【珍藏资料】北京宪章-中英文

北京宪章（英文）

BEIJING CHARTER
Presented at the XX Congress of the UIA, Beijing, 23-26 June 1999
Professor Wu Liangyong


On the eve of the new millennium, we architects from all nations of the world gather in Beijing, an ancient capital of the Orient, for the 20th Congress which celebrates the year of Jubilee for the International Union of Architects.
The present is born of the past, and yet the future rests with the present. We are here to reflect on the past, to account for the present, and ultimately to formulate a conscious plan of action for a better and liveable human habitat of the 21st century.



The world's geographical distances have shrunk, although the regional disparities are growing. Yet this age has endowed all of us with a common mission. It requires us to come to terms with the present, face the challenges, develop a holistic thinking and co-ordinate our efforts.


1 COMING TO TERMS WITH OUR CENTURIES
1.1 The 20th century: unparalleled construction and destruction
The 20th century has seen unprecedented magnificence and progress, and also incomparable calamity and confusion.



The 20th century has enriched the history of architecture in its unique manner: architects have played an admirable role in the reconstruction that followed the two world wars; technical and artistic innovations on a massive scale have introduced fine examples of design to the populous like never before.



But, this is not to deny that much of the built environment is still in a deeply unsatisfactory state. The very survival of humankind is under threat amidst squandering of the world's natural and cultural heritage. In affluent regions, redevelopment was often to become destruction by construction; in the poorer areas, pauperised masses are struggling to build their own cities of tomorrow.



Over the past century, the world has turned into a very different place. Yet one thing remains the same: we architects are again at a cross roads as a world profession.


1.2 The 21st century: a turning point
The diversity and complexity of the world has created much confusion; yet it is but part of the eternal process of change. The present century has seen remarkable reform and development in politics, economics, technology, and society, and the resurgence of human ideas. In the coming century, the pace of transformation is expected to accelerate, though its direction may be even harder to tell.



In the coming century, the coexistence of globalisation and pluralism will bring to a head the conflicts and the contradictions that characterise our age. On the one hand, modern means of communication have brought into close contact diverse cultures and traditions; global integration of production, finance and technology continues to dominate decision making. On the other hand, the gap between the rich and the poor is widening at an alarming rate; regional strife and financial uncertainties cast a sinister shadow upon the human habitat.



Whilst we should not take on tasks outside our professional remit, it would be both irresponsible and foolish to ignore the torrent of social and cultural change that is redefining the scope of the architectural profession. A conscious reconsideration of the role of 21st century architecture calls for our enthusiasm, strength and courage.


2 THE CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE
2.1 Interwoven questions
Nature's revenge
The industrial revolution unleashed tremendous human power, yet many a triumph over nature was achieved at a harrowing cost. The past century has seen population explosion, encroachment of farm land and deterioration of water, air and land resources. Environmental crises impinge on the very existence of humankind.



We do not know enough about the ecosystem, yet ecological disasters have revealed its fragile confines. From a historical point of view, we do not own the world that we live in: we simply have it on loan from our children. In what state shall we hand over town and country to our children? In what way can an architect contribute to the future of human civilisation through planning and design?



Overwhelming urbanisation
To better their lives, people congregate in the city, where science, technology and culture have brought about productivity that had never been foreseen. The 20th century has seen the brightest lights, so far, of metropolitan life. Nevertheless, the century ahead is the true urban era as, for the first time in history, urban dwellers will outnumber those who live in traditional rural ways.



Yet, hardly had the slums been demolished, did the cities see the resurgence of an underclass. Segregation of the rich and the poor, congestion of traffic and land use, and persistence of noise and emissions have worsened in cities large and small. Can our cities survive? We build the cities; yet why do we feel so powerless when we attempt to make any change? In what way can we shape the urban habitat, as it shapes us at the same time? Will the traditional concepts survive in the cities of the next century?



Technology as a double-edged sword
In the past century modern technology increased productivity to a degree never before experienced. New materials, new structures and new equipment have provided unique opportunities for the designers of the 20th century. Modern means of communication have brought the diverse cultures into close contact.



Technology has led mankind to a new cross roads, yet we are still in the process of harnessing its power and potential. Technology modifies the traditional relationships between man and nature, and thus constantly challenges the existing norms of life styles and values. In what way can humankind derive benefits from technology, whilst avoiding the harm of which it is shown to be capable?



Genius loci in default
The culture of architecture comes from a local accumulation of history. It manifests itself among the built forms and in day-to-day living, exerting a voiceless influence on the experience and behaviour of the inhabitants. In a sense, it is the soul of our cities, towns and villages.



However, globalisation of technology has made people more and more separated from their land. Standardised commercial production interrupts the evolution of local built forms. Traditional design techniques are confronted. Local identities fade away. What contribution can an architect make to bring back the soul of cities and towns which characterised them during the past centuries?


2.2 A common theme, a common future
The challenges we face are multifaceted and overwhelming. They are in fact the embodiment of complex social, political, economic and cultural processes at levels both local and global. Our discussion must not stop at the mere manifestation of such processes. Rather, an effective solution only comes from a thorough understanding of the dialectic nature of the forces which are shaping our built environment today.



The search for effective solutions at a global level is supported by our common aspirations for a sustainable future on this planet. Our world is an interdependent world. The future prospects of one nation to a large extent rest on the future of other nations. By the same token, the future of architecture depends on an understanding and assimilation of the achievements of other disciplines and professions. It is this common theme that will bring us together to lay out a common future in the 21st century.


3 TOWARDS AN INTEGRAL ARCHITECTURE
During the past 50 years, the architects of the world have met to debate over a large number of issues. These debates have much furthered our understanding in all branches of architecture. It is therefore appropriate to review the progress so far and redefine the limits, the contents, and the organisation of our discipline and profession.


3.1 The theoretical premises
Over the centuries the role of an architect is constantly modified to suit the needs and requirements of its time. Where traditional methods are shown to be inadequate, new approaches are developed to take their place. Yet without exception, each redefinition pushes the boundary of architecture outwards for a wider coverage, as well as inwards for higher degrees of specialisation in the component parts. The 20th century is perhaps the most exemplary in this regard.



A wider coverage of its contents and finer degrees of specialisation have empowered the 20th century architect with unprecedented professional opportunities and potential, yet at a personal level, an expanding profession with growing specialisation can seem elephantine. In a sense, the architects' Tower of Babel appears to have fallen: it is increasingly difficult for one architect to grasp the expertise of a fellow colleague; although the body of knowledge has grown collectively, the outlook of any single designer tends to become paradoxically narrow and fragmented. The specialist expertise is brought together through financial ties and managerial skills, rather than a coherent intellectual framework. As a result, the role of an architect continues to be marginalised in the decision making over the human habitat today.



From the point of view of an architect, his or her ability to propose creative design solutions depends critically on the intellectual and professional spheres he or she commands. Narrow and fragmented individual outlooks cannot be made to work, however wonderfully the individual designers are managed externally. Nevertheless, any given person cannot and should not attempt to master the whole body of knowledge of our profession. Quo vadis?



Classical Chinese philosophers went to great pains to pinpoint the differences between methodology (alternatively translated as Dao or Tao) which concerns an intellectual framework, and methods (Fa) which deal with specific techniques. It is useful to draw on their wisdom in this matter. Whatever professional talents, expertise, or preferences an architect may have, these techniques can only realise their true value when guided by a larger, intellectual perspective. An architect may work in a specialised area by choice or chance, yet he or she must not lose sight of the profession as a whole and of the vast sphere of knowledge which is potentially at his or her disposal.



Past and contemporary masters have shown how their understanding of the Dao of architecture has helped them to achieve magnificent heights in design and planning. However although such understanding could be regarded as a luxury enjoyed by the masters in the past, it will increasingly become goods of necessity for all architects in the age of information explosion. In the rapidly expanding professional universe, an intellectual orientation that organises the body of knowledge and expertise and relates architecture to the wider processes that give shape to the built environment, is paramount.



So what does this methodology contain?


3.2 A fusion of architecture, landscape architecture and city planning
The professional identity of an architect in the wider world is focused on the built forms that are ultimately created.



Basically, the general theory of architecture is an integration of architecture, landscape and urban planning with the core of city design. However, the increasing scale and scope of modern development provide architects with great opportunities to deal with architecture, landscape and urban planning as a whole. This tripartite composition enables the designer to search for solutions within a wider sphere.


3.3 Architecture as a process for human habitat
Metabolism is one of the fundamental rules in the development of human settlement. Architecture is the discipline that deals with human settlement, so it should regard the physical objectives of construction as a system of circulation. The life cycle of buildings should be regarded as a fundamental factor of design.



The life cycle of buildings not only includes the construction and running phases, but also includes processes aiming at lower resource costs, less pollution and grey energy consumption, recycling as much as possible, and reformation of environments.



On the aspect of urban settlement, factors such as planning, architectural design, historical preservation, adapted re-use of old buildings, urban rehabilitation, city renewal and reconstruction, utilisation of underground facilities, etc., should be integrated into a dynamic circulation system. This is a system for better architecture in the modern space-times of architecture. It is also an exemplification of the sustainable approach in urban planning and architecture design.


3.4 Multiple technology rooted in indigenous cultures
To utilise technological innovation to its full extent is one of our basic tasks in the coming century.



Firstly, in the 21st century, various presentations of technology will co-exist, based on the fact that there are regional contrasts and imbalance in the development of technology.



Theoretically, it is necessary to adopt new technology from foreign sources and integrate it with local conditions to improve the local technological standards. If architects themselves can realise the ecological challenges mankind is facing, and adopt advanced technology creatively, then the buildings they design are bound to be sustainable and healthy.

Because of technological complexity, low-tech, light-tech and high-tech are different in scale and level. For each project, the choice of technological approach should be made according to the specific conditions. In other words, for the progress of every building project, different forms of technology should be integrated, utilised and improved.

As for the utilisation of technology, considerations on humanist, ecological, economic and regional aspects should be integrated. Different levels of innovation should be carried out in order to improve the level of architectural creativity. Many theoretical and practical examples are available today, and it is obvious that much more progress will be made in the next century.

Secondly, today's progress includes both science and technology. The development of technology must be related to human factors. As Alvar Aalto said, "the preservation of difference should also be strengthened. The development of architecture should be rooted in the regional background, and take the local conditions as its starting point in the search for better solutions. Based upon this, foreign ideas can be integrated into our own. This would finally lead to a human society showing both integrity and variety".


3.5 Architecture of harmony instead of monotony
Architecture is by definition a regional product: buildings serve, and derive their significance from local contacts. Regional architecture is yet by no means a mere product of a region's past. Rather, it is derived from the concerns for its future. The significance of our profession lies in the creative designs that bridge the past and the future. We use our professional knowledge to guide an informed choice amongst the options that are increasingly opened to local communities. "The sharing of experiences among various countries and geographical regions must never be seen as a simple transfer of ready-made solutions, but as a means of stimulating local imaginations".

The localisation of modern architecture and the modernisation of local architecture is a common approach to be shared by all in the progress toward architectural proliferation.


3.6 Art for the sake of the built environment
After the industrial revolution, urbanisation of increasing speed resulted in dramatic changes in urban structure and architecture forms. The physical environment has been led to anarchy. We should try to find order in the anarchy, to find beauty and harmony in the chaos.

To consider the relationship between architecture and its environments with traditional design methods is far from adequate. We have to look at architecture from a massive and urban view. Architectural thoughts should shift from single buildings to building complexes, to urban and rural regional planning. The holistic relationship with nature is another important factor that should be considered.

In the histories of all cultures, architecture became the ultimate manifestation of inseparable parts in fine arts, such as sculpture, painting, craftsmanship, etc. This should be one of our goals.


3.7 Architecture for all
In many traditional societies, the architect played the part of master co-ordinator of all trades that built in towns and countries. Yet today, by the large majority, the architect is perceived as a style freak, irrelevant to real decision making. It is more appropriate to view architecture in its full socio-political context, rather than in the narrow techno-aesthetic sense of the term. Only in this way can architects "participate at all levels of decision making as professionals."

As social servers, architects should expand their professional services and visions. They should take an active part in social reform with a basic understanding of society and respect for the people. It is an architect's destiny to make everyone a home, to provide shelter for the poor and the homeless. The freedom of architectural design is by no means an excuse for ignorance of social responsibilities.

Architecture is a science that serves the people. A society-wide understanding and participation in architecture would be very helpful in making better environments. Not only should the end users participate in the design process, but so should the decision-makers; support and policies from governments would be especially effective.

The cultural and architectural education of a decision-maker is a determining factor for the quality of a building project. In this sense, the understanding of architecture should be emphasised in every society.


3.8 Learning architecture
The progress of future architecture lies in the progress of architectural education, which results in the growth of a new generation of architects. Architects and architecture students must have a responsible professional spirit and a comprehension of environmental ethics. They shall work for the benefit of society as a whole, try to carry out strategies that contribute to the overall quality of human settlements.

Architectural education must expand its concerns. An open system of knowledge should be set up. It is the goal of architectural education to make a student able to learn, to research, to express and to organise. Each architectural student should be educated to be open-minded, to utilise new technological advances, and to create on the basis of professional knowledge.

Architectural education is a life-long task. The education of environmental awareness should start at kindergarten, and continue in middle school, professional schools and adult education facilities.


3.9 Towards an integral architecture
Half a century later, it is necessary to re-emphasise words of Gropius, "My idea of the architect [is] as a co-ordinator, whose business is to unify various formal, technical, social and economic problems that arise in connection with buildings ... I believe that new architecture is to dominate a far more comprehensive sphere than building means today. And from the investigation of the details, we shall advance towards an ever-wider and profounder conception of design as one great cognate whole."

The development of architecture asks for both analysis and integration. But now, the focus should be on integration. The introduction of a general theory of architecture does not demand of architects that they be professionals with all abilities (which is impossible), but requires them to have better professional knowledge, a better philosophical way of thinking, in order to be better problem-solvers and theory developers.

We are facing a world full of contradictions. The contrasts between globalisation and localisation, internationalism and nationalism, universality and individuality, flexibility and stability, etc., are forever increasing. The future development of architecture needs our understanding and processing of these contradictions. Any contemporary building project can be regarded as a collection of the contradictions above. Every architect has to deal with these contradictions professionally, to decide between freedom and rules, art and science, traditional and modern, heritage and innovation, technology and place, assimilation and diversity, etc. The general theory of architecture is a dialectical process of these contradictions.


4 All pathways for a common destiny
The objective world is an interwoven complex of change and variety. It is neither possible, nor desirable to search for identical technical solutions. For centuries, holistic thinking has been the corner stone of the eastern philosophies. Today it is becoming a common heritage and blessing of the global village: "For all the means in the world there is but one end, for all the concerns there is but one destiny." Our concerns may lead us to the following conclusions:

Firstly, seeking the point of integration in the world of interwoven complexity. Many ancient Chinese philosophical and artistic sayings emphasised the importance of integration and holistic thinking.

20th century architecture has celebrated its triumphs and miracles, but these are mere fragments of history. To lead the architecture of the new era to a common destiny, we should try to find those fragments in history that made unique contributions, that made milestones in human civilisation. With the integration of these fragments, and returning to our basic concerns, we may find the spirit of a new architecture, the doctrine of a new era, and the opportunity for new creations in the 21st century.

Secondly, different ways lead to common destinations.

Given the regional contrasts, every nation should have its own particular way of development. Only with these "different ways", can human civilisation continue in a sustainable manner.

As the old western saying goes, "all roads lead to Rome". There may be no common roads, but there is a common future. That future when all mankind lives in his blessed environment.

Therefore, an architect should devote his life to the pursuance of humanism, quality, capability and creativity. It is his responsibility to build a better environment with the limited natural resources on this planet.

At the turn of the century, we have grasped the theme of the new era, and have found out the basic contradictions, and are reaching for the concurrence of our agenda. It should be seen that the beginning of the new century is only a spot in the continuous thread of civilisation. The research we are doing today is just a beginning of the co-ordination by mankind for our common goal, a beginning that is supposed to make changes.

We look forward with caution and optimism to the historic duty of building the 21st century human habitat. Yet, we are set for a new exploration for common theme and methodology. From this standpoint, we look forward to the future and to the mission that will reshape the future.



Prof. Wu Liangyong
School of Architecture
Tsinghua University
Beijing 100084,
P.R.China

北京宪章

(国际建筑师协会第20届世界建筑师大会1999年5月在北京通过)

在世纪交会、千年转折之际,我们来自世界各个国家和地区的建筑师,聚首在东方的古都北京,举行国际建协成立半年世纪以来的第20次大会。

未来由现在开始缔造,现在从历史中走来,我们总结昨天的经验与教训,剖析今天的问题与机遇,以期21世纪时能够更为自觉地把我们的星球──人类的家园──营建得更加美好、宜人。

与会者认为,新世纪的特点和我们的行动纲领是:变化的时代,纷繁的世界,共同的议题,协调的行动。

1、认识时代



1.1 20世纪:“大发展”和“大破坏”

20世纪既是人类从未经历过的伟大而进步的时代,又是史无前例的患难与迷惘的时代。

20世纪以其独特的方式丰富了建筑史:大规模的技术和艺术革新造就了丰富的建筑设计作品;在两次世界大战后医治战争创伤及重建中,建筑师的卓越作用意义深远。

然而,无可否认的是,许多建筑环境难尽人意;人类对自然、以及对文化遗产的破坏已经危及其自身的生存;始未料及的“建设性破坏”屡见不鲜;“许多明天的城市正由今天的贫民所建造”。

100年来,世界已经发生了翻天覆地的变化,但是有一点是相同的,即建筑学和建筑职业仍处在发展的十字路口。

1.2 21世界:“大转折”

时光轮转,众说纷纭,但认为我们处在永恒的变化中则是共识。令人瞩目的政治、经济、社会改革和技术发展、思想文化活跃等,都是这个时代的特征。在下一个世纪里,变化的进程将会更快。

在新的世纪里,全球化和多样化的矛盾将继续存在,并且更加尖锐。如今,一方面,生产、金融、技术等方面的全球化趋势日渐明显,全球意识成为发展中的一个共同取向:另一方面,地域差异客观存在,国家之间的贫富差距正在加大,地区冲突和全球经济动荡如阴云笼罩。

在这种错综复杂的、矛盾的情况下,我们不能不看到,现代交通和通讯手段致使多样的文化传统紧密相连,综合乃至整合作为新世纪的主题正在悄然兴起。

对立通常引起人们的觉醒,作为建筑师,我们无法承担那些明显处于我们职业以外的任务,但是不能置奔腾汹涌的社会、文化变化的潮流于不顾。“每一代人都...... 必须从当代角度重新阐述旧的观念”。我们需要激情、力量和勇气,直面现实,自觉思考21世纪建筑学的角色。



2 面临挑战



2.1 繁杂的问题

环境祸患

工业革命后,人类在利用和改造自然的过程中,取得了骄人的成就,同时也付出了高昂的代价。如今,生命支持资源──空气、水和土地──日益退化,环境祸患正在威胁人类。而我们的所作所为仍然与基本的共识相悖,人类正走在与自然相抵触的道路上。

人类尚未揭开地球生态系统的谜底,生态危机却到了千钧一发的关头。用历史的眼光看,我们并不拥有自身所居住的世界,仅仅是从子孙处借得,暂为保管罢了。我们将把一个什么样的城市和乡村交给下一代?在人类的生存和繁衍过程中,人居环境建设起着关键的作用,我们建筑师又如何作出自身的贡献?

混乱的城市化

人类为了生存得更加美好,聚居于城市,集中并弘扬了科学文化、生产资料和生产力。在20世纪,大都市的光彩璀璨夺目;在未来的世纪里,城市居民的数量将有史以来首次超过农村居民,成为名副其实的“城市时代”,城市化是我们共同的趋向。

然而,城市化也带来了诸多难题和困扰。在20世纪中叶,人口爆炸、农用土地被吞噬和退化、贫穷、交通堵塞等城市问题开始恶化。半个世纪过去了,问题却更为严峻。现行的城市化道路是否可行?“我们的城市能否存在?”城镇是由我们所构建的建筑物组成的,然而当我们试图对它们作些改变时,为何又如此无能为力?在城市住区影响我们的同时,我们又怎样应对城市住区问题?传统的建筑观念能否适应城市化趋势?

技术“双刃剑”

技术是一种解放的力量。人类经数千年的积累,终于使科技在近百年来释放了空前的能量。科教发展、新材料、新结构和新设备的应用,创造了20世纪特有的建筑形式。如今,我们仍然处在利用技术的力量和潜能的进程中。

技术的建设力量和破坏力量在同时增加。技术发展改变了人和自然的关系,改变了人类的生活,进而向固有的价值观念挑战。如今技术已经把人类带到一个新的分叉点。人类如何才能安渡这个分叉点?怎样对待和利用技术?

建筑魂的失落

文化是历史的积淀,存留于城市和建筑中,融会在人们的生活中,对城市的建造、市民的观念和行为起着无形的影响,是城市和建筑之魂。

技术和生产方式的全球化带来了人与传统地域空间的分离,地域文化的多样性和特色逐渐衰微、消失;城市和建筑物的标准化和商品化致使建筑特色逐渐隐退。建筑文化和城市文化出现趋同现象和特色危机。由于建筑形式的精神意义植根于文化传统,建筑师如何因应这些存在于全球和地方各层次的变化?建筑创作受地方传统和外来文化的影响有多大?

如今,建筑学面临众多纷繁复杂的问题,它们都互相关联、互为影响、难解难分,以上仅举其要,但也不难看出,建筑学需要再思考。

2.2 共同的选择

我们所面临的多方面的挑战,实际上,是社会、政治、经济过程在地区和全球层次上交织的反映。要解决这些复杂的问题,最重要的是必须有一个辩证的考察。面对上述种种问题,人类逐步认识到“只有一个地球”,1989年5月明确提出“可持续发展”的思想,如今这一思想正逐渐成为人类社会的共同追求,可持续发展含义广泛,涉及到政治、经济、社会、技术、文化、美学等各个方面的内容。建筑学的发展是综合利用多种要素以满足人类住区需要的完整现象,走可持续发展之路是以新的观念对待21世纪建筑学的发展,这将带来又一个新的建筑运动,包括建筑科学技术的进步和艺术的创造等,更具体地说:

生态观──正视生态困境,加强生态意识;

经济观──力臻人居环境建设活动与经济发展良性互动;

科技观──充分利用科学技术,推动经济发展和社会繁荣;

社会观──关怀最广大的人民群众,重视社会发展的整体利益;

文化观──积极推动建筑文化和艺术的创造、发展和繁荣。

任何事物都充满着矛盾,新世纪建筑学的发展必须根据特定的时间、地点条件,统筹兼顾,妥善处理这些诸多方面,求得暂时的统一,并不断加以调整。为此,有必要对未来建筑学的体系加以系统的思考。



3 从传统建筑学走向广义建筑学



在过去的几十年里,世界建筑师已经聚首讨论了许多话题,集中我们在20世纪里对建筑

学的各种理解,可以发现,对建筑学有一个广义的、整合的定义是新世纪建筑发展的关键。

3.1 三个前提

历史上,建筑学所包括的内容、建筑业的任务以及建筑师的职责总是随时代而拓展,不断变化。传统的建筑学已不足以解决当前的矛盾,21世纪建筑学的发展不能局限在狭小的范围内。

强调综合,并在综合的前提下予以新的创造,是建筑学的核心观念。然而,20世纪建筑学技术、知识日益专业化,其将我们“共同的问题”分裂成个别单独论题的做法,使得建筑学的前景趋向狭窄和破碎。新世纪的建筑学的发展,除了继续深入各专业的分析研究外,有必要重新认识综合的价值,将各方面的碎片整合起来,从局部走向整体,并在此基础上进行新的创造。

目前,一方面人们提出了“人居环境”的概念,综合考虑建设问题;另一方面建筑师在建设中的作用却在不断被削弱。要保持建筑学在人居环境建设中主导专业的作用,就必须面向时代和社会,加以展扩,而不能抱残守缺,株守固有专业技能。这是建筑学的时代任务,是维系自身生存的基础。

3.2 基本理论的建构

中国先哲云“一法得道,变法万千”,这说明设计的基本哲理(“道”)是共通的,形式的变化(“法”)是无穷的。近百年来,建筑学术上,特别是风格、流派纷呈,莫衷一是,可以说这是舍本逐末。为今之计,宣回归基本原理,作本质上的概括,并随机应变,在新的条件下创造性地加以发展。

回归基本原理宜从关系建筑发展的若干基本问题、不同侧面,例如聚居、地区、文化、科技、经济、艺术、政策法规、业务、教育、方法论等,分别探讨;以此为出发点,着眼于汇“时间一空间一人间”为一体,有意识地探索建筑若干方面的科学时空观:

─从“建筑天地”走向“大千世界”(建筑的人文时空观)

─“建筑是地区的建筑”(建筑的地理时空观)

─“提高系统生产力,发挥建筑在发展经济中的作用”(建筑的技术经济时空观)

─“发扬文化自尊,重视文化建设”(建筑的文化时空观)

─“创造美好宜人的生活环境”(建筑的艺术时空观)

......

广义建筑学学术建构的任务繁重而艰巨,需要全球建筑师的共同努力,共同谱写时代的新篇章。

3.3 三位一体:走向建筑学一地景学一城市规划学的融合

建筑学与更广阔的世界的辩证关系最终集中在建筑的空间组合与形式的创造上。“......建筑学的任务就是综合社会的、经济的、技术的因素,为人的发展创造三维形式和合适的空间。”

广义建筑学,就其学科内涵内说,是通过城市设计的核心作用,从观念上和理论基础上把建筑学、地景学、城市规划学的要点整合为一。

在现代发展中,规模和视野日益加大,建设周期一般缩短,这为建筑师视建筑、地景和城市规划为一体提出了更切实的要求,也带来更大的机遇。这种三位一体使设计者有可能在更广阔的范围内寻求问题的答案。

3.4 循环体系:着眼于人居环境建造的建筑学

新陈代谢是人居环境发展的客观规律,建筑学着眼于人居环境的建设,就理所当然地把建设的物质对象看作是一个循环的体系,将建筑生命周期(LIFE-CYCLE)作为设计要素之一。

建筑物的生命周期不仅结合建筑的生产与使用阶段,还要基于:最小的耗材、少量的“灰色能源”(“GREY ENERGY”)消费和污染排放、最大限度的循环使用和随时对环境加以运营、整治。

对城镇住区来说,宜将规划建设、新建筑的设计、历史环境的保护、一般建筑的维修与改建、古旧建筑合理地重新使用(ADAPTED REUSE)、城市和地区的整治(REHABILITATION)、更新（renewal）与重建(RECONSTRUCTION)、以及地下空间的利用和地下基础设施的持续发展等,纳入一个动态的、生生不息的循环体系之中。这是一个在时空因素作用下,建立对环境质量不断提高的建设体系,也是可持续发展在建筑与城市建设中的体现。

3.5 技术与人文相结合,及多层次的技术建构

当今的文化包括了科学与技术,充分发挥技术对人类社会文明进步应有的促进作用,这将成为我们在新世界的重要使命。同时,我们也应该注意到:

第一,技术的发展必须考虑人的因素,正如阿尔瓦·阿尔托(aLVAR aALTO)所说:“只有把技术功能主义的内涵加以扩展,使其甚至覆盖心理领域,它才有可能是正确的。这是实现建筑人性化的唯一途径。

第二,由于不同地区的客观建设条件千差万别,技术发展并不平衡,技术的文化背景不尽一致,21世纪将是多种技术并存的时代。

从理论上讲,重视高新技术的开拓在建筑学发展中所起的作用,积极而有选择地把国际先进技术与国家或地区的实际相结合,推动此时此地技术的进步,这是非常必要的。如果建筑师能认识到人类面临的生态挑战,创造性地运用先进的技术,满足了建筑经济、实用和美观的要求,那么,这样的建筑物将是可持续发展的。

从技术的复杂性来看,低技术(lOW-TECH)、轻型技术(lIGHT-TECH)、高技术(hIGH-TECH)各不相同,并且差别很大,因此每一个设计项目都必须选择适合的技术路线,寻求具体的整合的途径;亦即要根据各地自身的建设条件,对多种技术加以综合利用、继承、改进和创新。

在技术应用上,结合人文的、生态的、经济的、地区的观点等,进行不同程度的革新,推动新的建筑艺术的创造。目前不少理论与实践的创举已见端倪,可以预期,21世纪将会有更大的发展。

3.6 文化多元:建立“全球一地区建筑学”

全球化和多元化是一体之两面,随着全球各文化──包括物质的层面与精神的层面──之间同质性的增加,对差异的坚持可能也会相对增加。建筑学问题和发展植根于本国、本区域的土壤,必须结合自身的实际情况,发现问题的本质,从而提出相应的解决办法;以此为基础,吸收外来文化的精华,并加以整合,最终建立一个“和而不同”的人类社会。

建筑学是地区的产物,建筑形式的意义来源于地方文脉,并解释着地方文脉。但是,这并不意味着地区建筑学只是地区历史的产物。恰恰相反,地区建筑学更与地区的未来相连。我们职业的深远意义就在于运用专业知识,以创造性的设计联系历史和将来,使多种取向中并未成型的选择更接近地方社会。“不同国度和地区之间的经验交流,不应简单地认为是一种预备的解决方法的转让,而是激发地方想象力的一种手段。”

“现代建筑的地区化,乡土建筑的现代化,殊途同归,推动世界和地区的进步与丰富多彩。”

3.7 整体的环境艺术

工业革命后,由于作为建设基础的城市化速度很快,城市的结构与建筑形式有了很大的变化,物质环境俨然从秩序走向混沌。我们应当乱中求序,从混沌中追求相对的整体的协调美和“秩序的真谛”。

用传统的建筑概念或设计方式来考虑建筑群及其与环境的关系已经不合时宜。我们要用群体的观念、城市的观念看建筑;从单个建筑到建筑群的规划建设,到城市与乡村规划的结合、融合,以至区域的协调发展,都应当成为建筑学考虑的基本点,在成长中随时追求建筑环境的相对整体性及其与自然的结合。

在历史上,美术、工艺与建筑是互相结合、相辅组成的,随着近代建筑的发展,国际式建筑的盛行,美术、工艺与建筑又出现分离和复活。今天需要提倡“建筑、雕塑、绘画三位一体”,“一切造型艺术的最终目的是完整的建筑”,向着新建筑以及作为它不可分割的组成部分──雕塑、绘画、工艺、手工劳动重新统一的目标而努力。

3.8 全方位的教育

未来建筑事业的开拓、创造、以及建筑学术的发展寄望于建筑教育的发展与新一代建筑师的成长。建筑师、建筑学生首先要有高尚的道德修养和精神境界,提高环境道德与伦理,关怀社会整体利益,探讨建设良好的“人居环境”的基本战略。

建筑教育要重视创造性地扩大的视野,建立开放的知识体系──道德教育、智能教育、通才教育、管理教育等,蔚为体系。培养学生的自学能力、研究能力、表达能力,与组织管理能力,随时能吸取新思想,运用新的科学成就,发展、整合专业思想,创造新事物。

建筑教育是终身的教育。环境设计方面的教育是从学龄前教育到中小学教育,到专业教育的长期过程。

决策者的文化素质和对建筑的修养水平是设计优劣的关键因素之一,要加强全社会的建筑关注与理解。

3.9 全社会的建筑学

在许多传统社会的城乡建设中,建筑师起着不同行业总协调人的作用。然而,如今大多数建筑师每每只着眼于建筑形式,拘泥于其狭隘的技术──美学意义,越来越脱离真正的决策,这种现象值得注意。建筑学的发展要考虑到全面的社会─政治背景,只有这样,建筑师才能“作为专业人员参与所有层次的决策”。

建筑师作为社会工作者,要扩大职业责任的视野:理解社会,忠实于人民;广泛地参与社会活动;积极参与社会变革,努力使“住者有其屋”,包括向如贫穷者、无家可归者提供住房。职业的自由并不能降低建筑师的社会责任感。

建筑学是为人民服务的科学,要提高社会对建筑的共识和参与,共同保护与创造美好的生活与工作环境。其中包括使用者参与,也包括决策者参与,这主要集中体现在政府行为对建筑事业发展的支持与引导上。

3.10 广义建筑学的方法论

经过半个世纪的发展,重申格罗比乌斯(w.gROPIUS)的下列观念是必要的:“建筑师作为一个协调者,其工作是统一各种与建筑物相关的形式、技术、社会和经济问题,这个观点不可避免地对建筑功能的研究一步一步地从房屋引向街道,从街道到城镇,最后到更广阔的区域规划。我相信,新的建筑学将驾驭一个比如今单体建筑物更加综合的范围;我们将逐步地把个别的技术进步结合到一个更为宽广、更为深远的作为一个有机整体的设计概念中去。”

建筑学的发展必须分析与综合兼顾,但当前宜重在“整合”。提倡广义建筑学,并非要建筑师成为万事俱通的专家(这永远是不可能的),而是要求建筑师加强业务修养,具备广义的、综合的观念,从事哲学思维,针对现实存在的问题,能随时扩充知识,与有关专业合作,寻找新的结合点,解决问题,发展理论。

世界充满矛盾,例如全球化与地区化、国际和国家、普遍性与特殊性、灵活性与稳定性......未来建筑学理论与实践的发展有赖于我们善于分析、处理好这些矛盾;一些具体的建筑设计也无不是多种矛盾的交叉,例如规律与自由、艺术与科学、传统与现代、继承与创新、技术与场所、以及趋同与多样......广义建筑学就是在承认这些矛盾的前提下,努力辩证地对其加以处理的尝试。



4.基本结论:一致百虑 殊途同归



客观世界千头万绪,千变万化,我们无须也不可能求得某个一致的、技术性的结论。但是,如果我们能审时度势,冷静思考,则不难得出下列基本结论:

第一,在纷繁的世界中,探寻一致之点。

中国成语:“高屋建瓴”“兼容并包”“和则生物”以及中国山水画论“以大观小”等等,这些话内涵不尽一致,但其总的精神都是强调在观察和处理事物要整体思维,综合集成。

20世纪建筑学的成就史无前例,但是历史地看,只不过是长河之细流。要让新世纪建筑学百川归海,就必须把现有的成就整合起来,回归基本的理论,并以此为出发点,从时代的高度,发展基本理论,从事更伟大的创造。这是21世纪建筑学发展的共同追求。

第二,各循不同的道路,达到共同目标。

区域差异客观存在,对于不同的地区和国家,建筑学的发展必须探求适合自身条件的蹊径,即所谓的“殊途”。只有这样,人类才能真正地共生、可持续发展......。

西谚云“条条大路通罗马”没有同样的道路,但是可以走向共同的未来,即全人类安居乐业,享有良好的生活环境。

为此,建筑师要追求“人本”、“质量”、“能力”和“创造”......在有限的地球资源条件下,将广义的建筑学视野、整合的建筑学内容、融贯多学科的方法,作为综合创造的新的起点,建立一个更加美好、更加公平的人居环境。

时值世纪之交,我们认识到时代主旋律,捕捉到发展中的主要矛盾,努力在共同的议题中谋求共识,并在协调的实践中随时加以发展。应当看到,进入下一个世纪只是连续的社会、政治进程中的短暂的一刻。今天我们的探索可能还只是一个开始,一个寄期望于人类在总目标上协调行动的开始,一个在某些方面改弦易辙的伟大的开始。

21世纪人居环境建设任务庄严而沉重,但我们并不望而却步。无论面临着多少疑虑和困难,我们都将信心百倍,不失胆识而又十分审慎地迎接未来,创造未来!