平台原创,影音文字图片的版权均为GARLIC所有,若您需要引用、转载,请来信告知,获取授权。未经GARLIC允许,不得盗用本站资源;不得复制或仿造本网站。如有侵权行为,必将追究法律责任。

The Figure

Charles Jencks

查尔斯·詹克斯

Cultural Theorist
Architectural Historian
Great Master in Landscape Architecture
Co-founder of Maggie’s Cancer Care Center

文化理论家
建筑历史学家
景观设计大师
麦琪癌症护理中心联合创始人

The Garden of Cosmic Speculation |查尔斯·詹克斯和他的作品“宇宙思绪花园” | © Wikimedia Common

The Interview

Thank you for sharing ideas with GARLIC.  Please briefly introduce yourself to the GARLIC audience.

很高兴您能和GARLIC分享观点,首先请您向GARLIC的观众简要介绍一下自己。

I’m Charles Jencks, sometimes a landscape architect. I call myself a land artist. I’ve written 30 or 40 books on architecture and postmodernism. I suppose my background is the founder of postmodernism, which bred all the arts. Started in literature, but it was negative. And then the architects were driven to postmodernism because they are the social arts architects have to face. Big problems of modernization, mass industrialization, mass culture We break down a society. All those problems which painters, musicians, artists don’t have to face. Post-modern architecture is where I come from. I was trained at Harvard here for eight years, four in literature, four in architecture, master’s degree. Got a Ph.D. in history. So, I, you know, move across the categories, which is the postmodern idea. You live once, but you have 10 personalities.

我是查尔斯·詹克斯,曾经是个景观设计师。我自称是个大地艺术家,我写了一共30、40本有关建筑学和后现代主义的书。我设想我的身份是后现代主义的创始人。而正是后现代主义,延伸出了其他所有艺术领域后现代主义。由文学开始,但是效果不好。后来建筑师们都开始追随后现代主义因为这是他们必须面对的社会学科艺术。

现代化、大规模工业化、大众文化这些大问题需要我们对这个社会进行剖析。而上面这些问题都是画家,音乐家,和其他艺术家们不需要面对的。后现代主义建筑,恰是我擅长的领域,我在哈佛大学进修了8年,读了四年文学,四年建筑学,都是硕士学位,并获得了历史博士学位。所以我其实是跨学科的,这也是后现代主义的思想之一。你只活了一次,但却有10种个性。

The Garden of Cosmic Speculation |查尔斯·詹克斯和他的作品“宇宙思绪花园” | ©  www.charlesjencks.com

“You have to have a historical view to see how people are formed in their paradigm, and how the paradigms change.”

“必须要有历史观,才能看出人们是如何在他们各自的人生框架中是如何慢慢被塑造的,以及这些框架变化的状况。”

You’ve written a lot of bestselling books, and have had very deep conversations with so many big names and masterpieces. It’s a very simple question we will ask for a lot of big names. Who influenced you the most? And which design piece transformed your design thinking or life?

你写了很多畅销书和很多伟人也进行过深入的交流对你这样的伟人,我们经常会问这个问题谁对你影响最大?哪一个设计作品改变了你的设计思维或者改变了你的生活?

when I was at Harvard, my personal devotion, was Le Corbusier, and he’s a painter, sculptor, city planner, architect, writer of 57 books. He was the total renaissance man of our times. And architecture was his main focus, and he built here, you know, first building in America was built in the Carpenter Center where I was a student, teacher, and part-time historian. So, I thought Le Corbusier was the center of the modern movement. And Harvard was a kind of European center, which transformed as the modern movement fell because of fascism, Nazis. A lot of them went to England and then moved on here. Gropius, Seid. But my two teachers here both worked in Le Corbusier’s office and were Polish people. Jersey Sulton, who was like the Modular Man, he was the model for it. And Joseph Solevski, who was Jewish. And… who escaped from the ghetto.in the second World War, 1944, he got out of the ghetto, one of the few Jews to live. Anyway, he worked for Le Corbusier and, Eid and Sulton, and so, this was the Vatican of modernism, you know, the Pope was called Pape and I was a little Corbusier myself and I started a magazine here. But still, I had many other origins as it was. I was equally devoted to literature. English literature. And philosophy. And so, you could say that I was skeptical of what had happened to modernism. In the 50s and 60s, as many people were, the modern movement started to fall apart from within. And my post-modern work comes from that. I found out for instance that Gropius wrote letters to Gerbils and Hitler. you know, he’s under-studied. All the… Corbusier worked for Vichy, wrote letters to Mussolini Meese, of course, worked for the Nazis for 4 years. I was the first one to write on all this, and I interviewed Philip Johnson, who went into, with Hitler, into Danzig you know, in the second World War. So, I found out that all the modernists, although they appeared pure, moral, and reasonable, were impure, immoral and unreasonable. So, you know, you have to have a historical view. to see how people are formed in their paradigm, and how the paradigms change. So, the post-modern paradigm came in, and you know, a lot of people are involved now. Jane Jacobs, in this school, by the way. As always, there were battles going on, stylistic battles, philosophical battles, and moral battles. That’s my background.

Carpenter Centre by Le Corbusier | 柯布西耶的作品“卡朋特中心” | © www.carpenter.center

我个人所欣赏的是,当我在哈佛大学读书时,我很欣赏柯布西耶,他是个画家,雕刻家,城市规划师,建筑师,写了57本书。他完全是我们这个时代的复兴者,建筑学是他的专长。他在这,在美国修建的第一个建筑是卡朋特中心。当时我是那个中心的学生,教师,和业余历史学家。所以当时我觉得柯布西耶是现代化运动的中心.

哈佛大学从某种意义上则是欧洲现代化运动的中心。它发生重大转变的同时,现代化运动正因受到法西斯和纳粹影响而逐渐衰落。当时参与运动的很多人去了英格兰,后来又回到了这里,比如格罗皮厄斯、赛德。

但我在哈佛的两个老师都曾在柯布西耶的办公室工作。他们两个都是波兰人,其中一位是泽西·萨尔顿,他长得很像“六尺人”,他简直就是“六尺人”的真实写照。另一个是约瑟夫·索乐夫斯基,也是个犹太人。他在1944年二战的时候逃离了犹太人居住区。正因为他逃出了居住区,他成为了少数幸存的犹太人。总之,他为柯布西耶、赛德和萨尔顿工作过,所以这就是现代主义界的梵蒂冈。

当时罗马教皇被称为Pape。我就像个“小柯布西耶”一样,在这办了个杂志。但一如既往,我也在许多其他领域从事过。我也曾经像热爱建筑一样迷恋文学,英文文学,还有哲学。所以从某种意义上说我当时对现代主义抱着一点怀疑态度。在五六十年代的时候,就像当时的很多人一样,现代化运动也开始由内而外地崩溃了。我的后现代作品也由此而来,比如我发现格罗皮厄斯给葛比尔斯和希特勒写了信。我们对他的研究还太少。

柯布西耶当时为维希政府工作,给墨索里尼写信,当然,米斯为纳粹工作了4年。我是第一个写到这些的人,同时,我还采访了菲利普·约翰逊,他二战的时候曾经和希特勒同行去了但泽。所以我发现这些现代主义者虽然表面上看似纯洁,道德和明智,其实是不纯洁、不道德、不明智的。

所以说必须要有历史观,才能看出人们是如何在他们各自的人生框架中是如何慢慢被塑造的,以及这些框架变化的状况。后来,后现代“框架”产生了,现在很多人都卷入其中。就比如简·雅可布,她就在这个学校任职。斗争一如既往地发生着,风格主义斗争、哲学思想斗争甚至道德斗争。这就是我的背景。

Charles Jencks first chart of architects and movements | © www.harvarddesignmagazine.org

“Landscape allows me to give expression to the universe and cosmology in a way that maybe architecture would find harder to do.”

“景观设计能够让我对宇宙以及宇宙学进行造化,而建筑学就很难做到这点。”

As you mentioned, you’re a renowned cultural theorist, landscaping designer, architectural historian and co-founder of the Maggie’s Cancer Care Centers. How do those different kinds of roles help you understand the profession differently?

正如您提到的您是一位著名的文化理论家、景观设计师、建筑历史学家还是麦琪癌症护理中心的创始人之一这些不同的角色是如何让你从多角度理解你的职业的?

My late wife who had terminal cancer, she and I, in Scotland, set up the idea of a Maggie’s Centre, which I called after her because it was patient-oriented. And cancer, of course, is a devastating disease which today, you can live with for a long time. And so, it raises all the issues of life and death. Suffering, pain, your family, your boss. If you have cancer, you have about 10 social problems. Right off the bat. Where do I get a wig? From having chemotherapy. How do I tell my children I’m gonna die? You know, all these are social problems. How do I make money? How do I get a loan? We started these things.

Because I’ve been a historian for a long time, and I was friends with Frank Gary, Richard Rogers and Noman Foster and Ben Koopaz, Zaha Hadid, the thousand good architects. They were my personal friends. So, I invited them all to do a Maggie’s Centre. They all said yes. They knew Maggie, they loved her, they performed well, they got competitive, became the Nobel Prize for Architecture, and, you know, it had a virtuous circle. And it opened my eyes to something I always knew about, and wrote about the point of the client. The client, historically, and in the west, maybe in China too, is a man, and the architect is a woman. And she’s got her sleeves… things rolled up like that. She’s a tough woman, 35 years old, she is I mean, an older woman. Not a young woman. And she can go out on the building site. She’s strong. And the client, the man and the woman fall in love. This is a Renaissance allegory. They fall in love, and if it’s good love match, after 9 months, a baby building is born.

And they have to give it tender love and care, and, you know, they bring it up as a child. So, architecture is a love match between a client who has the money, an architect who has the talent, and, you know, it’s an interesting one. Because we found these Maggie’s Centers you know that we do or love our architects, although they’re women and men. You know, the sex thing isn’t so to the fore. But that’s a social meaning in architecture. And it’s a collaborative meaning because what’s really important here is the teamwork and the social psychological healing that we do as a team. Not the architecture. The architecture comes second. Work first is what we do. And, you know, what we do, is about 20 therapies which are social, psychological, and human. Which the mass culture health center cannot do, who’s there to do with the primary work. The chemotherapy, radiotherapy. And they only have one or two minutes with the patient. We have hours with patients, and we help them navigate.

Maggie’s Cancer Care Center | 麦琪癌症护理中心 | © www.archdaily.com

So, you asked me. Maggie’s Centers has the role of the client, which is very important, the relationship with the client and the architect, and we relate well. And it has a social purpose of a very important mission that is death, life, the meaning of life. You know, all of these things which, you could say, are pushed away in the mass culture environment, which you never study in Harvard. So that’s just one thing, but my background, you know, I believe architecture is an art, and it’s a synthetic art. Pulls together, like opera, pulls together a lot of different…It’s a hybrid art, it’s an impure art.

And, so I’ve been talking about meaning in architecture a lot. For all my life. Symbolism and its influence. But I think it’s also, of course, an art in itself. In other words, it has its own laws, and I think an architectural language is internal to architecture. So, you know, my philosophy of architecture is a hybrid, multi-leveled discourse. And I like architects who are purely involved with the language, like Peter Eisenman. Like, focus just on the language. Palladio is his favorite. And Corbusier was a linguistic architect. He focused on the language of architecture. So, I defend our profession. But I also attack it. Because I see it from outside socially, all buildings are failures. It’s really interesting. But it’s true. Great buildings are great failures, often.

And as a historian, I’ve come to that conclusion slowly. It’s a sad one. Because you know, a great Beethoven’s symphony is not a failure completely? I mean it’s a great symphony. But then architecture is a social art, has to do impossible things. It’s got to heal society, it’s got to be a good machine, it’s got to function well, it’s got to look good. It’s gotta challenge people and look bad… Paranoia. Herzog and de Meuren talked about you know, and Ram Koolhaas. So, architecture’s a challenge in art and, you know, there’s never enough money, or there’s too much money. You know, it’s so entropic to build a good building you have to fight, I would say 20% of the time, passionately, and the other 80% of the time, you have to relax, and enjoy it. If you don’t… You don’t communicate that. You can’t fight all your life. So, that’s… I don’t know.

 I saw the very funny article on Kurokawa, who was a good friend. I did with him Maggie’s Centre. Kisho Kurokawa, the Japanese architect is very famous, too famous. Anyway, it was on his plugin building, famous capsule building, and which is, the article was in the New York Times and it was written by a critic who said, you know, “My life is terrible. ” “My girlfriend has left me.” “Architecture always fails.” And it was about Kurokawa’s capsule building. and what a catastrophe it is today. I knew that building from the beginning, and I was a very close friend of Kurokawa’s. And the article struck me as opening this little box and saying: Well, of its time it was a great innovation, hardly idealistic, the first plugin building, you know, to work in its way to really be boxes plugged in, one room which is shrunk with everything in it. Marvelous! But society changes. Architecture deteriorates. Slumlords come in. You know, traffic gets worse, gets polluted.

It’s a tough, tough, profession we’re in. Now landscape, which is your profession is, in a way, has an easier time of relating to society, and relating to the enjoyable parts. It’s hard also to build landscape, because, again, there’s not enough money around, and landscape architects are cut down and turned into plumbers. So, you know, but on the other hand, if you design a landscape in a garden, it’s assumed you’re gonna do a pleasurable, beautiful, and challenging thing. You could do that in a landscape art, and it’s not over-industrialized as architecture tends to be. Over… So, anyway. I think landscape allows me to give expression to the universe and cosmology in a way that maybe architecture would find harder to do.

Nakagin Capsule Tower by Kisho Kurokawa | 黑川纪章的胶囊建筑 | © Noritaka Minami The Gorgeous Daily

关于癌症,我已故的妻子曾患有晚期癌症。当初,她和我在苏格兰的时候一起产生的这个想法,后来,我以她的名字命名了这个研究中心,因为它应该是以病人为核心的。癌症,显然是种破坏性很强的病,但在今天患了癌症还可以活很久。所以这就引起了人们对各种生死问题的关注,要遭受痛苦,你的家人、老板。如果患上癌症,你同时就有了10个社会问题都是癌症的附属品。在哪里买假发?从做化疗开始,我怎么告诉孩子我要死了?这些其实都是社会问题。我怎么赚钱?怎么贷款?所以我们就创建了这个中心。并且因为我做历史学家已经很久了,所以我结识了弗兰克·加里、理查德·罗切斯、诺曼·福斯特、本·库佩斯、扎哈·哈迪德,可谓上千位优秀建筑师。

他们都是我的挚友。所以我就邀请他们一起创建麦琪中心,他们都同意了,他们也认识麦琪,也很爱她他们表现的很棒,越来越有竞争力,还让中心获得了诺贝尔建筑学奖,这就像个道德循环。而且这让我在一件我已经知道的事上开了眼界,让我在作品中强调了客户的作用。客户这个角色,在历史上,在西方与中国相反。不,可能在中国也如此传统上是男性,而建筑师是女性。她袖子都卷起了,准备做事了,她是个健壮的女人,35岁,我的意思是说,比较年长的女人不是年轻女人她能够下的了工地,她很强大。然后这位客户,这个男人就和那个女人相恋,这是个文艺复兴时的寓言。他们彼此相恋,然后如果相处的好的话9个月过后,一个“建筑结晶”就诞生了。

他们要给它悉心的爱与呵护,然后像养育孩子一样把它养大。所以说建筑就是一个有钱的客户和有天赋的建筑师之间的爱情,这是个有趣的寓言。因为我们发现在这些麦琪中心的项目里,我们其实很喜欢我们的建筑师。虽然他们都是女人或男人,但性别不是重点,但这就是建筑学的社会意义,这是种合作的意义。因为我们作为一个团队,做的最重要的是社会心理治愈而不是建筑本身,建筑应该排在第二位。首先强调的应该是我们最初设想的这个工作。我们在做的工作,有将近20种疗程。一些社会的、心理的、人性的疗程这都是大众文化健康中心做不到的。他们的任务是做基础工作化疗、放疗。他们只与病人见一两分钟的时间,而我们与病人一呆就是数小时,我们能够引导他们。

所以说,回答你的问题,麦琪中心就有客户这一角色,这个角色至关重要,在和客户以及建筑师的关系中我们处理的很好。同时它还具有社会目的,它肩负着一个很重要的使命,那就是死亡、生命以及生命的意义这些东西,可谓是被大众文化环境所忽略的这都是在哈佛里学不到的。这仅仅是其中一点。但至于我的背景,我认为建筑学是门艺术,是门综合的艺术,像歌剧一样,结合了很多种不同的东西,这是门混合的艺术、不纯粹的艺术。

我经常都在谈建筑学的意义,一生都在谈象征意义以及它的影响。但我认为它显然本身也是一门艺术。换句话说,它具备自己的内部法则。我认为建筑学语言表达着建筑学的内涵。所以说,我对于建筑学的理解就是一种混合的、多层次的话语,而且我很欣赏那些纯粹使用建筑语言的建筑师,比如皮特·埃森曼就只专注于语言。帕拉第奥是他最喜欢的建筑师。还有柯布西耶,也是个语言建筑师。他专注于建筑学的语言。因此,我捍卫我们的职业,同时我也攻击我们的职业。因为我是从外部的社会角度看待它的。而这样看来,所有的建筑都很失败。挺有趣的,但确实如此。往往伟大的建筑都是伟大的失败。

作为一个历史学家,我是慢慢得出这个结论的,这很令人沮丧。因为你想想看,一支伟大的贝多芬交响曲肯定不是彻底失败的,因为它是一支伟大的交响曲。但建筑学是一门社会艺术,它需要实现一些不可能的目标。它需要治愈社会,需要是个好的机器,需要很好地运作,需要外观好,它需要看起来糟糕,打破常规思维,可以说是一种妄想症。赫尔佐格和德梅隆、雷姆·库哈斯也谈到过这个问题。所以建筑学是艺术领域的一个挑战。

钱总是不够,或者钱太多了要建出一个好的建筑,然后还要批判它,这可以说是在制造混乱。在我看来,在20%的时间里,这个过程都是充满激情的,而另外80%的时候,你就只能放松,享受它。这没有商量的余地,你不能一生都在斗争,所以这个我不知道。

我看过一篇有意思的关于黑川纪章的文章,他是我的好朋友,和我一起办麦琪中心的黑川纪章,日本建筑师,非常有名,太有名了。那篇文章讲的是他的“插件”建筑,他著名的胶囊建筑,这篇文章在纽约时报中刊登过这篇文章的作者,他曾说过:“我的人生真糟糕,我的女友离开我了,建筑设计总是失败”。文章讲的是黑川纪章的胶囊建筑以及它如今的灾难性影响。我从一开始就知道那个建筑,而且我是黑川纪章的一个很好的朋友,文章给我的感觉是在专挑问题:这是它所处时代的伟大创新一点都不理想主义,这是首个成功的“插件”建筑,真的能“插入”房间,每个小房间都配备齐全非常棒!但是社会在变,建筑都会腐朽,然后又提到恶劣的房东还有交通越来越堵,污染越来越大等等。

干我们这行实在太不容易,而景观设计也就是你的职业,从某种意义上说,更容易与社会联系起来,更容易与社会好的一面联系起来。建设景观,当然也不容易。因为,如我所说,钱总是不够,景观设计师往往都转行为管子工。所以呢,但是从另一方面来看,如果你设计了一个花园景观,人们就会觉得你的设计很好,很漂亮,而且很难设计。在景观艺术中你可以这么做,而且不会像在建筑学上那样,过度工业化。总而言之我认为景观设计能够让我对宇宙以及宇宙学进行造化,而建筑学就很难做到这点。

Nakagin Capsule Tower by Kisho Kurokawa | 黑川纪章的胶囊建筑 | © Noritaka Minami The Gorgeous Daily

“Double design–looks at the science and the philosophy behind it.”

“我必须要做双重设计–考察科学,也关注科学背后蕴含的理念。”

In many of your project, you celebrate nature and also incorporate the elements from modern science into design.  You believe that contemporary science partially is a great moving source of creativity, because it tells the truth about the way of how universe is and shows the pattern of beauty. So, we are pretty curious about what is the design process in your project?

在你的很多设计作品中,你都很崇尚自然,也把现代科学中的元素与设计相结合。 因为当代科学透露了宇宙运行的真理,展示了美丽的图案,所以你认为它们是你创造力的一大源泉。 你昨天有提过设计历程,就像采访中你展示的那样,我们对你的设计过程感到很好奇。所以你是如何如何设计出那些建筑作品的?

I mentioned yesterday that in my work you have to do double design. Double design, for instance, looks at the science and the philosophy behind it, so you have to become immersed in that.

When I was in China, I was asked to design a little park area for the Beijing Olympic in 2008. I went to Beijing and consulted with the Chinese people, philosophers, and they asked me to design something very quickly, to put by the river in the Olympic park, and they asked me to do the black hole. As so, I said okay, you know I will do rotating black hole which is a more complex black hole, very big and it sucks everything in, in reality, it’s feeding, it’s feeding, it’s really veracious, it eats up everything.

But the Chinese I talked to said we don’t like the name black hole. And so I said, “why?”. And they said “you know blackness is a nasty word, a hole is black and for us, it has overwhelming wrong meaning. And I said “okay, I agree with you.” you know black hole, hole, black is awful. And in fact, a black hole in science were beginning to learn, is full of embracing gravity, and super gravity, actually holds galaxy together, you know really important, and no one can believe that this little tiny black hole can hold galaxy which is ten billion, you know stars or something together or help it. So, it’s really a new name, we need a new name.

So, we talked with the Chinese, and we said you know, what would be a good nominal, and they said Wu chi. So wu chi and it’s a popular name, and black hole very popular too in English, but wu chi(Five Elements), so we reviewed Wu chi, mother, energy, and chi, the force. And I redesigned it in my mind in that manner.

A very funny thing happened with the Chinese Olympic, of course, they had cleared the air, so the pollution, so they see the clouds and they watered it. And too much water came down, and they flooded the river, the river flooded by the black hole, and it turned into a mud hole for a while. Anyway, they cleaned it up.

But I, it was a very nice collaboration with the Chinese, I must say, really, I enjoyed it, they enjoyed it, we exchanged the philosophical design, work design, linguistic design, science design, on the one hand, it’s all one part, and then how do you build it? How does it relate to its form or its form of language? How does it relate to the landscape? Another design, so when I say double design, you have to do both.

WuChi by Charles Jencks| 查尔斯·詹克斯的作品“五气花园” | © www.charlesjencks.com

是的,我昨天提到过,在我设计时,我必须要做双重设计。双重设计,比如说,考察科学,也关注科学背后蕴含的理念,所以你需要让自己沉浸在科学中。我当时在中国,有人找我让我为2008年的北京奥运会设计一个小公园,于是我去了北京,咨询了中国人和哲学家。他们的要求是尽快把作品设计出来,然后建造在奥林匹克公园里面的河边,他们希望我设计一个黑洞。

既然如此,我就说好,我设计了一个旋转的黑洞。这个黑洞比较复杂,巨大无比,它把一切都吸进来了。事实上,就像它在吃东西一样,就像吃东西,非常逼真,它可以吞没所有东西。不过在我和中国人交谈后发现,他们不喜欢黑洞这个名字。所以我就问,为什么?他们说,黑色是个非常不吉利的词,黑洞传达给我们的是一种非常不好的意义。我就说:好,我同意你的看法,黑洞,黑色确实不太好。

然而事实上,在科学中,黑洞意味着学习的开始。它吸收了很多重力,超级大的重力把星系连接在一起,非常了不起。没人相信,就这么一个小小的黑洞可以把星系里的几百亿颗星星连在一起,所以这真的是个新名字。我们需要一个新名字,于是就和中国人讨论,我们就说,你们觉得该取个什么样的好名字呢,他们就说了五气。五气也是个非常受欢迎的名字,相比于五气,黑洞这个名字在英国比较受欢迎。

所以我们重新审视了五气,母亲,能量,气(就是指能量)这些词。我在脑海中又以五气为基础,重新进行设计。这是中国举办奥运会的一个小插曲。当然,他们清洁空气,去除污染,不断浇水,让蓝天白云重现。水太多导致河流发生洪涝,黑洞导致了河流的洪涝,它变成了泥泞的洞,他们最终把它清理干净了。

我觉得和中国人合作很愉快,真的,我很喜欢,他们也很开心。一方面,我们在概念设计,功能设计,语言设计,科学设计上交换了彼此的意见。这是一方面,你要如何建造呢?如何让它与形式,语言形式和地形风景完美呼应?另一个设计,我说的双重设计,就是说两者都要做。

WuChi by Charles Jencks| 查尔斯·詹克斯的作品“五气花园” | © www.charlesjencks.com

The GARLICer

Interview

Zhangkan Zhou
Siyang Jing

Editor

Shuke
Yumeng
Dawei
Wen Zhang (Web)

Join the discussion 165 Comments

Leave a Reply