止，而后能观 —— 从2016 WA中国建筑奖看减速时代的建筑思索

张利/ZHANG Li

止，而后能观
—— 从2016 WA中国建筑奖看减速时代的建筑思索

Wait and You Will See: WAACA 2016 and Architectural Ideas in the Chinese Economic Slowdown

张利/ZHANG Li

2016 WA中国建筑奖印证了一个观点，即经济减速对中国当代建筑来说未尝不是一件好事。减速使我们有理由、也有机会摆脱业已疲惫的形式美消费，于建筑的美学与伦理间寻找一种阔别已久的平衡。

建筑的美学与伦理是一对难解的话题，也是造就当今建筑学的大多数精神分裂病例的原因。美学与伦理在早期的建筑学中本来是明确的能指与所指关系，联系统一，并无纷扰纠葛。维特鲁威的“坚固、实用与美观”、宋代的《营造法式》，是广为人知的例子。进入工业社会后，这种朴素的统一开始被技术或资本的过剩所突破，并随着经济的周期性增长与停滞呈现一种黑格尔式的“正-反-合”过程：持续增长期刺激对形式的消费，鼓励美学的激进冒险；随后的停滞甚至是萎缩期敦促对挥霍的反思，祭出伦理的矫枉过正；再后的经济恢复期则带来短暂的和解与平衡；如此往复。

在经历了长时间的高速增长之后，中国经济在近20年来第一次进入增速放缓的调整期，中国建筑师也在近20年来第一次得到群体化的相对冷静，从而有时间对前面留下的“更快、更新、更奇特”的遗产（或后果）进行再思考。从参评2016 WA中国建筑奖的项目中，我们不难发现中国当代建筑的一些微妙但却颇具揭示意义的变化：纪念性的符号化图示少了，平民化的日常空间多了；纯粹的形式操作少了，积极的人类学介入多了；对输入价值观的模仿或取悦少了，对文化归属的琢磨与诠释多了；以答案定制问题的少了，以问题推导答案的多了；将美学与伦理割裂、或以牵强的解释在美学之上附会伦理的少了，在美学与伦理间建立连贯关系的多了。

WA建筑成就奖的名称看来在一定程度上限制了它的亲和力——“成就”二字令很多建筑师望而却步。尽管如此，作为针对建成期5年以上“旧”建筑的奖项，它还是能把经历了一段时间考验的、有强大说服力的作品，再次带到聚光灯下。从某种意义上说，深圳华侨城创意文化园是所处城市文化气质的缩影，承载了其进取、自信与焦虑，也为其文化识别性的演化过程提供了持久的舞台。

WA城市贡献奖这次带给人们的与WA建筑成就奖有所类似，同样是关注一个高密度混居社区的文化属性的项目。西村大院将边界的明确性与渗透的公共性娴熟地组织到了一个混合的巨构之中，无处不在的生活细节与愈久弥新的材料工法为其注入了在这一尺度建筑中罕见的情感。

WA设计实验奖一如继往地延续自WA中国建筑奖创建之初就确立的对设计自主实验的关注。这次设计实验奖带给人们一个历史保护项目。虽然这一结果或许因其学科细分而有些出人意料，但毋庸置疑的是，广元千佛崖保护设计所敢于承担的冒险——包括在重力、光线乃至“历史意象”等方面对常规处理套路的挑战——以及其冒险的结果，都是令人钦佩的。

WA社会公平奖所指向的是建筑的“有力”与“无力”的边缘。一方面，好的当代建筑总是责无旁贷地承载促进社会公平的理想，另一方面，其对所服务的群体的理解程度（在多数情况下是微弱的）在事实上又决定了实际的社会效果。本次公平奖带给人们的是一个更贴近日常生活的作品，来自普通的乡村社区、普通的生活环境，关注普遍性的自然教育话题，实现恰如其分的建筑表达。

WA居住贡献奖再次带给人们突出设计的类型学探索的作品。唐山第三空间综合体提出了高层住宅垂直界面的崭新可能性，使高层住宅具备了一定的城市友好性。我们非常期待观察这种新的界面肌理对高层住户邻里关系的影响，也非常期待看到更多的建筑师在社会住宅这一最常见的建筑类型上为普通人的生活而思考。

WA技术贡献奖这次带给人们的是结构技术与表现上的耕耘。天津大学新校区综合体育馆展现的不是结构上的“更大、更宽、更高”，而是结构体系与材料表现上的更融汇统一。能看到早期的现代主义结构理性在当代中国建筑中得到稳健的实现，无疑是令人兴奋的。

我们相信，2016 WA中国建筑奖所体现的仅仅是中国当代建筑在经济减速时代冷静思索的开始。我们希望这种思索能够继续并产生出影响建筑文明的灵感。□

If there is one thing that WAACA 2016 proves, it is the opinion that the Chinese economic slowdown might not necessarily be bad news to Chinese architecture. The slowdown gives us a temporary departure from the all-too-hungry consuming of forms, indicating a return to a longlost balance between the ethics and aesthetics of architecture.

The relationship between ethics and aesthetics in architecture is a tricky one. So much so that today most of the architectural schizophrenia around us can be traced back to it. In the early times, this relationship used to be a harmonious connection between the signified and the signifier, one of inherent unity. Vitruvius' principle of commodity, firmness and delight, and Chinese Ying-Zao-Fa-Shi of the Song Dynasty, were both sound examples of this early unity. It was after industrialisation that the unity became broken by the excessive power of technology and capital. Along with the cycles of economic growthrecession-recovery, the relationship between ethics and aesthetics in architecture also changes in a Hegelian thesis-antithesis-synthesis pattern. Sustained growth would encourage consumerism and iconography, resulting in radical aesthetics. The following recession would evoke austerity and overhauls, resulting in ethical over-reactions. Then, the following recovery would bring up temporary balancing and reconciliations. The loop would go on.

After a long and continuous high growth, Chinese economy has for the first time in two decades, entered a time of adjustment and slowdown. Chinese architects, as a community, has for the first time in two decades, embraced a time of sombre and calm. This facilitates a thorough rethinking of the legacies, or the consequences of the "faster, newer and stranger" approach of the previous time. We are clearly witnessing this rethinking through WAACA 2016. The 300+ projects reveal subtle yet unmistakable changes of direction in Chinese architecture today: monumentality and iconography is being replaced by the focus on the everyday life of normal people; self-referential formal operations are being replaced by active contextual and anthropological investigations; the pursuit and pleasing of imported values is being replaced by the exploration and interpretation of cultural roots; backward question-follows-answer approach is being replaced by forward answerfollows-question approach; and, the separation of ethics and aesthetics (or more often, farfetched stories trying explain certain aesthetics) is being replaced by the unity of the two.

Obviously, the word "achievement" in WA Achievement Award sounds a little bit intimidating to some. That said, as an award that honours buildings that has been occupied for at least five years, it is without doubt capable of bringing tried and tested buildings under spot light. To some degree, the OCT Lofts in Shenzhen is representative of its city. In its physicality and in the life it contains, the OCT Lofts register the progress, confdence and anxiety of Shenzhen. It is a worthy stage of the culture identity evolution in this open southern Chinese city.

WA City Regeneration Award fares similarly well in the sense of delivering convincing results. As the Achievement Award, it celebrates a project that explores the potentials of a high-density mixeduse complex. The West Village Yard in Chengdu skilfully orchestrates territorial identity and permeable public life into a hybrid megastructure. Nuisances of daily life is presented in every corner, as is traditional local craft. There is a clear sense of human attachment in this compound, one that scarcely seen in a building of this type.

WA Design Experiment Award extends the prolonged interest in autonomous design experiment. Surprisingly, in 2016, it brings up a project of historical conservation. The Protective Structure for Qianfoya Cliff Inscriptions is certainly a risk taking project. It has carried out a series experiments in structure, day lighting and re-interpretation of the "historic image". It simply refuses to repeat the solutions of similar preservation projects, and it does this by providing an exciting alternative. We do admire this attitude.

WA Social Equality Award points to the line between the powerfulness and powerlessness of architecture. On one hand, all contemporary buildings claim to have embodied some kind of progressive social ideal. On the other hand, the result of such buildings in real use is greatly limited by the architect's understanding of the community he or she is working for. The winner of this category in 2016 is a building deeply embedded in normal life. It comes from a normal village located in a normal environment, and features a universal environmental-educational subject. What it excels in is the way things are put together.

For the second time, WA Housing Award acknowledges a project that does typological experiments. The Third Space in Tangshan opens up new possibilities for the usually dreadful vertical interface of high-rise apartments. It proves that a city-friendly high-rise is not impossible. What we are still keen to see is how this experiment is going to affect the life of the people living in it. We also eagerly anticipate more Chinese architects taking deeper design thinking in social housing, the building type that speaks to the absolute majority of Chinese citizens.

Unsurprisingly, WA Technological Innovation Award brings up a project of structural expression. The Gymnasium in the new campus of Tianjin University is by no means a structurally challenging project by modern standard. It is not one of those engineering-intensive structures that competes for "the biggest, the widest, the tallest" titles. But it does one thing wonderfully: the unity of form and function of the concrete roof. In a time of radical parametric design and digital fabrication, it is simply reassuring to see the beauty and honesty of the early modernists being revisited.

We have good reasons to believe that what we are seeing from WAACA 2016 is just the beginning of a time of reflection in contemporary Chinese architecture. We expect this refection to make some serious contributions to the story of architecture today.□

清华大学建筑学院/《世界建筑》

2017-03-11