “chest words”, because they can also touch emotional layers, elements of the projects which have not been describe prior to that moment. The “chest words” add emotional value to abstract notions. It’s like an Ariadna wire which you can take to the thinkable end. It should also work on several levels. It should work for this particular client, but we always try to make it an issue that goes beyond that point so that it becomes exemplary. 答: 核心词总是努力从建筑学的角度对可能的工具和方法进行抽象概括。为了寻找,需要和业主,场地,使用者以及欣赏者进行“沟通”;需要画草图以及寻找你所说的那种门槛,因为它能够触及精神层面,并且和尚未形成的项目的各方面有关。核心词把精神层面的价值用抽象的描述表达出来。它有像Ariadna把情人引出迷宫的绳子一样的作用。 但是它还必须为不同层次的制约因素工作,比如说特定的业主,但是我们总是努力使它升华,达到更高的价值。
DATASCAPES(基础数据) Ask: How does city planning develop into the outline of a building? In BERGEN OP ZOOM SHADOWTOWN , by reinterpreting the city planning, turning the fact that building are not to be seen into a quality, you transform the problem into the origin of the project where anamorphosis or view projections establish the precise rules that determine the outline of the construction. What are datascapes? Is it a technique? You say that sublime pragmatism replace artistic intuition, yet there is little intuition in deforming data, transforming data into shapes. 问: 城市设计是如何落实到建筑轮廓上的?在BERGEN OP ZOOM SHADOWTOWN项目中,通过对城市设计的重新诠释,你们改变了那种把建筑看成某种自身特质的表现的看法,提出在最原初的场地中具有能够决定建筑的法则。什么是基础数据?是一种技术手段吗?你们说实用主义取代艺术知觉,在处理数据使得它们形成形式的过程中很少有直觉参与。…… Answer: Datascapes can be seen as a kind of technique or a tool that tries to unfold the chaos theories, which appear so much in the current architectural debate. By using this it tries to escape from the mythical hide-away of the existing chaos notions. I suppose the work we’ve done in the last three years could all be considered as datascapes, in the sense that they all try to say something about the limitations which your encounter, which are set up by society, by the rules, or by the building laws which are set up. “Artistic” intuition lies in the use of the technique, in the way you can look at things. It is a kind of mirror in a way of showing these limitations. Normally it is very hard to show these limitations since they are “hidden”, swallowed by other parameters. But by pushing things to an extreme, compared to pressure cooker, these limitations “appear”, which makes it possible to create a discourse around them. 答: “基础数据”可以被看成一种摆脱混乱的理论的研究方法和技术手段。当今的建筑界就是这样一种局面。通过这种方法有助于从神秘和虚无中找到真正的东西。我想我们这三年来的工作都可以被看成基础数据工作。从这个意义上说,我们一直试图对那种你们提到的那种困扰做些什么,试图挣脱那些来自社会,规则,现有建筑法规等的限制。艺术直觉存在在技术手段中,和你看待事物的方法有关。这是一面通过一种方法显现极限的镜子。平时要想发现这些极限是很困难的,因为它们和其他的参数混在一起。 然而通过把事物向极限推进,如同压力炊具的做法一样,直到极限表现出来可以加以研究和讨论。 Ask: Can the architect, by adjusting the conventional elements of architecture and urban landscape, encourage new effects which represent, in a critical way, the world we live? 问: 建筑师是否可以通过对建筑城市和景观的惯例的改变,从而对我们的生存进行批判和影响? Answer: Apparently so. 答: 当然。
PUSHING THE LIMITS(突破限制) Ask: Is the creative way of working we have nowadays a distortion of reality? We say this because in SHADOWTOWN, once the technique is chosen, the shape is determined: you hardly need to draw it. Why should the shape of things come from a strange world? Is it something artistic in a way… 问: 今天我们从事的创造性的工作意味着对现实的一种变形吗?我们之所以这么说是因为在SHADOWTOWN中,看起来,手法一旦确定,形式就决定了,甚至你们都不需要画出来。这些形式是如何从一个奇怪的世界中来的呢?是否可以说这是某种艺术?…… Answer: We don’t want to discuss shape in isolation, without reasons. That’s why we don’t trust a merely artistic approach by architects. The shapes, however complicated it appears to be, becomes self-explanatory again. If one knows the parameters, accepts the starting points and you explain the principle, one usually also accepts the result that is generated by these principles. Whereas you would explain it the other way around by showing the results first. Most people do understand it if you explain the principle which is in the generator. But it depends on how you apply the statistics or the rules or the regulations that you are looking at. Often it’s necessary to push the limits. 答: 我们不愿意把形式单独进行讨论,没有理由。 我们不认为建筑师仅仅是考虑造型的艺术。形式,无论看上去多么复杂,最终都只是自己为自己做注解而已。 如果其他人了解相关参数,接受设计的出发点,而你就原则进行解释,相信他们可以接受结局是从这些原理产生的。但是实际上如果你已经知道结局,你完全可以用另外一套理论解释它。一般说来,当你解释导致结果产生的那些原则的时候,大多数人是能够理解的。 但是设计和你如何处理这些原则是很相关的。 对于突破限制,这是必要的。
HISTORY/FLATNESS(历史/平面) Ask: In the descriptions of your projects you speak of questions related to a personal redescription of history, with a particular way of seeing what is built. For instance, in VPRO you speak about the technique being organized as “in ancient Rome”, in THE HAGUE HOUSING you quote MOLENSLOOT’s “Memory of Pompeii” and the podium from where the monument emerges “as the Phoenix rebuilt”, the Nolli map, etc. Is history like a library where you can pick a book or is it like a landscape without time? Are objects independent from the ideas that gave them their shape? 问: 在你们哪些项目的介绍中,你们经常提到关于你们对历史重新进行的阐述,用一种特别的方式看待那些建成的建筑。例如,在VPRO,你们提到了象古罗马一样组织技术手段;在THE HAGUE HOUSING,你们引用了MOLENSLOOT的名言:庞贝的记忆,基座的设计包含着“凤凰城重建”的纪念色彩;Nolli的地图等。历史对于你们来说是一个可以捡起一本书的图书馆吗?还是一个没有时间概念的地景?事务对于赋予他们形式的概念来说具有独立性吗? Answer: Yes, history can be seen as a collective tool to explain the found reality. So if we are using Pompeii, it covers its loads as a tool to speak about the relativity of architecture in situ. But it is not only a tool but also a reference appearing in the texts to clarify and intensify certain ideas. Can elements of history be used as “chest word”? 答: 是的,历史可以被用作一个综合的工具来解释既定的现实。如果我们引用庞贝,那么我们就是同时在提到庞贝的建筑和环境的关系。而且这还不仅仅是一种工具,还包含着参照物的作用来强调和澄清一些观点。一些历史的观点难道不可以作为关键词来进行应用吗? Ask: Is the relationship between things more important than the words we use? 问: 事物之间的联系是否比我们如何看待其本身来得更重要呢? Answer: Both are important. A project should be able to stand on its own, the relationship with something else makes it possible to read the project in a different way…… Although maybe relationship is not the right word, it’s more a recombination of specific elements, or sometimes even a fusion. The VILLA VPRO is a hybrid of a villa and an office. You might be right when you say that architecture has overcome the state of the object as such. It has reached a state of interrelations more than even with all its communicative possibilities. Even in architecture, the post-Einstein era has come to an end, where linear attitudes towards progress have dissolved into a more gaseous situation where the architect combines elements in order to handle relative progress. 答: 两方面都很重要。一个项目必须证明它自身的存在,二和其他事物的联系则可以提供用理解它的另外的角度……也许联系并不是最恰当的词,比联系更合适的说法是各个单个物体的再组合,有时其中包含意义的混乱,比方说,VILLA VPRO就是别墅和办公室的结合。 你们说建筑的含义不仅仅是某种物体那么简单,我们绝对也许是对的。在今天的时代背景下,因为建筑物对内对外的交流和联系被强调,与其说建筑物是个物体,还不如说是一种联系。甚至可以说在建筑学中,后爱因斯坦时代已经结束。对发展的那种线性的理解被“场”取代,建筑师努力通过对元素的组合的研究和控制来推动前进。
NEOPLASTICISM/EXPRESSIONISM(新造型主义/表现主义) Ask: In 1922 Mondrian wrote: “The rooted idea that architecture should count on three-dimensional expressiveness leads the Neoplasticist FLAT surface to be considered impossible in architecture. But seeing architecture as the image of the form is, nevertheless, a traditional conception. It is the visual vision (perspective) of the past. The new vision (also for Neoplasticism) is not from a single and precise point of view, looking upon things everywhere and nowhere at the same time… nor linked to places or time (according to the Theory of Relativity). It actually locates it in front of the plane. Thus it sees architecture as a multiplicity of surfaces; once again flat… “The realization of architecture in the far future and today. Do you identify yourselves with these words? 问: 1922年,蒙德里安曾经在“今天的和将来的建筑”中写道:“关于建筑应该关注三维表现的根深蒂固的观点使得新造型主义的平面的表皮的概念看起来不可能应用在建筑中。但是把建筑看成是形体在图面上的透视投射也不过是一个过去的传统概念。新的观点也是新造型主义的观点认为:不从某个既定的视点观察建筑,而是同时考虑到各个视点又不考虑任何一个视点,并且和时间空间无关(根据爱因斯坦的相对论)。最终实际上又被放到平面上面来。最后建筑被看成表皮意象的复合。”你们能够认同这种说法吗? Answer: “Surface” is a very hip word lately although it can be seen as a reinterpretation of the vocabulary of the Archizoom era. “Surface” provides a possible continuation and looseness. It literally makes space for the things which are not planned or filled in yet. This is a very optimistic thought. But “Surface” is also a tool for disconnecting, like in the DOUBLE HOUSE IN UTRECHT: it’s a kind of membrane between two forces, two families. It’s the moment where the plane “freezes”, “petrified” and therefore the seemly endless optimism actually ends and the generic become specific. The fact that there is no precise or single viewpoint is still appealing: it refers to a loose movement, but I would not like to see architecture merely as a multiplicity of surface but of spaces as well. Neo-neo-plasticity, neoplasticity inside out. 答: 表皮是今天被用得非常频繁的一个词,其实在Archizoom时代就有这种说法了。“表皮”的概念意味着可能的加建和余地,字面上可以理解成有条件无限延伸,从而为规划和再向基地填充提供了可能。 这是个非常有趣的想法。但是“表皮”其实也可以意味着分隔,就像在DOUBLE HOUSE IN UTRECHT的项目中一样,两个力量之间有一层膜,分开了两个家庭。此刻作为“表皮”的背景的平面不再延伸,从而这种无限的感觉终结了,固化了,原本一般的东西变的特殊起来。 这种否定单视点和精确视点的观点关注不加明确限制的运动(译者按:即在自由运动中对建筑的感受),但是我不愿意把建筑看成表皮的集合,宁愿看成是空间的集合。一种新新造型主义的态度,从建筑内部到建筑外部的新造型主义。
PETRIFYING IDEAS/NEW RESULTS(观点物化/新效果) MVRDV: we noticed your eyes beginning to sparkle at the word “petrification”. Yes, we like this word because we are concerned about the way in which ideas become objects. Not things just in terms of space, but also material in terms of matter, becoming bigger or thicker or heavier or smoother, like in direct change from gas to solid… A good sub-title: Beyond Liquid. MVRDV: 我们发现在我们提到“固化”这个词的时候你们的眼睛在闪光。是的,我们喜欢这个词语,因为我们关心概念是如何变化成实体的。不仅仅是从空间到构成建筑的变化,也包括从问题的提出到材料的确定的变化……一个很好的副标题:超越液体。 Ask: Through an unconventional disposition of conventional elements, your buildings are able to create new situations in the assemblage. Do you understand the work of an architect as a creator or as a technician able to select and combine in order to achieve new results? 问: 通过对平常的材料的不平常的处理,你们的建筑证明可以利用构造方式的不同创造新的效果。你们觉得建筑师是个选择材料的艺术家呢,还是一个组合材料的技师呢? Answer: Both. An architect should be both a creator and a technician. We combine the technique of assemblage with zoning envelopes, often “discovered” through a thorough recombination of program and site-specific elements. For example, looking at the MOLENSLOOT projects. There, all the participant architects have been asked to build their houses next to the adjacent ones, sticking them altogether into one block. In order to dramatise the existing monuments, we suggested a strict height contour of 3 metres. At that height all individualism would be chopped off. Suddenly one starts to imagine a possible cohabitation of extreme difference: anthropological buildings, retro-architecture, rationalist; everyone can construct their ideal, the chopping off action turns it into a solid piece… Or in the case of the project for the masterplan of the HOGESCHOOL IN NIJMEGEN. The assemblage enables the client to hire different architects for different phase of the project, but keep a clear concept of the roof-campus on top of all these different architectures right from the beginning. The only rule for the series of architects is to build as many different spatial concepts for school as possible. It turns “difference” into an object. The bigger the differences, the stronger it works. 答: 一名建筑师应该兼具创造家和技师的素质。我们的创造带着深深的基地的烙印,设计程序的逻辑和基地本身的特殊性同时表现出来。例如,在 MOLENSLOOT项目中,所有的建筑都必须和相连的建筑紧挨着,一起构成一个社区。为了突出已经存在的纪念碑,我们制定了相当苛刻的限高。人们可以想象结果:一群各式各样的建筑紧挨着,人类学建筑;高技派;理性主义,每一种观点都可以并存,而限高使它们通过受限制的体量变成建筑。 另外的例子是HOGESCHOOL IN NIJMEGEN总体规划。分期开发的设计师的业主有条件聘请不同的建筑师设计不同的分期,但是从一开始,一个“屋顶--校园”的概念是得到贯彻的。 对于各期建筑的唯一要求是设计尽可能不一样的校园空间。“差别”在这里被实现成为一个“物体”。差异越大,规划思想越是得以实现。
MISSING FAÇADE(消失了的立面) Ask: The traditional concept of façade does not seem to exist any more: your buildings exhibit a kind of genetic cut. We also find the attitude in KOOHAAS’S EDUCATORIUM where the façade is ironically reduced to small pieces of travertin covers the edges of the concrete slabs… 问: 传统的立面的概念似乎不复存在了:你们的建筑看起来没有传统立面的血统。我们在库哈斯的EDUCATORIUM也发现了类似的设计态度,所谓立面似乎仅仅是用一片片的灰华石把混凝土体量的几个面包裹起来。 Answer: The VPRO-building just stopped there; that notion is continued in the detailing of the edge. We don’t want to emphasize it with a special material. It’s just a cut: the façade become a section showing the principle of the interior. Putting the inside, even your own, on display seems a very modern topic. It might be perverse but it has similarities with the mixture of privacy and publicness these days: walking on the zebra crossing and listening to the love conversation of the neighbor who is phoning his girlfriend, the way people show their privacy on the television in order to attract attention. In such a condition the ancient limitations between privacy and publicity seem to be irrelevant. [I’ve just made a trip to Brazil, where there are a great number of these exhibitionist modernistic buildings. Although the climate demands that all these kind of buildings have to be covered with an excessive amount of louvers, the will to show the interior is stronger than the unavoidable consequence of this transparency.] Traditionally a façade is something you observe from the outside, but at the moment you could consider the view from the inside to be far more relevant. This was also the case with the VPRO-building. It can all be seen as a part of the forthcoming process of densification. When buildings come closer to each other, the world starts to become interiorized. It is part of an observation that architecture is diverging in two directions—one is the direction of urbanism and the other is the direction of the interior, which is starting to play an effective role. This interiorisation is not only expresses itself in the intensive “design” of the intermediate public spaces with lamps, a bench, a flower pot, so they become interiors. A contemporary NOLLI map appears. At that very moment the façade start to disappear. It ceases to exist. Hybrids between buildings and urban fabric appear, like bazaar, palaces and fortifications. 答: 也许VPRO给人一种没有完成的感觉,但是我们不希望用一种特殊材料强调的立面把内部空间的设计概念束缚住,我们希望它能够延伸。你可以想象这个建筑立面是一个剖面…… 把内部表现出来(包括表现人的内在)是一个很新的主题。虽然看上去有点反常,但是私密性和公众性在当代的确联系更加紧密,当你在斑马线上行走的时候听到身边的人在和女朋友打电话;人们通过媒体展现自己的私生活以求得到更大的关注,这些都表达了一种私密性和公众性的混合。传统的私密性和公众性之间的分水岭正在受到挑战。 [我刚刚从巴西回来,在那里的新建筑中,这种主题被大量的反映出来。尽管当地的气候要求建筑的外面需要安装上大量的百叶,但是展示内部空间的欲望仍然无法阻挡。]传统上说,间看建筑,但立面意味着从外部空是从这个角度来说,你可以认为来自建筑内部空间的感受更加重要。这正是我们在VPRO中要表达的。 这种设计观念包含了对未来的高密度城市的一种前瞻。随着建筑物挨得更近,世界变成为了室内化的世界。这属于一种建筑学的观点的一部分,该观点认为:建筑学正在向两个方向演化,一个是城市之一的观点,另外一个是室内主义的观点,而后者日益扮演重要的角色。这种室内主义的概念并非只是体现在建筑物之间的距离越来越近的方面,在唤起人们对开放空间中的灯具,坐凳,花台等的设计的重视从而把开放空间进行室内化的设计方面他也担当起重要的任务。 一个现代的NOLLI的图景产生了。建筑的立面淡化了,把建筑发展成为城市织理(借用凯文林奇的术语)和室内的产儿的观点取代了传统的建筑观,就向市场、宫殿、城堡…… Ask: What we appreciate most in the VPRO building is that this way of understanding architecture leads interior to be built as if it were an exterior space. We find that the definition of open space is the most critical architecture thought of our days… 问: 我们对VPRO最感兴趣的是:在这种观点的支持下,建筑的是内被当成外部空间来设计,开放空间的定义问题被成了今天建筑学最有争议的命题。 Answer: There are so many different meanings enclosed with “the void”. It is a symbol for “escape” and for future, for the “unknown”, for fantasies and for protection. How can you exploit this ambiguity? In the last few weeks we have been working on a proposal for an empty space between two towns. Its main reason for existence was to protect these towns from being connected: a kind of fire break. We started to get bored with this void because no one knew what to do with it. Should we put in grass and turn it into a super “common green”? Or should we put in forest? Or might it be more interesting to provoke the use of the void by an extended series of pathway, linking the towns rather than disconnecting them, and challenging the program location. Thus turning this proposed periphery into a centre, into a city itself, into a vegetated version of Manhatten translates the “unknown” into a provocation of “use” of “liberty”and “flexibility”. We simply activate the potentials of the void. In WOZOCO’S, for instance, you mentions the voids between the boxes. There the void is created by the box. You could also consider the “void” as a public interior, in this case quite a social void, a street in the air. Besides having a neighbor 15 or so meters away, the cantilever houses also have an exciting view. The balconies of the regular houses on the other side of the building repeat this idea on another scale, introducing what we call a “small-talk” zone. But the word “void” can incorporate so much meanings that it start to become meaningless again… The void is like a snake that goes everywhere. You can use it wherever you want, so it exit in every project in a different way. Maybe it’s about ambiguity. 答: 空白包含了如此之多的含义,逃脱、未来、未知、理想、防伪……,如何能够准确去定义它呢?过去的几个星期我们从事了一项为两个城市之间的空地进行设计的任务。业主希望阻止两个城市的连接,是一件“救火”的任务。我们被这块空地困扰的是如何去安排。做一个超级的大草坪吗?还是森林?也许可以设计一些步行道,联系上两个城市而不是隔开他们,这就和设计的出发点有所背离。把这块空白变成一个中心、一个“城市”、一个曼哈顿的负片(摄影词汇),把空白变成针对“随意和弹性”的设计,我们希望激活空白的潜能。 在WOZOCO’S,你们提到那些盒子之间的空白,空白是由盒子产生的。你们也可以把何止之间的空白看成为“公众的内部空间”,由此产生如此的一个社会的“空白”,一个在空间里的街道。 除了在15米左右以外有他们的邻居以外,这些悬臂的房子同时具有精彩的外观。在建筑物另外一个面的阳台提供了可供密切谈话的空间。 然而,空白这个词包含了太多的意义,以至于重又归于寻常了……空白就如同运动的蛇,无处不在。因为不同的人可以给予不同的定义,所以在不同的项目中,空白以不同的形式呈现。也许这个概念本身就是模糊的。
EXTERIOR/INTERIOR(外部和内部) Ask: Another way of understanding this would be to consider the outline of the building as the result of the definition of the air that surrounds it. You don’t define the object but the air that is entering and surrounding the building. For example, in the BERLIN VOIDS what we find interesting are the voids created between the houses rather than the different type of apartments that arise, which are not obsessed, as in modernity, with solving a solid puzzle… 问: 也许可以这么理解建筑的轮廓:不去定义建筑物,而是关注流动在室内外的空气。例如我们在BERLIN VOIDS中看到的,使房子之间的空白吸引人们的兴趣,而不是不同类型的立起来的公寓的体量,而在现代主义观点看来,体量则是更重要的…… Answer: In this case it is merely a game of form and anti-form, the unimaginable anti-forms or voids as you call them, some of which may even be more ideal than the others. Sometimes you can design by defining conditions or a set of ruled, so you can activate the process. Sometimes it’s there to be used, but more often you have to trigger it. In the BERLIN VOIDS we started by putting in the ideal types of housing, and these ideals than shaped the imperfect types in between. Well, these are houses that occupy the “in-between” of the known ideals. We try to equalize idealism with non-idealism. We try to set a form by its anti-form. We try to describe the power of the “pochee” which exists in the mediaeval castles-when you go through a door you suddenly find the hidden treasure-, and a sudden awareness of the neighbor, a curiosity of what is behind that form, a reason for visiting them, a possible way of socializing within densificating areas. 答: 这只不过是一个形式和负形式的游戏,正如你们所说的被忽视的负形式或空白。有时候可以通过一些给定的约束条件或者一些原则来启动设计。有时候设计的契机得到很好的显现,但是绝大多数时候必须努力发掘。在BERLIN VOIDS项目中,我们是从标准的住宅模式着手设计的,但是在这些标准模式的住宅之间产生了不理想的空间。所以就产生了在标准模式住宅之间的空间中的设计。我们努力在使得那些非标准的住宅更加舒适。我们用负形式来控制形式。 我们试图寻找那种在中世纪城堡中的感觉:当你推开一扇厚重的大门,一个“宝藏”显现在你的面前,你的注意力开始投向你的邻居们,这才是你进入这个空间的目的。在古堡建筑华丽的形式掩盖了人们建造的目的:来访问你的邻居们,在这个人集中的场所进行社交活动。
EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY(相似性和多样性) Ask: How did the idea of elaborating the cross section as if it was a floor plan, avoiding a conventional straight line division, arise in the DOUBLE HOUSE IN UTRECHT? 问: 你们在DOUBLE HOUSE IN UTRECHT项目中把剖面精心设计,而不是常规的用直线一分为二的想法是从哪里来的? Answer: One of the clients saw the BERLIN VOIDS project and said, “I want to have a house like that”, not knowing that it would occur in the end as a perfect model for the cohabitation of their double house. One couple wanted to live on a kind of piano nobile and thus get a more secluded living area from the ground floor, the other wanted to cook and eat on the ground floor almost “in” the garden, the first couple wanted a big sleeping room next to the top, the other wanted to combine their TV salon with the sleeping level, etceteras. This proposed “rubber division line between the two” turned into a reliable tool to negotiate their boundaries and to exploit the possible ideals of interiors and views. This led to a certain voluntary dependency between the two couples: without the other it would never has been possible to obtain such qualities. A certain awareness of their difference was the result. 答: 我们两个业主其中的一家看了BERLIN VOIDS项目后说他希望有一个类似的房子。但是谁也没有想到这竟然导致了最后的,如此完美的复合居住的形态的建筑。一家夫妇希望有一个钢琴工作室,所以生活空间不放在地层;另一家夫妇希望在地面层可以做饭和用餐,就像在一个花园里面一样。第一家夫妇希望有一个通向屋顶的卧室;而另外一家夫妇则希望卧室层能够放一套视听设备,等等。这么一来,为了充分满足两个家庭的室内的和景观的需求,就需要打破常规的两户之间的分割方式。最后,两个家庭户想凭借对对方的依赖赢得了各自理想的居住品质,而最终的结果满足了两家不同的空间形态需求。 Ask: We are concerned with the issue of uniformity and diversity: the simultaneous presence of something which is regular and something which is diverse, something which is like the way we humans live… Is the abstract concept of ideal dwelling replaced by a wide range of different ideal housing? Is unity and diversity the shadow of how similar and different we humans are? 问: 我们很关心同一性和多样性这个主题,即规则的物体、多变的物体一起共存,如同人们生活状态的写照。传统的既定的居住方式会被新的富于变化的模式所取代吗?同一性和多样性是否可以被看成人类居住方式的本身的同一和多样的反映? Answer: Yes, it evokes a MARGUERITE DURAS-like situation: the place with social awareness; due to the concrete walls one will not hear the other, but you are nevertheless aware that he or she is around, due to the neighboring volume penetrating the house. It causes a certain awareness that might help to deal with each other within a dense situation. Instead of hearing, you can feel your neighbor----as in the project of the CASA PIU BELLA, one house simply intervenes in the other----. The themes of the BERLIN project have gone into two directions. One direction is used in DOUBLE HOUDE IN UTRECHT, in which negotiation and awareness of the other become an issue. The second aspect is the combination of many ideals. 答: 是的,这样就引发了一个MARGUERITE DURAS式的命题:空间中的社会知觉。混凝土的墙体使得人们不能听到邻居的声音,但是人们仍然能够受到邻居家的建筑体量的影响,感受到邻居的存在。高密度居住模式下,这个问题值得重视。听不到邻居的声音,但是能够感受到邻居的存在----就像在CASA PIU BELLA项目中,一套房插入到另外一套中。在BERLIN项目中的主体向两个方向发展。 一个方向是在DOUBLE HOUDE IN UTRECHT中使用过的,这里互相合作成为主题。另外一个方向是把各种因素结合在一起考虑。 ON SITE(关于建筑的基地)(也许译成场所更好) Ask: If “landscape” can be translated as “endlessness” then “landscape” is a pretty serious and endless topic to be examined. If “nature” can be equated by “freedom” then lots of explorations can be considered. Most of our buildings seem to investigate these matters. We tend to be extremely site-specific, without becoming critical regionalists. You could consider it as a doubling the landscape. In our work we tend to enlarge or emphasis certain aspect of a site. Site is not an avoidable force of nature. Sometimes you have to redefine the site, make a new site. It is a base for the extant like in MOLENSLOOT project, or an open space in the neighborhood like in the WOZOCO’s project. Or a slope that suddenly appears due to implantation, like in the RVU project. Aren’t you asking for a combination of site-specificness and sitelessness? There is a moment in the church when indeed the site disappears in heaven. There is a moment in the VPRO when the site disappears and turns into interior. There is a moment in the WOZOCO’s when the site was there but, when you walk onto the galleries, it has become interior as well. 答: 如果“landscape”意味着无止无尽,那么这将是一个永远重要的命题。如果可以把“nature”和自由等同起来,那么这将值得努力探索。绝大多数我们设计的建筑都涉及了上面这些内容。 我们不是地方主义者,但是我们对基地的特性非常重视。我们可以把基地看成包含“landscape”和另外一重意义的双重属性的产物。在我们的实践中,我们努力强化和释放基地的这种性质。基地并不是“不得不接受的自然现状”,有时候我们需要重新定义基地,形成一个新的基地。在MOLENSLOOT项目中,基地意味着一种历史现状;在WOZOCO项目中,基地变成一种邻里开放空间;在RVU项目中,基地是树林中突现在眼前的一个斜坡。 你们的问题大概是关于基地本身的独特性和作为人类文明的“大基地”的完整性在设计中的结合。在教堂中,人们祈祷的瞬间,空间走向天国,基地同时也消失了;在VPRO项目中,基地变化成为内部;在WOZOCO,人们可以感受到基地,但是当你走向廊道的时候,基地也会变化成内部空间。 (译者按: 本节文字中出现了很多“基地”一词,是个问题,但是找不到好的翻译办法,所以把这个问题留了下来。)
TEACHING(教书) have taught at the A.A. SAsk: You chool of architecture in London, the Academy of Architecture in Rotterdam, the Technical University in Delft and at the Berlage Institute in Amsterdam. When a model does not exist, how do you share your enthusiasm for architecture with the students? 答: 你们曾经在伦敦A.A建筑学院,鹿特丹建筑学院,德尔夫工学院,阿莫斯特丹布莱克研究所任教。你们是如何和你们的学生分享你们的建筑热情的? Answer: There are different attitudes to teaching during the years. One of them is research instead of design. By selecting topics like FARMAX, the study of extreme densities, or DATASCAPES, the study of hidden logics, or of INFRASTRUCTURE, the study for the intensified use, or THE LITE CITY, a contemporary Broadacre, one can concentrate. It’s a classical situation of professorship by focus on certain topics within society and trying to give answer to them. In that way, they are part of a voluntary entry into a specific way of dealing with urbanism and architecture. They adopt it today and explore that partial field. That is also one of the dangers of teaching. On the hand it’s very good to create schools with a certain identity and educate students in a certain tradition, and try to make that tradition clear, but on the other hand you often see that both teachers and students have become unaware of their own tradition. So when you enter as a guest teacher you can try to investigate, make an issue of this attitude and try to make the students more aware of the peculiarity of the choices they are making all the time. In any case, we hardly teach design any more. It’s not that interesting. We rather try to train students in ways of fact-finding that generate form. To set up their own “iron logic”, where something subjective like taste is less relevant. What’s fantastic about the current education situation is that as a student you can go for one year to Barcelona to the school of Bohigas and then leave to go to a school with a totally different approach somewhere else. It’s a bit of luxury but you are creating a composition of masters and directions, and you do it yourself in the end as a student. We do not intend to provide the total path to the students. We just take them into our world for half a year. 答: 教学的目的一直在变。其中之一是用研究代替设计。选择一些课题诸如:FARMAX、高密度研究、DATASCAPE、内在逻辑研究、基础设施、高使用频率研究、THE LITE CITY、当代宽带等等。经典的教授模式是集中在一些社会方面的主题上,试图给学生们以答案。那样,学生们自动进入一些特定的领域,学会用某种思路去思考分析城市和建筑。学生完全接受知识并会开发这些特定的领域。 这也是教学的危险所在。一方面依据某种明确的原则建立一所学校,教授学生特定的知识域,努力使得学校的传统更加明确,是好的。但是,另一方面,在这样的学校中,经常会发现老师和学生们渐渐失去他们自己的传统。因此当作为一个客座学者时,可以通过努力,让学生们明白他们整天从事的工作的非一般性,使他们更清醒。 我们并不教授设计,这并不是关键所在。我们只是训练学生问题的发现和思考是如何发生的。帮助他们建立他们固有的逻辑,而那些主观的诸如品位等问题一般不会在我们的教学中设计。 时下有趣的是,学生们可以比方说,在巴塞罗那Bohigas大学学习一个学年,然后又到另外一个完全不同的学术环境学习。这么做是比较奢侈的,但是学生可以由此寻找专业方向,作为学生,最后发现自己应该做的选择。我们不主张包办学生的一切。 我们仅仅在我们教授的半年中把学生带入我们的世界。 Ask: How has your working experience with O.M.A, Van Berkel, Mecanoo, Torres&Lapena and so on influence MVRDV? 问: 你们从曾经效力过的著名事务所中获得最大的收获是什么? Answer: If there is one word that connects our experience at OMA with our current work, it is “communication” in the broadest sense of the word: the booklets-culture, the use of extremely different collaborators, the number of advisors, the resource from all kind of libraries, the incredible extended possibilities of different media. “Communication” accelerates thinking. Unlike these possibilities, the profession is not as totally accelerated as one might imagine, due to the slow building production and to the duration of intellectual discourse. It’s quite recommendable and useful to travel and work somewhere during and after your study. It definitely has influenced our actual state. It would have been different if we had not done that. But it’s hard to describe what would be different. It might be the way of working. It is obvious there are influence: working experience can be seen as a part of your education. But when you move on again, it simply become part of your history. 答: 如果说可以用一个词表达我们在大都会的工作和现在的工作的联系的话,就是交流,最广泛意义上的交流。各种文化、最不可思议的合作者、大量的顾问、各大图书馆的资源、传媒的不可估量的作用可能,等等。交流刺激思维。但是建筑设计其实没有想象中那么充满无限可能,建造需要时间,智识的发展也有个过程。 在读书期间和参加工作后进行游历和有不同的工作经历是有意义的。它的确影响了我们的工作。如果我们没有那些工作经历,一切将会不同。但是很难说工作经历究竟影响了哪一方面,也许是工作的方法。显然这些影响是重要的,可以说工作经历是所受教育的一部分。但是当你继续前进后,那些仅仅是一段历史罢了。
ABSTRACT/MATERIAL(抽象/具象) Ask: Architecture that is very abstract and at the same time extremely material, that pushes projects towards these two poles, implies that something in the matter outlasting the thinking… How is the space between the abstract and the material inhabited? 问: 建筑非常抽象同时又非常实实在在,这是建筑的两个极端。似乎在那些实体中隐藏着具有长久思考价值的东西,你们可以谈谈居住实体和它们背后的抽象的精神内涵吗? Answer: A good question. Not easy to answer though… Your suggestion seems to relate to the Arte Povera movement, that influenced Swiss architecture and lots of landscape architects so much. This architecture is flourishing due to its limited material: a tree, some grass, some pavement, a fence. It can clearly be abstract and it therefore becomes extremely direct because of its material limitations. But isn’t this limitations leading to an overreduction of the found reality? Doesn’t this limitation calm things rather accelerating them? How productive is the reductive? Isn’t it therefore very temporary? To reach an abstraction in a realization, it is essential to have an awareness of the material qualities and sophistication. In our case it is handled by a certain degree of double meaning which leads to an abstraction that is never compulsory. 答: 这是一个好问题,但是不容易回答。你们的问题似乎和ARTE POVERA运动有关,那场运动深刻影响了瑞士建筑师和很多景观建筑师。这类建筑因为选材非常简单,一棵树、一块草地、一些人行便道、一扇篱笆,所以有普适性。这类建筑的抽象意义很明白的被简单的材料表达出来。但是越是用材简单,岂不是越是能够抽象地表达意义吗?限制使得概念澄清,而不是混淆它们。它们通过限制达到了丰富,但是它们却是临时的建筑,很有意思,是吗? 为了找到从现实通向抽象的道路,我们要对材料的性质和它的复杂性保持清醒。我们通过掌控材料的复合意义,从而顺其自然地表达抽象的精神。
UNITY/FRAGMENTS(片断/组合) Ask: The lack of a fixed point of view that Mondrian described is perhaps linked to a northern vision and representation. It’s not a narrative way of looking at things at all, where ideas and things overlap each other as in Dutch still-life(they painted with detail the objects that were late to be hidden by others)or as in Max Ernst overpaintings… In your work we can see the overlapping of technical questions, memories, statistics, social concerns, etc… apparently organized in a chaotic way which produces an intriguing vitality and validity. In this torturous approach, how do you explain this unexpected unity that we sense in each project? 问: 蒙德里安对固定的视点的透视的批判也许是因为存在一些容易被忽视的视角。这种批判不但适用于透视的问题,在荷兰静物画中,在Max Ernst的复绘中,物体互相重叠,而观念也是如此。在你们的作品中,我们看到技术问题、记忆、统计、社会问题交织其中,从而激发了活力和价值。你们如何解释这种现象呢? Answer: Unexpected unity is a nice description of that feeling. A surprising logic can be quite useful if it is not necessary to convince somebody about ideas. During the process, these webs or reasoning becoming richer and richer. The question is, are we searching for this unifying element, or is it a mere side effect? There are always elements from this organization which organize themselves into a meaningful shape. For instance in the mall we are now designing at LEIDSCHENVEEN. The surface of the omnipresent parking layer are at the same time the public space that connects the given program. Its shape become a sign that can be seen from the surrounding. 答: 你们所描述的那种感觉可以说是在原设计中没有想到的给观众的新的感受,对设计元素的新的组织方式导致新的理解。人们对建筑师的设计会产生一些有趣的思考,和设计师原本的构想并不完全一致,这种思维会使得作品的意义越来越丰富。 问题在于,我们是否是刻意去找这些组织方式,或者说这些只是原设计的副产品。我们用做设计元素的元素常常会产生新的有趣的意义,比如在我们正在设计的LEIDSCHENVEEN项目中,停车层把建筑的各部分联系在一起,同时担当公共空间,同时对于周围的环境来说,它就是建筑的外立面。
NEW TERRITORIES(新地域) Ask: Is the model of reformulating the ground a result of the geometrical operations linked to the paper folding and Origami techniques, or is it a problem of materialization of the space through a system of phenomenological perception? 问: 你们觉得在基地上构思建筑的过程是取决于做模型时的叠纸艺术还是物化空间的系列现象学过程? Answer: I think the question of whether to build or not to build is specifically important in the Netherlands. In a lot of cases our projects have to been built on sites that are already “occupied” by nature or public space. This means that there is always a dubious relationship between the thing you have to build and the site you are actually going to build on. I think your question is about what new territories have to be made. Trying to extend space is due to the lack of it. This prolongation of the urban site or the ground floor is very popular at the moment. You can see it in the work of more and more architects; there is a lot of hype around at universities about working with that. Can’t we try to give reasons to every manipulation of the floor, so that we may turn it into a stair when the stair is needed, turn it into a ramp when a ramp is needed, a hill when a hill is needed, etceteras, in order to build up a debatable, imaginable non-linear scenography…? And of course with these techniques, the landscape is introduced into architecture. It’s also about continuity of course; of inside and outside… In the 80’s the discussion was about screens, so the problem was focused on the layering of facades, if they should be totally permeable and entropical, etc., and somehow this discussion has now moved on, so actually the whole building, the whole interior space, has become subject to the transition of landscape. 答: 我想在荷兰,是否在某块地上建造建筑的问题尤其重要。我们经常发现在给定的基地上,自然或者公共空间的因素限制设计。这就意味着将要建设的建筑和已经拥有某种功能或意义的基地之间从一开始起就存在某种矛盾。 我想你们的问题是关于新的建设和原有环境的矛盾问题。换个角度思考,环境需要新的建筑是因为空间需要被延伸。当今的建筑界,关于城市空间和建筑底层空间的交融问题的研究被广泛关注。你们会在越来越多的建筑师的工作中发现,相当多的大学中有研究相关问题的团体存在。我们是否能够给每一层空间、每一个楼梯、每一个坡道乃至每一座小山以存在的理由,从而使得每一个环境的设计都有章法可依呢?如果我们可以,那么我们就可以明白LANDSCAPE是怎样和建筑共存的,室内和室外是怎样的一种关系,等等…… 80年代时,有过关于表面的讨论,问题集中在建筑的立面是否应该不是和环境对立,从而引起熵增,而是完全可渗透的。这个问题到现在仍然会被提到,并且进一步使人们关心到整个建筑,内部空间是否应该被看成是LANDSCAPE的延伸。 VOLUMES/SURFACES(体/面) Ask: The formation of volumes as a result of surfaces, like in the DEPARTMENT STORE AT THE MEET or the DOUBLE HOUSES IN UTRECHT, is attractive. It seems here that space lives between surfaces more than between volumes. It is interesting to think that a single folded plane gives form, continuity to floors, ceilings, walls and sculptural planes. Those surfaces sometimes have a topographic form like the interior landscape of VPRO, or in a more independent way, in the CHURCH IN BARENDRECHT or in the SLOTERPARK SWIMMING POOL, where the folding of the surfaces contains the water. Other buildings, like the VILLA IN HASSELT emerge from a piling up of dried volumes with a vitality emerging from the free spaces between the faces. In both cases, the diagonal transversal visions and the crossed illumination bestow quality on the spaces, so that the rooms look like the exterior of the closed volumes (although they are not). The simultaneous view of a large number of levels produces a conflict and doubt in the observer and makes perception more lively. Is this technique an expression of the architectural space nowadays? 问: DEPARTMENT STORE AT THE MEET 和 DOUBLE HOUSES IN UTRECHT中非常有意思的是:体量象是由面互相作用而产生的。这里,空间似乎依赖面而存在,而不是依赖体而存在。试着去想象一个简单的面,通过折叠,形成地板、屋顶、墙面,形成被雕刻后的平面,这是个非常有趣的事情。在诸如VPRO项目中,面成为内部空间的表现方式,在CHURCH IN BARENDRECHT 和SLOTERPARK SWIMMING POOL项目中,面的功能更加独立,如在后者中,折叠后的面成为盛水的容器。而在象VILLA IN HASSELT项目中,简单的体积,却在面之间生成了充满生机的空间。在你们的建筑中,通过成角的横断面和照明设计,使得建筑的室内看上去是某个封闭体量的外部空间,当然实际上并不是这样。在你们的建筑中,同时呈现的不同楼层使得使用者获得全新的建筑体验。这种建筑处理手法代表了当今建筑的潮流吗? Answer: I think you are asking an excessively formal question! We sometimes have a discussion about when you should and should not use glass on a façade. That debate might summarize your topic. Sometime you need intimacy. When do you need intimacy? When can it be public? The border between them is intriguing in an era where the public and the intimate are so intermingled. How to deal with this notion? Maybe sometimes by showing this through an extension of the public to a maximum, and thus trying to force “concentration” as a way to survive. 答: 这个问题有点老套。我们有时会讨论立面上是否合适使用玻璃,这就是你们的问题所在。私密性和公共性的问题人们讨论了一个世纪,而实际上二者互相渗透。如何处理这个问题呢,有时候我们把公共性做到极致,这样去寻找一种特别。 Ask: Our question was actually related to the role played by the structure and energy. Maybe by reformulating Viollet le Duc’s words “There is poetics in the structure”, we can find poetics in the way that architecture deals with energy. What we find interesting in WOZOCO’s is that space and structure are the same thing, whereas in other projects, as in VPRO, there is a kind of independence between the definition of space through surfaces, and the structure through abstract reticule… 问: 我们的问题其实是关于建筑空间和建筑实体结构以及能量之间的关系。维埃里.勒.杜克有过“建筑构造具有诗意”的名言,而我们发现建筑师在处理能量时同样存在诗意。WOZOCO项目中有意思的是,空间和维护结构是同一个主体,而在VPRO等项目中,我们发现:建筑空间和表面的关系,和手提袋空间和实体之间的关系不能够简单等同。 Answer: Sometimes the interior lies inside, sometimes outside the surface, and structure does not always play the same role. 答: 功能空间有时位于建筑内核,有时在外面,而作为维护的结构体系,其角色也并不只有一种。 Ask: Because there, space, structure and energy have the same profile- there is no difference between them. In any case, is the column structure, with its linear character, a residue of modernity or is it the price of radical transparency, in a architecture mostly defined by surfaces? 问: 是的。空间、结构、能量得到了很好的结合。在这种用面定义的空间中,柱子作为垂直构件是现代主义思想的残余影响呢,还是对结构的让步? Answer: Yes, very much so. But the state of art has not gone that far. Financially we couldn’t afford decentralized plants which could have helped in that way. We couldn’t afford connections without columns in that building yet! 答: 是的。艺术受制于技术,实践不如想象中那么完美。人们无法把建筑设计称植物,那样将会产生无法负担的预算,同样的道理,使得在那些建筑中柱子无法避免。 Ask: We think you have found a personal form of expression, in WOZOCO’s, where architecture is created through volumes rather than surfaces. It’s a fantastic building! 问: 我们发现你们有一套自己的建筑语汇。WOZOCO是一个从体量出发的设计,一座神奇的建筑。 Answer: Fancy that! The word “personal”finally comes out right at the end of this discussion. 答: 有趣的是个性的问题在讨论将要结束时被提到了。 Ask: Personal in the sense that we suspect there is a need to establish ourselves in nature and culture. This is something which ultimately everybody needs to do by themselves… maybe this is not just something related to originality… would you prefer to avoid this word? 问: 个性是人们为了彰显自我的存在而追求的东西,它和创造性并不相关,你们会不会和这个词保持距离? Answer: Not really.
九个盒子 edited on 2005-10-14 14:27
|