论文部分内容阅读
对于任何建筑的评价,特别是对房屋建筑的评价,人们考虑的总是它的形式与内容。形式与内容相符,那么就是一个好建筑,否则,“只”注意功能(且用这个“只”字),则难免被斥为呆板,而“国际式”方盒子也确实与大千世界难于相容。如果“过分”(姑且用这个词)追求形式,肯定被斥为“形式主义”,而密斯·凡·德·罗的范斯沃斯住宅也确实只是绣花枕头。仅此而已,泾渭分明,也还罢了,但追求形式何为“过分”呢?怎样讲求功能才不会让人冠以“只”字于前呢?对同一个悉尼歌剧院,有人认为作为形式的白帆在这里转化为功能;有人却认为这个建筑过分追求形式,耗资巨大,并非出于功能考虑。这些争论要持续到什么时候为止呢?
Regarding the evaluation of any building, especially the evaluation of housing construction, people always consider its form and content. Form and content are consistent, then it is a good building, otherwise, “only” pay attention to the function (and use this “only”), it is inevitably denounced as dull, and “international” square box is indeed difficult to be compatible with the world . If the “excessive” (temporary use of the term) pursuing of the form is certainly denounced as “formalism,” Mies van der Rohe’s Fansworth home really is just an embroidered pillow. Nothing more than that, it’s clear, but it’s still okay, but what is the “excessive” form of pursuing the form? How can we emphasize the ability to use the word “only” before the same Sydney Opera House? Bai Fan is transformed into a function here; some people think that this building is too pursuing a form and costly, not because of functional considerations. When will these debates continue?