国产性做久久久久久-国产性视频-国产性色视频-国产性片在线观看-午夜dj影院在线视频观看完整-午夜dj影院在线观看完整版

　　【蔡沁文】可能我們把這兩個名詞可以再打開討論。比如像陸老師剛說的，“形式”肯定不是純粹的形式。建筑師傾向于使用某種形式，往往因為它在我們的文化或者意識形態(tài)里具有某種信息，符合這個設(shè)計的身份的人們的期望;中國館的形式就有這樣的一方面。而“功能”一詞也不是僅僅是“使用功能”，也有可能人們用的方式，這里是有很大挖掘空間的。建筑師不會去過多挑戰(zhàn)比較穩(wěn)定的使用功能;但可以通過某種形式激發(fā)某一方面的使用方式，可以是視覺感受，對光、對尺度;可以是動態(tài)感受，行走、穿插;更多的是其他的。這樣的互動是良性的;剩下的事可能就是程度問題，見仁見智了。不同類型的建筑這個動態(tài)平衡都不一樣，對這個平衡的把握有可能讓整個設(shè)計極富創(chuàng)造性，所以我覺得這個永遠(yuǎn)都是建筑設(shè)計中最吸引人的地方之一。

　　【陸軼辰】 I’m not quite interested in pure forms, but more in what the visitors feel inside the space. It’s a basic thing that architecture is to be seen, but on a higher level, to be experienced. And the functions are dissolved in the space. If you look at the study model in the middle of 2013, you’ll see maybe more interaction between the interior and the roof system, in the sense of architecture. But exhibition buildings really depend on the needs of the interior display items. The pavilion contains the illuminated LED ‘wheat field’ of 400 square meters, designed by Prof. Shi Danqing of Tsinghua University. A large, column-free space is necessary for the visitors to see the LED field from all angles which led to a different dialogue between the roof and the main exhibition space.

　　【蔡沁文】 It’s probably more interesting if we unpack the two terms to have the discussion. For example, as Prof. Lu just said, ‘form’ never means the pure shapes. Certain forms are preferred by the architects because there are messages in them. The messages have always been there in the culture or ideology of us and they match the identity and the expectations of the design project. The form of the pavilion has to do with it. And ‘function’ is not just ‘usage’ but ‘programs’, the ways people use the building; then there’s a lot to explore. Architects wouldn’t challenge the stable usages of the building but can choose the form to stimulate one of the aspects of how the buildings are used; it can be visual experience, of light, scale; it can be movements, walking, trespassing; there are much more of others. An interaction like this is positive. The rest of the question is to which extent and how, depending on the architect. Different types of buildings have different dynamic balance as well. How to deal with the balance can make the design extremely inventive that’s why I think it will always be one of the most attractive things about architectural design.　　

　　【記者】建筑的形式和屋頂形成的內(nèi)部空間具有很明確的方向性，不過從平面來看，內(nèi)部流線的組織似乎有自己的方向，您是否同意，對于這兩者方向性之間存在的張力您是怎么看的?

　　The shape of the architecture and the interior space it forms has clear directionality. But the organization of the internal circulation seems to have its own directions. Do you agree? What do you think of the tension between the two different directionalities?

　　【蔡沁文】出發(fā)點是建筑師希望在最大程度上給屋頂下的展陳、麥田空間留出了自由度，這一點在建成的結(jié)果中也是能很明確看到的。比如屋面作為一個自由延展的物體“罩”在景觀和麥田一米高的這個塊上，所有的活動是從這個塊里面掏出來的空間。人們在這個“田野”里行走的時候，屋頂則在不同的高度上出現(xiàn)在他們的視線中。中國館的設(shè)計出于各種原因，只能做到這一步，而要將屋頂和下面的流線整合的更嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)，把一種無意識的張力轉(zhuǎn)化成有目的的張力，則需要更微妙的技巧和設(shè)計師的敏感度。這在我們以后的設(shè)計過程中會是很有意思的，我們?yōu)榇诉€挺樂觀甚至興奮的。

　　【蔡沁文】 The starting point was that the architect wanted to leave maximum flexibility for exhibition items and the LED field. This intent is clearly there in the final constructed pavilion. The roof is a free style artifact floating above the continuous field of the landscape and the LED installation which is at the height of 1 meter above ground. All the public activity space is ‘carved’ out of the field. While people are meandering within the volume, they encounter the roof at different heights. For various reasons, the China Pavilion could only push to this point; to further integrate the roof and the circulation, much more skills and sensitivity would be needed to transform the tension into something more intentional. This will be more interesting point in our future design process. And we are actually optimistic even excited about it.

　　【記者】在建筑圖解中您描述了從城市輪廓到自然輪廓的過渡，這樣的設(shè)計方法您認(rèn)為在您今后的設(shè)計中還會出現(xiàn)嗎?又或者，關(guān)于設(shè)計，您是每一個項目都希望有不同想法的建筑師，還是項目的想法之間會互相聯(lián)系，累積的建筑師?

　　In the diagrams you described the transition between the city profile and the nature profile, do you think the same design method will appear in the subsequent design projects? In other words, regarding design, are you an architect who would like to have a different idea for each project or who would prefer the project ideas interrelate and accumulate?

　　【陸軼辰】 我們這一代建筑師的工作方式和蓋里、霍爾他們肯定是不一樣的。比如我會盡量不去畫草圖，而讓團(tuán)隊不同背景的建筑師們來討論，恰當(dāng)?shù)臅r候組織各專業(yè)顧問來階段性地“批”這個設(shè)計。我們幾個來主導(dǎo)方向。我們用大量的物理模型，來讓建筑與場地“對話”，讓建筑自己按它應(yīng)該長成的方式“生長”。功能、造價、結(jié)構(gòu)、材料都是形式生成過程中的“酵母”，而建筑師是指揮家，我們用最真誠的方式來推進(jìn)設(shè)計的過程，最好的技術(shù)手段來解決設(shè)計中遇到的問題。讓項目和建筑自己說話—僅此而已。之前不要去預(yù)設(shè)，只要過程充實，結(jié)果就是水到渠成的事。

　　【陸軼辰】 The ways architects of our generation work are definitely different from that of Gehry or Holl. For example I would rather not to sketch but to have a team discussion with architects from different backgrounds, then periodically invite consultants to give critics. A few of us core members guide the direction. We quite many physical study models to let the architecture ‘talk’ with its site then let it ‘grow’. Function, budget, structure and materials are all catalysts of the generation of the form; the architect is the conductor moving the design process forward in the most honest way and solves the problems with the best technical skills. Let the project and the building speak – this is it. Without a pre-definition, as long as the process is rich, the result comes rather naturally.