从边缘出发

青锋/QING Feng

从边缘出发

Starting from the Periphery

青锋/QING Feng

在边缘……我们放弃了对不依靠任何参照行事的信仰，重新考虑地理条件与历史的补足性本质。

——阿尔瓦罗·西扎，《建筑文集》，1997

雅克·德里达在他的名篇《论文字学》中，试图解构西方思想体系中一直存在的中心优于边缘的二元结构。这一哲学批判实际上延续了15世纪神学家库萨的尼古拉所做的类似推论，为了维护神绝对性的至高无上，他只能放弃宇宙中心与边缘之分，从而破坏了亚里斯多德宇宙模型，为新科学的诞生扫除了部分阻碍。然而，跨越500年的努力并不足以动摇人们对中心的常识性认同。毕竟我们只能从自己的身体出发，渐次接触周围的事物。维护中心的优越性实际上出于原始的生存本能，这几乎是不容选择的。即使是在更大的范畴中，当身体的控制性退隐之后，也还有传统与既存体系在支持中心的权威。作为“中国人”，这种影响更为明显。“中国”的称呼，至少可以上溯到《尚书·梓材》篇，从那时开始，我们对国家与民族的认同就与中心/边缘的差异性相互关联。近40年来经济与政治实力的上升以及国家策略的制定，进一步强化了民众对中心性的渴望。无论承认与否，在不断取得成功的同时，我们的确面对越来越强烈的可能滑向中心的傲慢的危险。一种抗衡的方式是对边缘给予更多的关注，本期《世界建筑》就致力于这一方向，我们将要展现一个处于世界“边缘”的国家——智利的当代建筑。

将智利描绘为“边缘”显然会遭致批评，之所以要露出破绽是为了承认我们的无知。谈到这个国家时，我们想到的或许是复活节岛、麦哲伦海峡、前往南极旅游的中转地以及英超阿森纳球队的正选前锋，除此之外，所知甚少。它不仅是除了南极之外距离我们最远的大陆尽端，也从未在我们的知识体系与利益架构中扮演任何重要角色。“边缘”既是这个国家给我们的印象，也同样是描述我们自身贫乏认知的准确词汇。

从另一方面看，这一描绘也有一定的客观性，因为它也是很多智利人自身的看法。对于智利（Chile）国名来源的一种猜测是美洲原住民所称的“世界的尽头”，如果这种说法成立，无疑与“中国”的来源形成完整的互补。而对于智利知识分子而言，地理上的边缘仅仅是一个戏剧化的索引，将讨论者引向建筑话语体系中北半球对南半球的制约与忽视。在很长一段时间中，拉丁美洲仅仅被视为北方现代主义体系扩展和移植的一个范例，奥斯卡·尼迈耶与卢西奥·科斯塔在巴西的工作被当作现代主义普适性的证据而被纳入典型历史论述当中。仅仅是在最近一段时间，这一地区的建筑师与作品才开始得到更多的独立评价，保罗·达·洛查与斯米连·拉迪奇等新老两代建筑师获得广泛的国际声誉，西方主流评论体系也通过展览等形式来弥补对拉丁美洲的认知不足。智利人在这一潮流中有特殊的贡献，由戴维·阿萨埃尔与戴维·巴苏尔托创立的ArchDaily网站是近年发展最快的建筑网络媒体之一，拉丁美洲建筑师通过这一途径获得了更多被世界所了解的机会。有趣的是，这一网站的创立动机之一就是“边缘”对“主流”的反击，阿萨埃尔与巴苏尔托试图给予那些无法在主流媒体中获得发声机会的年轻建筑师应得的关注。今天，这种关怀已经惠及全球各地的“边缘”建筑师们。

On the periphery ... we abandon the belief in doing without references, and reconsider the complementary nature of Geography and History.

Álvaro Siza, Writings on Architecture, 1997

In his classic essay Of Grammatology, Jacques Derrida tried to deconstruct the long existing binary opposition of Center/Periphery, in which the center occupies a superior position. His philosophical critique actually echoed similar conjectures by Nicolas of Cusa, a 15th century philosopher, theologian, jurist, and astronomer. To ensure the absolute transcendence of God, Nicolas had to abandon the center/ periphery difference in the universe, thus undermining Aristotelian cosmology and sweeping aside certain obstacles for the birth of the new science. Efforts over the 500 years between Nicolas of Cusa and Derrida were not enough to destabilize the priority of the center in common sense. Perhaps this is because we can only start from our own body and reach out to touch things around us. Without any choice, it is thus intuitive for people to maintain the superiority of the center.

More broadly speaking, even when the human body is removed, , there are still many traditions and existing institutions which support the authority of the center. In China, these influences are quite apparent. The very name of the country in Chinese, Zhong Guo (the Middle Kingdom, translated literally) shows that privileging the center can be traced back at least to the ancient literature of ShangShu mostly from the Zhou Dynasty c. 1046 BC–256 BCE. Thus over 3,000 years understanding of our national identity has been connected with the difference between the center and the periphery. With the help of China's national strategy, our economic boom and our political rise during the past 40 years have all stimulated people's desire for even stronger centrality. Whether we deny it or not, in the shadow of one success after another, we face an ever stronger danger of slipping into the arrogance of a central stakeholder. To prevent this from happening, a counter move is to pay greater attention to the periphery. Thus this issue of World Architecture focuses on a country from China's periphery. We whould like to present the contemporary architecture of Chile.

To describe Chile as being on the periphery could easily expose us to criticism. The intention of such partial phraseology is to deliberately confront our ignorance. When we think of Chile, we think mostly of Easter Island, the Straits of Magellan, a transit point on a trip to Antarctica or Alexis Sanchez, the leading forward of Arsenal F.C.. We know very little about Chile as a country. Chile is not only antipodal to China on the globe, but it also a country of limited significance in our knowledge system and economic interests. On the one hand "periphery" describes our impression of Chile, on the other hand, it accurately illustrates our poor understanding of this region.

There may also be some objectivity behind the very name of the country, "Chile". Many Chileans use the term Chilli to refer themselves. At least, one interpretation of the etymology of Chile is the Mapuche or indigenous American word for "where the land ends". If this is indeed true, Chile constitutes an intriguing counter example to China the center, i.e. Chile the periphery.

For Chilean intellectuals, geographical marginality is a dramatic index introducing discussion of the dominance of the global north over the global south in architectural discourse. For a long period, Latin American architecture was regarded as an exemplification of the transplantation of Northern Modernism. Oscar Niemeyer (1907-2012) and Lúcio Costas (1902-1998) works in Brazil were treated as historical evidence demonstrating the universality of modern architecture. Only quite recently, have architects from the Latin America begun to acquire more independent acclaim. International recognition was given to architects like the Brazilian, Paulo Mendes da Rocha (1928- ) and the Chilean, Smiljan Radic (1965- ). And various exhibitions helped to enhance the reception of Latin American architecture in the West.

Chilean contributions to this rising tide is impressive.The ArchDaily website founded by David Assael and David Basulto is one of the most successful architecture websites in the world. With its help, Latin American architects have gained recognition throughout the world. Interestingly, one motivation for the foundation of ArchDaily is a counter fight of the periphery against the center. Assael and Basulto intended to give young architects publication opportunitiesthat were normally denied by main stream media. Today, their support has benefitted peripheral architects around the world.

It is still misleading to use the confrontation between center/periphery to explain the intentions of the Chilean architects appearing in this issue of World Architecture.The Parisian students of 1968 and the ArchDaily founded in 2006 (originally named Plataforma Arquitectura) shared the same dissatisfaction towards the dominant episteme. The former led to the end of the architecture department in École des Beaux-Arts, the latter led to the construction of a new institution; the former was eager to subvert or reverse the center/periphery difference, the latter lacked such ambition and rather saw the periphery as an appropriate starting point. The architects listed in this issue share the same non-aggressive and constructive ethos as Assael and Basulto.

For these architects, the periphery is not a competitor dreaming of replacing the center, but rather represents neighbouring people and places that have not been given sufficient attention. Their works shown here all focus on construction in this periphery zone. It is not hard to see, that all these works are public projects. They mostly benefit children, Native Americans and common urban citizens, all of whom have a less privileged status in society. Publicity and social concern constitute the main selection criteria. These projects epitomize the expansion of public projects in Chile. Constant economic progress and increasing social investment enable architects to jump out of the circle of elite private houses and render a deeper and wider service to the general public. It is wrong to regard Chile as a Utopia, but as Assael and Basulto mention, in the past 10 years, "profound reforms have helped ameliorate existing inequalities in education, healthcare and labor." In this extraordinary change, architects stand as a prominent positive factor.

The above discussions only touch on the architects' social stance. The quote of Álvaro Siza at the beginning of this essay can better generalize their design strategy. It could be called a "peripheral gesture." When you are not the dominant central agent who sets the rules and enforces them, naturally you will pay more respect to circumstances and limiting conditions thus Siza's emphasis on Geography and History. Projects in this issue of World Architecture clearly show such sensitivity. They all share respect for local climate, water and earth, housing tradition, urban fabric, historical architecture and craftsmanship. Humility is firmly established as a virtue.These projects may lack the celebrity effect of architecture highlighted by main stream media, but they clearly exemplify one main principle: Architecture does not serve the curiosity of a magazine reader, rather the works here serve a Mapuche community, a group of people threatened by flood, a group of wicker weavers, Catholics living in a slum and farmers enjoying a short rest in the field. Only these people living on the site and experiencing the climate change, only they value local life and culture, only they embody the collective memory. Behind Geography and History is the way of life of real users. When a single person is given such respect, whether it is center or periphery is no longer important.

This is the conclusion for which we aim at. Even if we acknowledge the animal instinct of protecting the center, it still can't be denied that there is something special in human beings – dignity. Emanuel Kant believed that one interpretation of human dignity is that everyone is treated as an end rather than a tool. This means we cannot establish the superiority of the center by denouncing others in the periphery. The respect of the other is the respect of the periphery, because every other is indeed periphery compared to our embodied self. This means, we need moral principles to restrict our animal instinct, such moral principles form our own dignity, as Kant argued.

In these Chilean works, we can substantially feel the ethical thickness. They represent not only the focus of a region, a group and a time, but also the fundamental principles of a discipline as well as a profession. Starting from the periphery, does not end in the conquest of the center. As Nicholas of Cusa and Jacques Derrida expected, breaking the center/periphery limitation is to open space for more possibilities, more comprehensive experiences, and a deeper understanding of ourselves and our buildings.

Our special thanks to Assael and Basulto, and their team from ArchDaily, who made this issue possible.□

然而，我们不应用边缘与中心的对抗来简单解释智利建筑师的意图。1968年的巴黎学生与2006年创始的ArchDaily（西语原名为Plataforma Arquitectura）都不满于传统主流体系的统治，但前者导向了巴黎美术学院建筑系的终结，而后者则专注于一个新体系的建设；前者急于颠覆或者翻转中心/边缘的差异性地位，而后者并无对抗的野心，反将边缘视为恰当的起点。本专辑中所收录的当代智利建筑作品均持有这样和缓的建设性心态。

对于这些建筑师而言，边缘不是企图取代中心的竞争者，而是身边未能受到足够重视的人与场所，他们的作品无一例外聚焦于这一边缘地带的建设。不难看出，入选作品均为公共建筑，绝大部分项目的受益者是孩子、原住民、城市平民等往往处于弱势的群体，公共性与社会关怀是项目选择上未加掩饰的标准。尽管只是少数几个案例，这些作品实际上是近年来智利不断增长的公共项目的缩影。持续的经济增长与社会投入使得建筑师能够摆脱精英私人住宅的项目限制，更广泛地影响大众的日常生活。将智利描绘为乌托邦是不现实的，但是如阿萨埃尔与巴苏尔托所写到的，过去10年智利社会中“教育、医疗和就业的不平等”得到了大幅的缓解，建筑师是这一显著改变中不容忽视的积极因素。

如果说上述讨论仅仅涉及了建筑师的社会立场的话，那么文首阿尔瓦罗·西扎的那句话可以用来概括这些建筑师的核心设计策略。这可以被称为一种“边缘姿态”，当你不是作为中心主导者制定规则并强硬推行的时候，自然会对各种周边条件有更多的尊重与妥协。因此，西扎说地理条件与历史成为身处边缘的建筑师们的合理选择。本专辑所收录的项目鲜明体现出这一敏感性，对当地气候、水土条件、住房传统、城市肌理、历史建筑、手工艺技术的尊重是这些项目所共有的特征，谦逊在这里成为一种美德。这些作品可能缺乏主流媒体所期盼的惊世骇俗，但是它们阐明了自己的原则，建筑服务的不是猎奇的读者，而是一个马普切部落、一群受到洪水威胁的市民、加工柳条的手工艺者、贫民区的天主教徒以及田间休息的农人。只有这些具体的人居住在建筑所处的地方，面对气候的变迁，也只有这些人在共有的集体记忆中延续生活的价值。地理和历史所承载的是一个真实使用者的生活方式，而当一个人受到这样的尊敬，中心或边缘已经不再重要。

这就是我们想要获得的结论。即使我们认同中心性源于保护身体的动物本能，也无法否认不同于其他动物的人具有某种特殊性，那就是尊严。而康德认为，这种尊严的体现方式之一就是人作为目的而非手段，这就意味着你不能通过将他人贬斥为边缘而强化自身的中心优越性。对他人的尊重就是对边缘的尊重，因为相对于自己，他人的确处于边缘。这也就是说，我们需要用道德原则来约束动物本能，这也构成了人自己的尊严。

在这些智利建筑师的作品中，我们的确可以感知到这样的伦理厚度。它们所展现的不仅仅是一个地区、一个群体、一个时代的专注，也同样有建筑作为一个学科与行业所遵循的根本性原则。从边缘出发，不是为了占据中心，而是如库萨的尼古拉与德里达所期望的，打破中心/边缘的狭隘限制，为更多的可能、更全面的体验、更深入的理解开启空间。

特别感谢阿萨埃尔和巴苏尔托及ArchDaily团队，他们使本期专辑成为可能。□

清华大学建筑学院/《世界建筑》

2015-06-05