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

WEIMIN ZHUANG

Dean ,school of architecture, Tsinghua University

President & chief Designer,Architectural Design & Research Institute of Tsinghua university

Class A Registered architect

National engineering survey and design master

庄惟敏

清华大学建筑学院院长、教授

清华大学建筑设计研究院院长兼总建筑师

国家一级注册建筑师

全国工程勘察设计大师

The Interview

Weimin Zhuang shared her professional experience and passion for design with GARLIC.

Q1:As the Dean of School of Architecture in Tsinghua University, and the principal of Architectural Design & Research Institute of Tsinghua University, you are in the leadership positions for both teaching in school and design practices of the institute. You mentioned that the culture of a firm is very much related to its leadership. So what are the qualities that you think an architectural leader should possess? And where do you see the differences between the leadership of architecture field with that of other fields?

您作为清华大学建筑系的系主任和清华大学建筑设计研究院院长,你在教学方面是领导,在大院做实际项目也是领导。您还说过企业的气质,一定程度上和领导人有很大的关系,那么您认为在我们这个行业做领导的一些素质是什么?和其他行业的区别是什么?

Actually I have been in the design institute leadership for a long time after graduation. I worked as an architect intern at the very beginning, then an architect, and then the office director, the associate and the principal. Eventually I worked up to the vice dean, and the dean. Of course, this promotion process was rather long. But the time working as a dean of the architecture school is actually short, only three years. I have recently completed my first tenure, and now it is the beginning of my second tenure.

There are huge differences between the two positions. I think the crucial one is that the two organizations are different types. An architecture school is an educational organization, while a design institute is a place for production and market oriented researches. You know considering the development of the architecture discipline, it’s rational for the architecture school to serve as a cradle and a meditation place. In this sense, as the dean of the school you should be an expert in the discipline and its future progress.

So what kind of challenges is the architecture discipline facing today? What are the emerging demands of human settlements for architecture today? To what degree have architecture and other disciplines been integrated? Is architecture bringing us more introspection? Then facing those introspection, what shall we do in elementary education and professional education of architecture? In a word to develop the discipline is the primary task as the Dean of an architecture school.

Of course there is another major, you can say first task as the dean of an architecture school. On one hand, it is very important that you provide an effective platform for discipline development. This platform should be able to attract talents and allow them to fulfill themselves freely. On the other hand, the platform needs to have sufficient financial support. You know almost every successful dean of an architecture school does very well on both two things. One is to attract a large number of people, whether by lobbying, or relying on the school name as an attraction; the other is that they can get enough sponsorship and funding. So, the two positions differ in the starting point and in kind, which results in different major tasks.

As to the design institute, basically it’s a practice platform. But there are still some research projects beyond practices. Moreover, as the dean you need to orient your team to the needs of the market, to seize the opportunities and to complete projects one by one. One of the performance assessment criteria for a design institute leader is being able to develop your staff, your architects, your team, to their full abilities and creativities under your leadership, in order to seize the crucial opportunities in the market. Actually the two jobs differ greatly.

In terms of current energy allocation, my ratio is like one to five, one for the Design Institute and five for the architecture school. There is no clear line between the two jobs. However the dean needs to consider things including the discipline, the faculty, teaching activities, students, and so on, so I devote more time to the school.

其实毕业以后很长一段时间,我一直是在设计院做领导,一直以来也是一步一步上来的。从一开始作为实习建筑师,后来到建筑师,后来到室主任,就是所长、主任建筑师,再后来副院长、院长。当然,这段时间比较长,但是当建筑学院院长其实时间很短,才三年,一个任届刚满,现在是第二个任届开始。

这两者区别是很大的。如果要说最主要的区别,其实就在于这两个部门本身的定位不同。建筑学院是一个教学科研的单位,而设计院是一个以生产、市场为主要研究对象的单位。那么,建筑学的发展,它的源发地,或者说它的测度地应该是在建筑学院。所以作为建筑学院的院长,你应该了解的东西是学科和学科的发展。

那么,建筑学在今天,面临着什么样的挑战,今天的人居环境又对建筑学有些什么新要求?建筑学和其它学科的跨学科融合又达到了什么样的程度,建筑学是不是今天又给我们带来更多的反思?面对这些反思,我们在建筑学的基础教育,包括专业教育中,应该做哪些事儿。学科的发展就是建筑学院院长主要要做的事。

当然建筑学院院长还有另外一个、也是最主要的工作。你要想让一个学科发展,很重要的一点就是你要给它提供一个很好的平台。这个平台既包括能把很好的人才吸引过来,让他们能够在这上面很宽松地、很自由地发挥他们自己的能力和才干,另外一方面,也要有很强有力的资金资助。所以你看,凡是成功的建筑学院院长多半都在这两个层面做得非常出色。一个是能吸引大量的人,无论是靠他们自己去游说,还是靠他们的这个品牌去吸引;另外一个就是他们可以搞来基金、赞助和经费。所以,应该说这两者的出发点不同、定位点不同,它们主要的内容也不同。

而设计院呢,主要是一个实践平台。说是实践平台,除了做项目之外,当然它也有一部分研究。更重要的一点就是,作为院长,你能不能带领你的团队去顺应现在的市场,同时又很好地抓住机遇,一个一个项目去做。所以设计院院长的一个业绩考核或者衡量的标准就是你能不能够通过你的创造力、你的指挥才干,让你的员工,你的建筑师、你的团队,发挥出最大的创造活力,以此来抓住市场最主要的契机。这两者差异还是挺大的。

当然从现在的精力分配来讲,大概会是一比五的关系,在设计院是一,在建筑学院是五。这两者没有截然之分,当然建筑学院因为考虑学科,考虑人才,还有包括教学、包括学生等等的方方面面,所以他的事儿这个相对多一点。

庄惟敏院长主持设计上海中国博览会会展综合体项目| © http://www.thholding.com.cn/

Q2:Do you have any future planning for the major of architecture programming or what are the subversive effects do you expect the discipline of architecture programming to have in the design field?

您对建筑策划这门学科有什么未来的规划或者说你希望建筑策划这门学科对设计学科有什么颠覆性的影响?

In theory, architecture programming is within the scope of architecture. There has been a rapid urban growth after the World War II, because the war destroyed a lot of cities. Given this backdrop, how to make rational schemes for urban development? How can we combine the architecture discipline with practice for the post-war reconstruction? That is to say, on the question of how to develop architecture theory and produce outstanding works in the rapid urban construction process, the West has given us some really good experience.

In the late 50s, William Peña, an American scholar, and his partner William Caudier, published an article in the Architecture Record under the title “Architectural Design Analysis – the beginning of a good design”. This article laid the groundwork for architecture programming. It talked about how architects clarify project-related elements and factors through site inventory, analysis, and research, in order to accurately define their design interests and niches.

So his starting point, in simple words, is to use the least amount of money to build the best houses, avoiding waste and simultaneously emphasizing the acquisition of good social, environmental and economic effects. At that time after World War II, this idea had very positive meaning for the American society. In other words, the key point is whether architects could rigorously think about this problem when facing austerity with an upcoming climax of urban construction.

After that, he published a book called Problem Thinking which has been very popular even today, sometimes translated into Chinese as Problem Detection. The book is currently in its fifth edition. William Peña and his students continued working on this issue. Many of his students, such as Cherry, Steven Parshall and Wolfgang Preiser, are now famous experts in architecture programming and members of AIA (American Institute of Architects). As experienced architects, they are very clear that if we treat a design project simply as a piece of art, just from the perspective of constitution, it is very likely that the design would bring risks or dangers, since environment preservation, human activities, and climate responses are ignored. Today even more issues like sustainable development, green space, ecology, energy-saving design, and fabricated cost of construction are ignored as well. So in order to make our project both aesthetically and functionally elaborated to be s piece of work, or even a masterpiece, it’s necessary to have in-depth researches. This kind of researches are what we called “design analysis” in architecture programming. So the first step is to determine all the problems associated with this architecture, which is called problem thinking. It has extraordinary meaning to us even today.

We all know that the urbanization process in our country has taken around 30 years to achieve the development that might take 100 to 200 years in other countries. Is there any problems during such a rapid urbanization process with such a large number of construction projects, and completed area? These are not simply design quality issues, but what is the more important issue? That is, our research on the design of this project is not enough, especially during the early phase of the design process, or you can say we don’t have enough researches on the foundation of the design.

What is the foundation of a design? Architects all understand that the basis is the design assignment. Who creates the assignment? It is created by the landlord, or the owner, right? So what is the owner or the landlord’s decision based on? They are giving architects questions. If an assignment goes wrong, the final result must be problematic no matter how excellent and professional the architect is. Therefore, the proposal of architecture programming had an absolute significance under its historical background, and it had its theoretical foundation. So the concept which was just mentioned, is called Architecture Programming in English. In fact, this concept defines the most significant dividing line in contemporary architecture field. That is the division of Architecture programming.

Architecture programming was brought up by William Peña and his partner in late 1950s, then we had problem thinking. This theory became a system. Then it had its own methods. After more than half a century until today, it finally becomes accepted by the Chinese. When I came back from abroad in 1990s, I brought this concept back and set up the system. For a long period of time, we are committed to establishing its theoretical framework and to exploring its methods through guiding graduate students, and setting up a professional committee called “China Architectural Association Building Planning Professional Committee”.

Of course, today we have a long way to go in the architecture industry. For example, architecture programming hasn’t been defined as a mandatory procedure stipulated by law. In developed countries, government-funded projects or public welfare projects such as hospitals, kindergartens, nursing homes, must carry out architecture programming research. In other words, the design assignment is proposed by the owner, and must be accredited by management departments, authoritative departments, and certification departments, to ensure that there is no problem in your assignment. In contrast, a lot of Chinese government leaders, amateurs who are not familiar with or do not understand the situation, would make decisions completely on their arbitrary minds, say, “Ah, I want a landmark building here. I want a big piece of water surface there. I want a big square. I want to play with the space like this…” In fact, there are rules behind architecture developments: not only rules of architecture, we also need to broaden the horizons, to interact with history, economy, culture context and so on. So architecture programming has its own set of a complete system.

And today in China, the government has made several clear points about urbanization construction, which explicitly refers to another concept called POE, which is “post-use evaluation.” Now the government requires that important public buildings in China must be evaluated after use. Post-use evaluation is an important part of architecture programming. In other words, we analyze the building in order to see how has the original design been applied on the building and how is the effect, have it caused any problem. All of these need to be reviewed. Then we summarize the result to get a general rule for the same type of buildings. This entire system is known as architecture programming.

Therefore, architecture programming could ensure us a relatively high quality of architecture design and a high level of urban construction, and guarantee us good environmental benefits, social benefits and economic benefits. So the 2014 version of the book “Architectural Terminology” has already included architecture programming as a very important scope. China’s registered architect examination lists architecture programming as a very important part as well. UIA, the International Union of Architects, also makes it clear that architecture programming is one of the seven core tasks recognized by UIA and is a necessary procedure (in architecture design flow).

其实理论上讲,建筑策划属于建筑学范畴之内。二战以后城市快速兴建,由于二战战火摧毁了很多城市,在这样的大背景之下,怎样对城市建设有一个非常好的考量?在这种百废待兴的背景之下,怎样能够让建筑学很好地和实践结合起来?也就是说,如何能够在快速的城市化建设过程中,又能有建筑学理论的发展和优秀的作品产生。其实在这一点上西方给了我们一些很好的经验。

上个世纪五十年代末,美国有一位学者叫威廉·佩纳(William M. Peña),他和他当时的合伙人威廉·考迪尔,在《Architecture Record》杂志上发表了一篇文章,叫做《建筑设计分析——一个好设计的开始》,这篇文章奠定了建筑策划的基础。说的是什么呢?就是怎样由建筑师通过对项目的分析、研究、深层次的剖析,得到跟这个项目相关的所有的要素、因素,以此来准确地界定你设计的利益和定位。

张维(清华大学建筑设计研究院建筑师)与威廉·佩纳对建筑策划进行探讨 |
© http://www.weixinnu.com/tag/article/3828370881

所以他的出发点,用简单的话来讲,就是用最少的钱盖最好的房子,避免其中的浪费,强调同时取得好的社会效应、环境效应和经济效应。这在二战以后,对当时的美国社会是非常非常有积极意义的。也就是说关键点在于,在百废待兴、城市化建设高潮要到来的时候,建筑师能不能够静下心来认真地思考这个问题。


所以在那以后他出了一本书,这本书到今天仍旧非常受欢迎,叫Problem Thinking,《问题搜寻》,我们翻译出来也有叫《问题探查》的。这本书到现在已经出了第五版了。威廉·佩纳和他的学生持续不断地在做这项工作。他的学生有很多比如说Cherry、比如说Steven Parshall、Wolfgang Preiser,这些人都是现在鼎鼎有名的搞建筑策划的专家,同时他们也是AIA,就是美国建筑协会的成员。作为资深建筑设计师,他们非常清楚的一点就是,如果我们随意地去拿一个项目,单纯地把它当成一个艺术品,从造型的角度来做的话,很有可能会带来一些风险,或者说某些危险性,就是你忽略了对环境的思考、对人的使用、对气候的应对,在我们今天来讲,还忽略了环境的可持续发展、绿色、生态、节能,甚至于造价虚高等等。所以为了要让我们的项目,不仅仅在美学层面上有很高的造诣,同时还不能是个废品,而真正的是个作品,甚至于精品。这样来看,就需要有深入的研究。这种研究其实就是建筑策划说的“建筑设计分析”。那么首要的一个问题就是要把跟这个建筑相关的所有问题全部找到,这就是所谓的problem thinking。即使在今天看来,这对我们同样是有意义的。

大家都知道我们现在的城市化进程,用三十多年走了一百多年、两百年的时间,这样快速的城市化进程,这样大量的建造项目、竣工面积,是不是会有一些问题出现?这些不仅仅是设计质量问题,更重要的问题在哪儿?就在我们对这个项目的设计研究不够,尤其对项目的设计前期研究不够,也就是我们对设计的依据研究不够。

庄惟敏院长的著作《建筑策划与设计》 | © http://product.dangdang.com/23955764.html

依据是个什么呢?建筑师都很清楚,依据是设计任务书。那设计任务书是谁定的呢?是由业主定的,是由甲方定的,对吧?那么甲方或者说业主又是根据什么定的呢?他们在给建筑师出题。建筑师即便再优秀,再专业,如果这题出错了,那你想最后的结果一定是有问题的。所以说建筑策划的提出是有它绝对的时代意义和时代背景的,而且有它的理论根依据。所以刚才说到的建筑策划这个概念,叫Architecture Programming。这个概念实际上也就界定了当下建筑学领域里最重要的一个分野,就是建筑策划分野。

建筑策划这件事儿,在上个世纪五十年代末被威廉·佩纳和他的合伙人一起提出来,于是有了problem thinking。这个理论变成了体系,又有了它自己的方法,半个多世纪之后一直到今天,终于被我们中国所接受。所以上个世纪90年代,我留学回来以后把这个概念带进来,然后把它的体系建立起来,很长一段时间内我们指导研究生,包括到今天我们成立了专业委员会,叫“中国建筑协会建筑策划专业委员会”,就是一直在致力于它的理论架构的建立和方法的研究。

当然,今天我们建筑行业发展的路还很长,比如说我们还没有把它界定成一个法律层面的事情。如果在发达国家,由政府投资的项目、公益性的项目,比如说医院、幼儿园、养老院,必须要进行建筑策划研究。

庄惟敏院长在清华建筑智库2016——“城市与软实力”学术座谈会
针对建筑策划对于城市软实力作用进行了发言 |
© https://wx.abbao.cn/a/4588-2fadf0b2b958e573.html

换句话讲,就是他们由业主提出来的设计任务书,必须要由主管部门、权威部门、认证部门去认证,防止你这题出错。我们恰恰是有很多的领导、外行,在不熟悉、不了解的情况下,完全凭着自己的脑袋,说,“诶,我这儿要建一个标志性建筑,我那儿要来一个大水面,我要来个大广场,我这个空间里面怎么怎么弄……”其实这里面都是有规律的,不仅要符合建筑学的规律,还要视野更宽阔,和历史、经济、文脉等等结合起来,所以建筑策划有它自己一套完整的体系。

而且今天在中国,中央又明确提出来了关于城市化建设的几点意见,这里面明确提到了另外一个概念叫POE,“使用后评估”。现在国家要求国内重要的公共建筑都要进行使用后评估。使用后评估恰恰就是建筑策划里面很重要的一个环节。也就是说,我们对既有的建成建筑、既有的环境,要进行分析,看它根据原来的设计到底实施得怎么样、效果怎么样、有没有问题,这些都要进行一个review。而后回过头来,拿这个结论,再对同类的建筑,加以概括。所以这一套完整的体系,就是我们说的建筑策划。

所以建筑策划本身应该说,是保证我们建筑创作比较高的质量,城市化建设达到比较高的水准,环境效益、社会效益、经济效益都好的这样一种保障。所以2014年《建筑学名词》这本大书里面,已经把建筑策划明确列入到很重要的范围,我们国家的注册建筑师考试也把它作为很重要的一部分。作为国际建协,UIA也明确提出来了,建筑策划就是国际建协认可的职业建筑师里的七项核心任务之一,是必须要做的。

Q3:For rural development projects, there is a “pile on” phenomenon among architectural designers. However, the design qualities are varies, for which require long time to reach substantial improvements. Under such scenario, in your opinion, what could the governments, clients, architects, and others do better for rural development projects?

对于乡建项目,设计师有一窝蜂而上的现象,但是设计水平却参差不齐。但改善设计水平又是一个长期的过程。那么你觉得对于政府,甲方,还有设计师等角色来说,他们应该怎样把握才能把乡建这个过程做的更好?

You have mentioned the word “pile on”. Personally I understand it because rural development is a popular topic today. I think there are two reasons. First one which is very obvious, is that the China has lots of land in rural area. And when we look at the city, we’ve had very intense development in urban area, right? You’ll find many cities too urbanized to build new development. Then what are architects going to do? They definitely will search for more land to build on – that is the countryside. That’s one reason. What about the other reason? Rural areas are relatively less developed, they are more like pieces of white paper, which offers more room to play from many architects’ point of view. Of course this kind of free play contains designers’ understanding about history, tradition, context, environment, especially factors like the territory, climate. This is why the rural development becomes so attractive to architects.

But in my point of view, it is undeniable that the rural developments in China still have problem so far. The problem has two main parts.

First, many people treat the rural area as a place or space to play with their ideas, or say to design recklessly. Actually they should know that compared to cities, there are more natural, kindred, cultural background and fundament, or premises in the country side. You will consider fewer questions when you build a house on a plot in urban environment rather than work on the same site in the countryside. So the key point is the countryside itself has more vernacular and cultural characteristics that you have to consider, which is precisely the point ignored by many of our architects. They feel like that they can just play with the rural sites.

Second, theoretically, the living environment in rural areas may be somehow more vulnerable than cities. The so-called vulnerable is to say, it is not like an urban area that runs constantly like a huge machine, all the gears like transportation, utility, human flow, and zoning bite perfectly. The countryside itself is very fragile, and if you miss one point – for your design concept, for an idea of the facade, or for an idea of constitution, you ignore some points – this might bring a very unacceptable result, which could damage the ecology, cut off the kindred and cultural context. So these are the most prominent points in rural development. Of course many architects today haven’t realized it.

Another critical thing is that urban and rural areas use different land ownership structure, or say different ways of social organization, which also brings about the biggest urban and rural difference. For example, we may need only one set of administrative division system, or just a land zoning system in cities. But in rural area things are not so simple. The first thing you need to know is what it means for farmland. People use farmland for production. Once the farmland is taken away, what could people feed themselves on? You can tear down an old house and build a new house in a village. Or you can replace the old beams or the old windows with new ones, keep part of the ruin as if this is rural development. We say this is not acceptable. Here the primary issue is that the fundamental problem in rural area reminds to be solved.

Then what is the fundamental problem in rural development? As urbanization continues to encroach on rural land, villages in the cities are springing up, which means villages have been surrounded by cities. During the land transfer process farmers are losing their production material, so they can’t earn their own livings. In this case, what can they feed themselves on? It’s not that we tear down the farmers ‘ houses and build some tall buildings, and they will all go upstairs. We had a slogan in the past said “Farmers go upstairs”. But the history proves that farmers can’t live in the tall building. Why? Farmers must use production material to feed themselves. When land has gone, what can they do? Some people suggest building factories. Some people suggest developing agritourism, to build restaurants and guest houses. But how many visitors would come and stay there?

As a matter of fact, the biggest problem is the hollowing-out of rural areas. The mid-aged are moving out to work. So there are very limited locals but a bunch of migrants hired to farm. Those migrants bring in external cultures, which are hard to be blended with the existing culture where only the aged and the children are still living in the countryside. This kind of severe social problems brought by the hollowing-out of rural areas are precisely the urban and rural difference. This is an inevitable, or say the paramount problem to consider if architects start projects in the countryside. Otherwise it’s likely that nobody will live in or use the houses once they have been completed. Those houses can only work as a scenery with no rural issues solved, sometimes even exacerbating the issues. So for today’s rural development, maybe we should concern more about the problem of how to achieve sustainable development in rural area, instead of simply caring about the constitution problem.

你刚才用了“一窝蜂而上”这个词,这个我个人理解。当然现在乡建这件事很热门。我认为有两个因素:一个是很自然的因素,就是农村太广阔了,而城市化建设这一块,我们基本上把城市做完了,对吧?所以我们现在看看城市化率已经达到很高了,很多城市都已经没什么房子可建了,那么建筑师干什么去呢?他就一定要移师到更广阔的天地,所以农村是一个因素。另外一个因素呢?由于农村原本基础比较弱,它更多的是像一张白纸,所以很多建筑师觉得自己在那里有很好的发挥空间。当然这种发挥空间里面也包含了他们对乡村的历史、传统、文脉、环境,特别是比如说地域、气候这些因素的理解和融合,还有包括民俗、民间文化的传承。所以乡建变成了特别吸引大家的那么一个东西。

但我个人认为,不能否认乡建到现在为止还是有它一定的问题。这个问题大概有以下两个方面:

第一个方面就是很多人一直认为,乡建可能是提供给自己一个可以去发挥创作,或者说恣意去折腾的一个场所,或者空间。其实他们应该知道,和城市相比较而言,乡村可能带有更多自然的、人脉的、文化的背景和基础,或者说前提。如果同样一块地、同样一个房子在城市里面建,你所要顾忌的可能比在乡村里要少。所以主要的问题是,乡村本身可能带有更多的地域的、人文的,你不得不考虑的特征。但是恰恰是这一点我们有不少建筑师并没有认识到,于是他们就觉得我可以在那儿自己发挥一下。

第二个,乡村从理论上讲,它的人居环境条件,某种程度上可能要比城市脆弱。所谓脆弱就是说,它不像城市一样,像一个大的机器在那里不断地运转,每一个齿轮都咬合得非常好,比如说交通、市政、人流、功能分区等等。乡村本身很脆弱,你忽略了一点——为了实现你的某个理想,或者是立面的创意,或者是造型的创意,你忽略了其它点——可能这一点就会带来一个非常不能接受的结果。这个结果可能就会使得生态破坏了,使得人脉、文脉被切断了,所以这些东西在乡建里面,反而变成今天最突出的、或者说最要紧的事情。当然实际上很多的建筑师并没有意识到这一点。

庄惟敏院长在2017中国乡村复兴论坛•台江峰会致辞 |
© http://www.sohu.com/a/138572183_286304

另外一个我个人认为也是比较关键的,就是所有制的形式不同,或者说社会组织方式不同,这也带来了城市和乡村之间最大的区别。比如说在城市里面我们可能以一种行政区划,或者说以一个简单的功能分区,就可以把它实现。但是在农村,很多事情是不可以这样做的。首先你要知道,这对耕地来讲意味着什么。土地就是老百姓的生产资料,一旦把生产资料剥夺之后,老百姓拿什么去养活自己?一个村庄,你可以把旧房子推倒,完全盖新房子;或者你可以把旧的房梁、旧的窗户拆掉安上新的,而后你保留一部分残垣断壁,似乎这个就是乡建了。我们说它不可以,最大的问题就是,你没有解决农村最基本的问题。

农村最基本的问题是什么呢?随着城市化不断地蚕食农村,城中村越来越多,乡村被城市所包围。现在包括土地流转在内的一些新问题带来的就是农民越来越多地失掉了自己的生产资料,他们没有办法养活自己。在没有办法养活自己的情况下,他们靠什么过活呢?不是说我们把这些农民的房子拆了,然后盖一些高楼,他们就都上楼了。原来有啊,叫“农民上楼”;后来事实证明,农民上不了楼。问题在哪儿呢?农民必须得用生产资料养活自己,土地没有了,那怎么办?有人说我给你盖工厂,于是就盖了很多工厂。我给你盖农家乐,我给你盖乡村酒店,那到底有多少人去那儿住呢?

农村空心化现象 | © http://www.zhjs.cc/wzt/31.html

现在最大的问题其实是农村空心化的问题。很多人中壮年都出去务工了,真正的本地人没有了,却雇了一帮人来种地。这帮外来的人带来外来的文化,这些新文化又融入不到原来的乡村里边去。乡村里边只剩下留守的老人和孩子,所以这种乡村的空心化带来的大的社会问题恰恰是农村与城市不同的地方。所以建筑师到农村去做乡建,首先不能回避的、或者首先你要思考的,是这个层面的问题。不然的话,房子一栋栋建起来了,没有人住,没有人用,最多当个布景放在那里,农村的问题一点都没解决,有时候反而还会激化问题。所以今天的乡村建设,可能更多应该在这个层面上去考量,即农村建设到底应该怎样实现可持续发展,而不是只关注简单的形式问题。

Q4:You have just mentioned the science and other industries in the topic of rural development. Relative to them, the architecture industry has less social impact. So how could designers pose more social or political impact, so as to help us do better in rural development projects, or generally in all design tasks?

您刚刚在乡建这个话题中提到了科学等等行业。相对于他们,建筑这个行业的影响力会小一些。那么你觉得我们设计师应该如何才能获得更广泛的社会影响力或者政治影响力,从而来帮助我们更好的完成乡建,或者别的设计任务?

Now architects are getting more and more respect in the society. And increasing number of people understand what do architects do, just like doctors, lawyers, and accountants in the western world. Architects are people’s consultants. I have money. I just bought a piece of land, and architects help me decide what to build on this land. Architects help people create human settlements, create qualified and sustainable living environment, which should be respected.

In a really long time, especially since 30 years ago or even earlier in our country, architects have been treated like a tool of the government. The government, or say many politicians have been using this tool to achieve their career goals. For example, some leaders might want a skyscraper to show his ambition, to show the city’s power, or to show the government’s ability. So a leader would look for an architect to do some experimental design. The architects might be asked to use certain kind of constitution, with certain heights and building mass. Lots of architect’s working mode become like this.

Some clients even require architects to add a gate or something with granite as the only construction material, or require the architecture to be western classic style etc. They impose their ideas, some even have political reasons, on the architects and ask the architects to achieve those goals for them. As a result, architects become the tools. This is actually putting the cat before the horse. It breaks the basic value of architecture design.

Architects should be respected. Why? Because architects synthesize history, culture, environment, function and human activities to create pleasant, enjoyable, and interesting living environment within limited area. They are great designers who create beautiful human settlement. It should be a notion like this.

The good thing is, people started to realize that architects should be respected and architects are getting more and more attention, some even become public figure. For example, when we heard that an architect built a landmark in a city, then the city would also become famous because of the building, sometimes even boosting urban development. These are all very recent examples.

Of course, we still have a long way to go in our country. Lots of architects are still working as a political tool for government leaders to achieve their goals. The good thing is architects start to advertise their theory, idea and the design about green building. They would even influence a city’s positioning and development. I think in this sense architecture do have political meaning.

Actually the government needs leaders with architecture or planning background. This are very important positions. Unfortunately not too many people understand this. If architects or specialist who have professional planning, architecture, and landscape architecture knowledge could work in the government, they would have more powerful influence in decision making process.

A beautiful city would not only allow people to enjoy their life, but is a symbol for human value. So I think architect is a great and holy profession who is creating significant human value. With further development of urbanization, people will have deeper understanding for cities and the living environment. Then the influence of architects will be more widely recognized.

建筑师这个行业现在越来越受到社会的尊重,而且越来越多的人理解到建筑师是干什么的,就像西方的自由职业者、医师、律师、会计师一样,对吧?建筑师是人们的置业顾问,是我有钱了,我买了一块地,你帮我想想我要怎么做吧,对吧?你要帮助人们去营造他们的人居环境,营造一个美好的、可持续发展的生活环境。所以这一点应该被大家所尊重。

当然长久以来,特别是在我们前三十年,抑或再早一点时间,建筑师一直被当作是一个工具。这个工具是很多我们的领导,或者说很多我们的政客来实现自己的诉求,和愿望,或者说自己本身的政绩的一个工具。比如说我要在这儿盖一个高楼,这个高楼要显示我的雄心,显示我这个城市的力量,显示我这个单位的能力。于是我找个建筑师,你过来做实验设计吧,你设计要做成这样,要多高、多大、体量要怎么样。很多建筑师的工作内容都变成这样一种状态。

庄惟敏院长在2016“建筑之本原 • 哲匠之精神”清华设计学术周致辞 |
© http://www.chinaasc.org/news/114731.html

甚至还有的业主说,你在这地方给我做一个大门或者是做成一个什么样,而且我这材料完全用花岗岩,或者完全地就要用西洋古典式的,诸如此类。他把他们的意识形态的思考,甚至于带有政治因素的思考,强加给建筑师,让建筑师替他们来实现,所以建筑师在很大层面上变成了一种御用的匠人。这一点事实上反了,真正违反了建筑创作的最本源的价值观。

建筑师理应受尊重,为什么呢?因为建筑师在你给他划定的区域内,结合历史、文脉、环境和功能、使用,创造了一种让人们愉悦的,感到很欣慰的、很有趣味的工作、生活、学习的空间。他们是一群营造美丽人居环境的伟大的设计师,应该是这么一个概念。

好在在今天,大家逐步认识到这一点,所以建筑师慢慢地也会变得越来越受瞩目,有些甚至于变成公众人物。比如说我们听到了某一位建筑师创造了一个建筑,那么这个城市也因为这个建筑变得很有名了,甚至于带动了城市的发展。这些都是非常非常近在眼前的例子。

当然在我们国家我觉得这条路还需要走很远。很多的建筑师仍旧还是在做这种为领导实现自己某些政绩的匠人式的工作。好在建筑师现在越来越多的从图板后面走到前面来了,他们在宣传他们自己的理念和想法,宣传他们的绿色建筑的思想。甚至于他们会影响着一个城市,左右着一个城市的定位和发展。那么在这个层面上我觉得也起到了一部分政治的意义。

其实在一个城市的领导层的人,有建筑规划出身的还是很必要的,而且确实也还是很重要的一个岗位。可惜我们在这方面的了解太少,如果要是建筑师,或者懂专业的,规划、建筑、景观的这些专家,他们能走到领导岗位,那么他们的主导作用就更强了。

一个美好的城市不仅让人们在里面生活很愉悦,它还是一种人类价值的象征。所以我觉得建筑师是创造人类美好价值的一个非常非常神圣和伟大的职业。我觉得随着我们城市化进程的不断地深入、发展,随着我们对城市的理解和人居环境的理解越来越深入,建筑师的影响力应该会被大家更多地认可。

庄惟敏院长参加2016“建筑之本原 • 哲匠之精神”清华设计学术周开幕式 |
© http://www.chinaasc.org/news/114731.html

Q5:The architecture field has relatively high unemployment rate and relatively low income. Thus, many architecture students, or architects, have chosen to change profession. Some of them even become very successful after they change profession. What do you think of this phenomenon? What do you want say to architects or young architects who have the idea of changing profession?

建筑师失业率高,收入也不多,很多建筑学生,或者建筑师选择了转行,有一部分建筑师转行之后也做得很成功。您对这个现象怎么看?您想对那些有转行想法的建筑学生,或者青年建筑师说什么?

If we treat the architect as a profession, then the adulation of the society towards this profession, or say the rising and falling of this profession, is actually related to the market, related to the development of the society. Architecture was so popular during the past decades, which in my mind was not very reasonable because it was more like a real estate bubble. People thought we didn’t have enough architects that you could earn a good sum of money per drawing if you graduated from the architecture department. But in fact it was only an illusory sense conducted by the housing bubble.

Actually I think it is a good sign to see some people change their careers if they don’t want to persist any more. Rational thinking returns, which is a process that had been through by western countries way long ago. But that aside, simply concerning the students, many students applied for an architecture degree, and now a lot of them decide to transfer. Many parents whose children are topmost students, let’s see what they say: their child is going to apply for the best department because he or she is the top student. So what is the best department? It is the one that has the highest admission score, and that is the department of architecture, or the school of architecture at Tsinghua University. If you furthermore ask them why, you would find out that they didn’t deliberate on the problem.

Many people think that life of architecture students are hard because they need to spend five years, which is quite a long time, to burn money and to stay up late, and now it’s even hard to find a job. But you can see, we do have people who transfer to other schools, but there are still students who wish to transfer into our department. I think it’s normal to both transfer in and out. We will find out if we compared with other countries, our students in Tsinghua also have the same feeling when they study abroad, for example in Harvard, Yale, or MIT, that it seems like local students in the U.S. or in Europe treat architecture more of a preference, or an interest, that their love and persistence in architecture are stronger than Chinese students. Chinese students might choose architecture because they got the highest grade in the college entrance examination, and they followed the market trend speculatively, or say, to consider more about the market. But foreign students don’t make choices for these reasons. It’s hard to get a job in the U.S. considering their depressing economy, right? Architect is not one of the most demanded jobs in that country. Why do so many people choose this discipline if it costs five years and a lot of money, it makes people tired, and it’s even hard to find a job? Because many people pursue it as an interest and a career.

So I think the differences are obvious at this level. The profession will be affected by the changing market no matter how developed the economy is, but the architecture profession is, to a large extent, essential in such a society. Many young people persistently pursue architecture because it’s a discipline combining science, technology, culture, and fine arts together. They learn it because they like it, get enchanted by it. So you say some people changed career. I think it’s good for them to do this because they finally understand that their initial choices are merely influenced by the market. It’s really normal to change career when the market goes sliding.

如果把建筑师当成一个职业来看,社会上对一种职业的追逐或者说职业的盛与衰,其实都跟市场是有关系的,或者说都跟社会的发展是有关系的。前一段建筑这么火爆,其实我个人认为并不是特别的正常,总是觉得房地产虚高、泡沫,所以大家觉得建筑师不够用了,我只要是建筑学毕业,我到设计单位画一张图就能挣多少钱。其实这个都是比较虚的,或者说他是在一个虚高的房地产泡沫下支撑起来的。

其实今天有一部分人觉得他要转行了,有一部分人他不能够执着地做下去了,我觉得倒是一个好现象,回归理性思考,其实西方早就经历过这个过程。但是今天我们不拿别的说,就拿学生而言,报清华建筑学的有多少,现在又转走多少。很多家长,孩子都是状元,你看家长说的,“我们孩子是状元,我们要报最好的。”那最好的是什么呢?就是分最高的,那就是清华建筑系,分最高,清华建筑学院,分最高。问他进一步说,为什么呢?他没仔细思考。

那么也有很多人说,凡是报建筑系进来的,都挺不容易的,因为他要学五年,花的时间又长,还花钱,还熬夜,很辛苦,现在再加上工作也不好找。但你可以看看,我们是有人转出去的,但也有人转进来。|||转出去我说很正常,转进来也很正常。那我们和国外比较比较你就可以发现,我们清华的学生到国外去他们也有过体会。比如说到Harvard、Yale、MIT,他们会发觉在美国,也包括欧洲,学建筑的这些,美国的当地学生、欧洲的当地学生,他们似乎表现出来对建筑有更多的一种偏好,或者说爱好,甚至于这种爱好的程度和执着程度比我们的中国学生还要强。

庄惟敏院长主持设计华山游客中心 |
© http://www.thholding.com.cn/

中国学生如果说高考的时候考了个状元,而后又按照现在的市场发展趋势,带有一点投机色彩,或者说带有更多的市场因素的话,国外的学生其实并不这样。美国经济不景气的情况下,建筑师很难找工作,对吧?建筑师已经不是他们那儿最容易找工作的工作之一了。又不容易找工作,又要花很多钱,还要学五年,还要非常苦,那为什么还有那么多人去?很多人是把它真的当成一个自己的爱好、自己的一份事业去做。

所以我想在这个层面上,可以区别出来。无论你经济发展到什么样的程度,这样一个职业是会随着市场的变化而变化;但很大的一部分层面上,也表明了建筑师这样一个行业在社会里边存在的必要性。很多年轻人执着地愿意去学建筑学,其实我想,他们也是冲着建筑学是这样一个融合了科学、技术、文化、艺术为一体的一门学问。他们喜欢它、迷恋它,才去这样学。所以你说有一部分人走了,走了的这部分人我觉得挺好。他们可能自己真的想明白了,自己一开始的选择完全是随着市场去的。市场不好,自己转向,这个是再正常不过的事了。

Q6:
If you are going to do project on Mars, how do you plan to convert Mars for human being?

如果要去火星上做项目, 你会选择如何改造火星?

Actually Mars brings more of a puzzle. I think it is more because mankind use thousands of years to evolve in order to fit into our environment. If we move to Mars, are we going to adapt to the environment on Mars, or are we going to convert the Martian environment to make it livable for mankind? I believe this is a critical question

From ecological point of view, what is the ecology on Mars? Then there comes a more interesting topic. That is, the ecology conditions on different planets would be different. For example, within the universe, what is the ecology condition on the earth? The ecological civilization, ecological sustainable development that we talk about today both refer to the ecology on the earth. So for other planets in the universe besides the earth, on the Moon, Mars, and even some other life-bearing planet, what are their ecological environments look like? This is actually worth exploring.

Increasingly we don’t believe in the old saying “Man will conquer the nature”. So I think it’s absolutely impossible and unnecessary to say that we need to move onto Mars to build Mars, to transform Mars into a planet that is livable for today’s human being on the earth. I don’t think it is very probable.

Some would say, let’s build another environment like the earth on Mars, and we could cover it with a big dome or something. However, will this affect the existing ecological environment on Mars? So, if we want to build development on Mars, the primary task is to figure out this question. To copy an earth or whatever planet, or what kind of planet, is one thing. To develop Mars is another thing. First of all, it is important to make sure what kind of living condition we would like to have on Mars.

I’m not sure whether it is programming. Programming may be too cross-border in this case. In my understanding, there would be more researches on Mars. What is the aim of going to Mars? Immigration is one kind, and doing scientific researches is another. Different purposes will definitely bring about different operation modes and usage modes. So we have to be clear about the purpose. To prove that mankind have been on Mars, just like the idea of “Mars Rescue”, or to do researches on Mars, or to emigrate the whole human race onto Mars, these are all different. So if you want to answer this question, first you need to get a clear idea of the three premises.

火星上其实更多的是一种困惑吧。我觉得更多地在于,人类千百年来演化到今天,他是适应这个环境的。我们到火星上去,是要想办法让人适应火星的环境呢,还是我们去改造火星的环境来适应今天呢?这个我觉得是一个本质的问题。

如果从生态的角度而言,火星的生态是个什么生态?那么就提到了一个更有意思的话题,就是说当在不同的星球上,比如说我们在整个宇宙里面,我们在地球村,地球村的这个生态是个什么样?我们说今天的生态文明,生态可持续发展,指的是我们地球村的生态。那么在地球村之外,在浩瀚的宇宙里边,月球、火星,甚至于还有其它的带有生命的,或者说生命可以遗存下来的星球上,他们的生态环境是个什么样子?其实这一点是值得研究的。

当然我们现在越来越不相信那句话,叫“人定胜天”。所以我觉得完全不可能也没有必要说我们到火星上去,去改造火星,把火星建造成一个适宜今天在地球上的人生活的状态。我并不认为这件事情是特别的有可能。

一来说我们到那儿去再建一个跟地球一样的环境,我们用一个大罩子给罩起来或者说怎么怎么样。从另外一个角度来讲,是不是对火星本身的生态环境也会有所影响?所以,如果说要到那边去做的话,可能我觉得要做的事情就是需要搞清楚这个问题。如果说复制一个地球,哪怕复制一个星球,复制一个什么样的,那是另一回事。说要到火星上去做这个项目,我觉得可能先要想明白,说我们到那儿是一种什么样的生存状态。

至于是不是策划,我也说不太清楚,这策划可能就是太跨界了。因为火星在我理解中是这么一种状态,可能在那里科研的成分会多一点。我们到那儿去的目的是个什么样的?移民是一种,或者说是做科研是另一种。所以目的不一样,一定会带来最终你的运作方式和使用方式的不同,所以当然也要说清楚了。如果像“火星救援”这个概念,我只是到那儿去表明我这人到那儿去了那么一下,和我真的要在那儿短暂地停留一段时间做科研,和我把人类整体移民到那边去,那是不同的。所以你要想回答这个问题,先要把前面这三个问题搞清楚。

The GARLICer

Interview

Zhangkan Zhou
Siyang Jing

Editor

Shuke
Yumeng
Dawei
Wen Zhang (Web)
Yanqi Cai (Web)

Join the discussion 89 Comments

Leave a Reply