七位頂尖建築師爲世上最令人厭惡的建築正名

DANIEL LIBESKIND

丹尼爾·裏伯斯金(Daniel Libeskind)

ON THE TOUR MoNTPARNASSE, PARIS

巴黎蒙帕納斯大樓

“It’s legendary for being the most hated building in Paris. I want to defend it not because it’s a particularly beautiful tower, but because of the idea it represents. Parisians panicked when they saw it, and when they abandoned the tower they also abandoned the idea of a high-density sustainable city. Because they exiled all future highrises to some far neighborhood like La Défense, they were segregating growth. Parisians reacted aesthetically, as they are wont to do, but they failed to consider the consequences of what it means to be a vital, living city versus a museum city. People sentimentalize their notions of the city, but with the carbon footprint, the waste of resources, our shrinking capacity, we have no choice but to build good high-rise buildings that are affordable. It’s not by coincidence that people are going to London now not just for work but for the available space. No young company can afford Paris. Maybe Tour Montparnasse is not a work of genius, but it signified a notion of what the city of the future will have to be.”

“它是出了名了巴黎最遭恨建築。我之所以想爲它辯護，不是因爲它是個分外漂亮的大廈，而是因爲它所代表的理念。巴黎人被它嚇懵了，但當他們拋棄這座大廈時，他們也拋棄了高密度可持續城市的觀念。他們把所有的摩天大樓都驅逐到拉德芳斯之類的偏遠城區，這是要決絕於發展。巴黎人做出了一種審美反應，他們一直是這樣，但他們沒有考慮過，要成爲一個有生氣、有活力的城市，而不是博物館城市，需要付出怎樣的代價。人對城市的看法是情緒化的，但由於碳足跡、資源浪費和生產力的縮減，我們別無選擇，必須去建造物美價廉的高樓大廈。現在，人們紛紛涌向倫敦，這並非偶然，他們不僅爲了工作，也爲了更多的空間。現在，年輕的企業沒法承擔在巴黎的開銷。蒙帕納斯大樓也許不是天才之作，但它象徵着一個觀念，就是未來的城市只能是這樣。”

ZAHA HADID

扎哈·哈迪德(Zaha Hadid)

ON THE ORANGE COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, GOSHEN, N.Y.

紐約州歌珊的奧蘭治縣政府中心

“The 1960s were a remarkable moment of social reform. The ideas of change, liberation and freedom were critical. Now people think public buildings should be more flowery, but these were times when people did tough projects. The complex is arranged as a sequence of interconnected indoor and outdoor public spaces that flow into each other. There is an integrity within the design that displays a commitment to engagement and connectivity. As a center for civic governance, it enacted democracy through spatial integration, not through the separation of elected representatives from their constituents. Many similar projects around the world have also suffered neglect; yet sensitive renovation and new programming reveal a profound lightness and generosity, creating exciting and popular spaces where people can connect. Rudolph’s work is pure, but the beauty is in its austerity. There are no additions to make it polite or cute. It is what it is.”

“1960年代是社會改革的一段格外出彩的時間。改變、解放和自由這些理念在那時異常重要。如今人們認爲公共建築應該更美觀，但那時候人們是會去做一些艱難的項目的。整個綜合體的佈局是一系列相互駁接的室內和室外公共空間，彼此之間是流暢的。這個設計有種完整性，表達了保持參與和溝通的決心。作爲公民治理的中心，它通過空間的整合來施行民主，而不是將民選議員和他們的選民隔離開來。世界各地的這類建築裏，有許多也已年久失修；然而細心的改造和新的項目安排可以展露出一種深邃的輕盈和寬容，創造出令人振奮和喜歡的空間，讓民衆可以在那裏進行交流聯絡。魯道夫的作品是純粹的，但它的美感在於樸素。沒有任何附加的東西，去把它變得客氣或可愛一些。它就這樣。”

ANNABELLE SELLDORF

安娜貝爾·塞爾多夫(Annabelle Selldorf)

ON THE EMPIRE STATE PLAZA, ALBANY

紐約州奧爾巴尼帝國廣場

“Against my better judgment, I like this complex. It’s sculptural, architectural abstraction to the extreme. At a distance, the scale of the skyline exudes a sense of identity and strength for Albany, while at the pedestrian level the Plaza plays an important role in the community. I know that others find it too brutal or forbidding, but I think it’s beautiful in its monumentality and starkness. Monumentality always suggests supreme power, and that’s scary. I somehow think that if you could populate the Plaza with more gardens, and make it feel more part of everyday life — which they’ve tried to do with farmers’ markets and using the basin for ice skating — then it wouldn’t feel so hostile. Ultimately it has to do with the sense of feeling included and welcome. When life is allowed to enter, it makes a space feel alive. Then it becomes an outlet for the expression of our democratic values of assembly and freedom of speech.”

“我知道這不對，但我喜歡這個綜合體。它把雕塑、建築抽象做到了極致。在遠處看，天際線的尺度流露出一種奧爾巴尼的身份和強韌，而在行人的層面上，廣場在社區中扮演着一個重要角色。我知道所有人都覺得它太過粗野或冷峻，但我覺得它的美就體現在這種雄偉和嚴厲中。雄偉總是能暗示一種至高權力，令人生畏。有時候我在想，如果在廣場里布置更多的花園，讓它有更貼近百姓生活的感覺，這樣就不會顯得太不友好。而他們的確也曾嘗試在那裏開設臨時的農產品市場，還有把水池改成溜冰場，歸根結底是要有一種容納和歡迎的感覺。一旦生命得以進入，一個空間就活了。然後它就可以用來表達我們主張集會和言論自由的民主價值觀。”

ADA TOLLA

阿達·托拉(Ada Tolla)，LOT-EK聯合創始人

ON VELE DI SCAMPIA, NAPLES, ITALY

意大利那不勒斯的斯坎皮亞帆城

“If somebody put this complex in front of me right now without adding any context, any history, I would consider it a really strong piece of architecture. They are iconic buildings that embed the Modernist idea of the right to a home — a home for everyone. At the time it was conceived, the complex was very positive, optimistic and progressive. It embodies the idea of the megastructure as the mechanism that can solve the pressing problem of overpopulation and saturation of the city center. The urban planning for the development of the area also testifies to that optimism, with all the roads named after leftist, Socialist or Marxist Italian figures. The interior courtyard and shape of the sail combines the most humble and lively moment of Naples life — the vicolo (narrow street) — with the city’s opulent iconography of the water. But the complex was cursed. It wasn’t built as specified; value-engineering changed the structure and reduced the interior courtyards, therefore limiting the amount of light. None of the planned public spaces, amenities, schools or offices were ever constructed. The buildings were squatted even before completion. The Camorra installed gates and blocked the police from entering. For me it is important to recognize that the Vele is not a failure of the architecture, but rather a failure in execution and management. Demolition is often an attempt to sweep things under the carpet, and that doesn’t seem like the right way to learn from the past.”

“如果現在有人把這座建築羣擺在我面前，沒有背景，沒有歷史，我會認爲它是一個非常紮實的建築項目。這些都是代表性的建築，貫徹了居者有其屋的現代主義理念——一個爲所有人準備的家。在最初構思的時候，這個羣落是非常積極、樂觀和先進的。它體現的觀念是，巨型建築這樣的構造可以解決人口膨脹和市中心飽和所帶來的緊迫問題。對這個區域的城市規劃中也能體現這種樂觀，所有的道路都是用意大利的左翼人士、社會主義或馬克思主義者的名字命名的。內部的庭院和風帆造型將那不勒斯生活最鄙俗、鮮活的一面——vicolo（小巷）——和這座城市的豐饒海景結合了起來。但這座建築羣是受到詛咒的。它沒能按照要求來建造；價值工程改變了構造，縮減了內部庭院，因此就限制了採光。規劃中的公共空間、便利設施和學校、寫字樓，一律沒有建造。整個工程尚未完工就已被無家可歸者私佔。黑幫組織克莫拉(Camorra)給建築羣安裝了大門，阻止警察入內。在我看來，應該認識到帆城不是一個建築上的失敗，而是執行和管理的失敗。拆毀往往是爲了把事情搪塞過去，似乎不是從過去吸取教訓的好辦法。”

NORMAN FOSTER

諾曼·福斯特(Norman Foster)

ON TEMPELHOF AIRPORT, BERLIN

柏林滕佩爾霍夫機場

“Tempelhof is one of the really great buildings of the modern age, and yet it is inevitable that it is not necessarily celebrated by everyone. Its architect, Ernst Sagebiel, studied under the Jewish master Erich Mendelsohn but later served the Nazis. It was adjacent to a concentration camp that held journalists, politicians, Jews and other so-called ‘undesirables,’ so it is redolent with all the most negative associations. Like a pendulum, it served the purposes of the fascist regime and then became a lifeline with the airlifts of 1948 and 1949 that delivered food to the people of West Berlin. The airport is full of contradictions and paradoxes. It has an austere facade, which is not so fascist, and could almost appear in Sweden. The back is a sweeping, cantilevered curve. It soars. If you were transported there and were to walk under that cantilever, you would be awestruck. The architecture is heroic, not in a pompous, empty, vacuous sense, but as engineering that really lifts the spirit. Monuments, if you trace their ancestry, can reveal disturbing things about the past. Nonetheless, they have enduring qualities which, viewed on their own merits, are perhaps an example to us.”

“滕佩爾霍夫是真正堪稱偉大的現代建築之一，然而它註定不會得到所有人的讚美。它的建築師恩斯特·扎格比爾(Ernst Sagebiel)曾師從猶太建築大師埃瑞許·孟德爾松(Erich Mendelsohn)，但後來爲納粹服務。它跟一個集中營緊挨着，裏面關着記者、政治家、猶太人，以及其他“不可取的人”，所以一切負面的聯想它全有了。它就像一個鐘擺，先是作爲法西斯政權的工具，後來在1948、49年又成了一條爲西柏林人空運食物的生命線。這座機場充滿了矛盾和弔詭。它的正面十分簡樸，不太符合法西斯的風格，搬到瑞典去都沒問題。背面是一個大弧度的懸挑結構。宛然兀立。如果你乘車來到那裏，走在挑檐下，會感到敬畏。這是一座有英雄氣概的建築，不是自命不凡、空洞、虛妄的那種，而是一種真正能提振精神的工程。去追溯它們的起源背景就會發現，紀念建築能揭示過去的一些令人不安的東西。然而，它們擁有恆久的品質，從其自身的品質來看，也許可以給我們樹立一個典範。”

AMANDA LEVETE

阿曼達·勒威特(Amanda Levete)

ON THE BT TOWER, LONDON

倫敦英國電信塔

“What fascinates me is that in its time the BT Tower was a building that was entirely about its function as a telecommunications tower: Its purpose was its height. Now, without the satellite dishes, that purpose is redundant. It’s lost a lot of its visual and symbolic power. I was 10 when it was finished in 1965 and it was the tallest building in London for many years. It was a marker of arrival if you were coming from the north. That, in the context of London’s skyline now, is extraordinary. It was the first building with an observation deck — that way of engaging with the city was actually pioneered by the tower. It had a restaurant that wasn’t particularly expensive. High rises today are about exploiting the skyline for private gain. But Londoners are capable of being nostalgic too: We have a power station that is now a modern art gallery. I wonder if the satellites and antennae shouldn’t be reinstated to communicate its purpose as an enduring symbol of the moment in the 1960s when technology propelled Britain onto the international stage. It’s a reminder. It holds so much meaning in an elegant slender cylinder.”

“我覺得有意思的是，電信塔在當時純粹就是爲了實現作爲電信通訊塔的功能：它的用途是它的高度。現在衛星天線已經拆除，那個用途就不存在了。它失去了很多視覺上的力量和權力象徵。1965年，這座塔完工的時候我10歲，接下來很多年裏它一直是倫敦最高建築。如果你打北邊過來，看到它就表示到倫敦了。在倫敦天際線裏，這可是很不得了的。它是第一座有瞭望臺的建築——此類接觸城市的方式其實就是這座塔開創的。它有一個不算特別昂貴的餐廳。今天的摩天大樓已經把天際線的資源用於牟取私利了。但倫敦人也是能夠懷舊的：我們有一座電站，現在是個現代美術館。我在想，是不是可以把天線重新裝上，把它的用途轉換爲1960年代那個瞬間的恆久象徵，當時的科技將英國推向了國際舞臺。它是一個提示。這樣一個纖柔的柱體，承載着太多的意義。”

VINCENT VAN DUYSEN

文森特·範·杜伊森(Vincent van Duysen)

ON CENTRE POMPIDOU, PARIS

巴黎蓬皮杜中心

“I admire its boldness and openness as a building that participates with — and is woven into — its city, its place, its time. It was without any respect for the environment, a cultural factory where you could observe important modern art collections, a superexpressive, very colorful, complex building. It was seen as a rejection of the neighborhood, the Marais, and of Paris itself. Paris stands for French stone and light gray rooftops and beautiful natural colors, and all of a sudden you have got this architectural machine. On the other hand, the building has this democratic purpose because it attracts how many millions every year, more than the Eiffel Tower and the Louvre. I couldn’t take my eyes off it when I was studying architecture. It reversed the typical model of a museum into something that was engaging and inviting to the public. Architecture at that time needed to do things differently, like a shock. The shock liberates a lot of emotions and perceptions.”

“我欽佩它的勇敢與開放，這座建築參與——和勾織——到了它所在的城市、地點和時間中。它完全不考慮環境，它是一座文化工廠，你到這裏來，是來看重要的現代藝術收藏的，這是一個極富表現力的、非常多彩而複雜的建築。它拋棄了自己所在的‘瑪萊’區以及巴黎本身。巴黎的特徵是法式的石頭和淺灰色屋頂，美麗的自然色彩，可是突然之間冒出這麼一臺建築機器。另一方面，它又有着一個民主意圖，因爲它每年會吸引數百萬人前來。當年學建築的時候，我對它很是癡迷。它推翻了典型意義上的博物館形態，建立了一種讓公衆覺得親近而誘人的模型。當時的建築需要做一些不一樣的事情，就像一次休克。能釋放大量情感與知覺的休克。”