中国建筑艺术网 >> 理论精粹 >> 理论研究
形而上学的解读
 
http://www.aaart.com.cn/cn/theory 2011-5-13 10:38:57 来源: 作者:黑川纪章[注]
 


     矶崎新和我曾同在丹下研究室学习过,并在同一个时代里生活至今。因此,“矶崎新1960/1990建筑展”对我来说,有一种用另一种眼光俯瞰自己生活过来的时代的感觉。
  建筑,不管人们有意还是无意,它都是所处的时代的精神或气氛的一种表现。因此,我的上述感觉是理所当然的。然而,在俯瞰30年来矶崎新所走过的轨迹时,还是为他的题材扩展之广,它所展示的多元性感到惊讶。
  在建筑师中,有像阿尔瓦?阿尔托或安藤忠雄那样,靠超越时代,超越场所性,表现作者自身的个性或是“手的痕迹”而取得成功的。他们的建筑常常由于作者的个性或者叫“手的痕迹”而失之为同质的重复。与此相反,矶崎新在作品中一直力图排除自己的痕迹。最近,他常用作为形式的建筑,超概念的建筑,大写的建筑等言论,表明他的内心充满了力图摆脱像“手的痕迹”的这种实在,追求形而上的建筑的想法。
  但是,不管怎么说,建筑,其结果总是作为物理的,用眼睛看得见的形态而存在的东西。如果谈到所谓形而上的规范,与作为结果的建筑之间的联系,当然就会众说纷纭。
  在今天的时代,敢于谈关于形而上建筑规范的建筑师为数极少。能够将自己的言论与自己的建筑的关连加以分析和说明的建筑师也为数极少。仅就这一点而言,矶崎的存在就十分令人瞩目。这是十分宝贵的。特别是,在只有印象、感想、好恶之类的所谓批评的 的评论风气之中,他所起的作用是巨大的。
  在“矶崎新1960/1990建筑展”的第三部分,展出了群马县立近代美术馆、筑波中心大厦、武藏野乡村俱乐部等重要的标志性作品。矶崎新的建筑在东京、巴黎、伦敦、纽约等世界中心城市是看不到的。即使在 国内,他的代表作也都是在地方城市实现的。
  最近,在《新建筑》连载的《作为建筑的形式》一文的第一篇(见《新建筑》1990年第一期),他有一个副标题:“非都市的建筑”(或译为“反城市的建筑”)。他写道:“不论东洋还是西洋,那些不规则形的未经提炼的意匠,都曾多次流行,使正统的,已经完结了的作为主流的公式化的形式的东西发生质变。”这种非都市东西是什么呢?它不是指融合于自然的草庵风味的建筑。说到底,它是形而上学意义上的非都市吧,是与当今作为正统派统治着的大城市、国家、工业化社会、商业主义相对抗的非城市。换言之,他的意思是,建在城市中的建筑本应是“非城市建筑”。其结果就是,在地方上建成的矶崎的作品才是极“城市的”建筑。筑波中心大厦诉说着国家的不在,中心的不在,最近的北九州国际会议中心,诉说着孕育工业城市之死的虚构的城市,这些都如实地表现出矶崎的主张。
  展览的第三部分中,特别有特点的是,从语言学、符号论借用来的、作为引用与集积的“手法”(这种“手法”被称作建筑)。很早以来,在文学界就有过将形而上学意义上的文学,用语言学、符号论的方法加以解读的“手法”,所以它并非从矶崎新开始。而对于一直力图把个性(手的痕迹)、地域文化(场所的土地精灵)等排出的矶崎认为,只有这种“手法”才是其建筑得以实现的唯一方法。
  实际上,我感兴趣的是,这种“手法”有没有限界这个问题。
  现在人们正在重新认识和评价现代主义。之所以如此,正是其中心命题即形而上学理念的解体,理性中心主义的解体,人文中心主义的解体,西欧中心主义的解体的缘故。
  把正统的形而上学的理念用另一种形而上学的理念加以否定,是个十分危险的工作。其前途可能是无望的。在不否定形而上学的理念也不否定手的痕迹(个性)或场所的痕迹(地域性)和文化的痕迹(传统),而是探求双编码(共生思想)的我看来,矶崎的武藏野乡村俱乐部,还有巴塞罗那的圣约迪体育馆,是最为有趣的。因为矶崎在这些作品中,表现了场所(实在),场所的土地的精灵,场所的力,以及时空连续体。或者是,他采用了灯笼这种历史产生的 的形式。
  我甚至有这样的预感,矶崎新今后很可能向“手法”与“场之力”相结合的新阶段前进。当前,在医学、物理学、宗教学、哲学、文学等广泛领域中展开的后现代主义,其中心课题就是西欧中心主义、理性中心主义的解体。在这个潮流的先端,矶崎表现出的对 文化,手的痕迹,以及场所的力的新的关注,与我本人所走过的充满苦涩的道路有共鸣之处,他引起了我的密切注视。
      A Decodable Metaphysics
        Kisho Kurokawa
  Arata Isozaki and I are contemporaries, and both of us studied in Tange's studio. That is why the "Arata Isozaki: Architecture, 1960-1990" exhibition gives me the feeling that I am looking back on my own times through a different pair of eyes.
  In as much as architecture is something that expresses, whether consciously or unconsciously, the spirit of the age, one expects in the thirty-year record of an architect a broad range of themes and diverse ways of addressing those themes, but the breadth and diversity revealed in Isozaki's work are still astonishing.
  There are architects like Alvar Aalto and Tadao Ando who transcend their time and place and succeed in putting their own personal stamp on all their work. They tend to repeat themselves, producing a succession of works that are made similar in character by the traces of artistic personality. Isozaki, on the other hand, has removed all traces of himself. His recent statements regarding "formalizing architecture", "architecture as a metaconcept", and "Architecture with a capital 'A'" each suggests an attempt to elude the reality of such traces of personality and to discover the norms of a metaphysical architecture.
  However, since architecture ultimately can exist only in a vi*le material form, copious statements are inevitably needed to relate those metaphysical norms to the works themselves. Very few architects today are brave enough to speak of metaphysical norms of architecture, and there are very few who have the ability to analyze and explain the relationship between such statements and their work. The fact that he is to be numbered among the few would alone suffice to make Isozaki a remarkable and much valued presence. He serves a particularly important role since the Japanese critical climate favors criticism based only on impressions, feelings, and tastes.
  The third section of the current exhibition features such landmarks as the Gumma P refectural Museum of Fine Arts, Tsukuba Center Building, and Musashikyuryo Country Clubhouse. Isozaki's works cannot be seen in major cities like Tokyo, Paris, London, or New York. All his representative works in Japan have been built in provincial cities.
  Isozaki entitled the first installment of his article "Formalizing Architecture'' serialized in Shinkenchiku, "Anti-Urban Architecture". He wrote, "In both East and West, irregular and unrefined designs have repeatedly gained currency and have transmuted the character of those orthodox, integral, formal designs that constituted the mainstream." What does Isozaki mean by "antiurban architecture"? He is not referring to things like rustic, thatched-roof retreat*ut rather to an architecture that is anti-urban in a metaphysical sense. That which is "anti-urban" resists the orthodoxy ruling the metropolis, namely the state, industrial society, and commercialism. "Anti-urban' architecture is the kind of architecture that ought to be built in the city. The works that Isozaki has realized in provincial cities are consequently very urban buildings. Thus his Tsukuba Center Building speaks of the absence of the state or the center, and his recent Kitakyushu International Conference Center speaks of the fictional city produced by the death of the industrial city.
   What is distinctive to this third section is a "manner"--employing the methods of linguistics and semiotics--for creating architecture out of the integration of quotation and rhetoric. Isozaki was not the first to do something like this. In the literary world there have been for some time attempts to develop through the methods of linguistics and semiotics a "manner" by which literature might be made decodable as metaphysics. For Isozaki, who ha*een attempting to remove traces of personality (i.e., the traces of the hand) and regional culture (i.e., the genius loci), a "manner" was the sole means available for realizing architecture.
   I am interested in knowing whether or not there is a limit to the efficacy of such a "manner". That i*ecause the main theme of today's re-examination of modernism is the dismantling of metaphysical ideas, logocentrism, anthropocentrism, and Eurocentrism.
   Refuting an orthodox metaphysical idea with another metaphysical idea is an extremely difficult, perhaps hopeless, task. For someone like me, who is trying to search for a double code (i.e., a philosophy of symbiosis) that does not deny either a metaphysics or the traces of the hand (personality), place (regionality) or culture (tradition), the Musashikyuryo Country Clubhouse and the Sant Jordi Sports Hall (appearing in the fourth section), are particularly interesting. That i*ecause with respect to such works Isozaki speaks of the genius loci, the power of place, and the (actual) place as a space-time continuum, and uses the lantern, a Japanese form which is a product of history.
   In his next phase Isozaki may try to join "manner" to "power of place". That at least is my guess.
   The central postmodern theme now being developed in many fields, from medicine, physics, comparative religion, and philosophy to literature comprises the dismantling of Eurocentrism and logocentrism. Isozaki is on the cutting edge of this movement, and the new interest he is showing in Japanese culture, the trace of the hand, and the power of place has something in common with the difficult path I myself am at present traveling. It merits close attention.



  声明:中国建筑艺术网刊载此文不代表同意其说法或描述,也不代表推荐其学术观点,仅为客观提供更多信息用。凡本网注明“来源:中国建筑艺术网”字样的所有文字、图片和音视频稿件,版权均属中国建筑艺术网所有,其他媒体或个人在下载使用时必须注明"来源:中国建筑艺术网",违者本网将依法追究责任。对于未注明“来源:中国建筑艺术网”字样的所有文字、图片和音视频稿件,其他媒体或个人从本网下载使用,必须保留本网注明的稿件来源,并自负版权等法律责任。本网站有部分文章是由网友自由上传,对于此类文章本站仅提供交流平台,不为其版权负责。如对稿件内容有疑议,或您发现本网站上有侵犯您的知识产权的文章,请您速来电或来函与中国建筑艺术网联系。
   现有评论 0条
〖最新十条相关文章〗



公司简介 | 关于我们 | 联系我们 | 诚聘英才 | 留言咨询 | 友情链接
中国建筑艺术网 京ICP备06036503号
地址:北京市海淀区紫竹院33号美林花园4号楼5F 手机:13910429182
站务邮箱:13910429182@139.com
COPYRIGHT 2004-2005 AAART.COM.CN All Rights Reserved