论文部分内容阅读
编者注：奥运会期间，绝大多数场馆在比赛日都人满为患，但奥运会结束后，很多场馆无人问津。奥运四年才举办一次，而建成的场馆每一天都存在于城市中。只有利用好这些场馆，让他们真正地同城市融为一体，这才是真正的奥林匹克精神。
During the Rio 2016 Olympics， the eyes of the world were trained on Rio de Janeiro， Brazil. But what happens to those Olympic stadiums once the athletes are done and the last spectators go home？
2016年里约奥运会期间，世界目光聚焦巴西的里约热内卢。但是当运动员们完成比赛，当最后一群观众返程回家后，这些奥运会场馆会怎么样？
Answer：“legacy1”. To prove the rationality2 of the huge cost of the major sporting championships， Games organizers have to prove it worthwhile to spend every penny. What to do with all those stadiums， dining halls and so on？
答案是：“遗存物”。为了证明主要体育赛事的巨额费用的合理性，赛事主办方必须证明花出去的每一分钱都是值得的。所有这些体育场、餐厅、自行车场之类要怎样处理呢？
Get it right and you can regenerate a deprived3 part of a city， as the London 2012 Olympics are widely credited for doing. Get it wrong and you can be left stuck with Olympic-sized white elephants4.
这事处理的好，那么城市曾被“剥夺”的那部分就能得到重生，就像2012伦敦奥运会被广为称赞的那样。如果处理的不好，那么你就会被庞大的奥林匹克“白象”困扰。
Repurposing， reusing and even relocating buildings are among the various strategies for securing a sporting venue’s long-term legacy， says Glenn Scott， an expert at design practice Hassell. Whichever option organizers end up choosing， they should make the decision before the end of the game rather than hesitating after the Games.
悉尼的哈塞尔设计公司的基础设施专家格伦·斯科特称，重新定位、重新利用，甚至重新选址搬迁都是保护一处运动场馆长久留存的策略。无论组织者最终选择哪一种，都应在比赛结束前计划好，而不是在比赛结束之后还犹豫不决。
“On paper the easiest thing to do is design a bunch of Olympic venues， which then you end up after an Olympics trying to retrofit5 for some other use... Far better is to decide what a country actually needs and then fit an Olympic event into that building，” Scott says.
斯科特说：“纸上谈兵最容易的就是设计一大堆的奥运场馆，而它们在奥运过后最终却又被你改作其他用途……更好的做法是确定什么才是国家真正需要的（设施），然后使之与奥运赛事结合。”
Of all the infrastructure6 used for major sporting events， stadia are by far the most inflexible. Their opportunities for reuse are limited.
所有用于大型赛事的基础设施中，体育场到目前为止是灵活度是最差的。它们被再利用的机会非常有限。
London has learned the hard way. The cost of converting the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park into a home ground for Premier League football club West Ham United has topped 700 million—making it more expensive than refitting Wembley stadium.
伦敦在这方面已经尝到了苦头。将伊丽莎白女王奥运公园改造成为英超西汉姆联队足球俱乐部主场的费用高达7亿英镑，比重修温布利体育场还要昂贵。
“If they’d at first thought it was going to be a football stadium， then they’d have designed it first and foremost as a football venue and retrofitted it for the Olympics. But they did it the other way around，” Scott says. 斯科特说：“如果他们一开始就想过这里日后会用作足球场，那么他们首先就会以足球场的需要来设计，然后再为奥运做相关的改造。然而他们实际却本末倒置了。”
Smaller， more flexible venues and facilities are certainly easier to repurpose7. Olympic villages are the most obvious case in point， as the Chaoyang district in Beijing now testify. Or take the international broadcast centre at London’s Olympic Park， which now houses8 TV and editing suites for the television channel BT Sport.
更小的、更灵活的场地和设施肯定更容易改变用途。在这一方面，奥运村就是最显而易见的例子。北京朝阳区如今就是最好的证明。或者以位于伦敦奥运公园的国际广播中心为例，那里现在是广播电视的大本营，也承担了BT Sport电视频道的编辑工作。
Adapting existing buildings presents an attractive option too： less resource use， less environmental impact， less investment. The classic example here is Athens’ use of the Panathenaic stadium （scene of the opening ceremony of the first modern Olympics in 1896） for the archery competition and marathon finish in the 2004 Olympics. The Rio organizers followed suit， adapting the Sambódromo （the venue of the Rio Carnival） to the same ends. In 2000， the Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre was similarly modified for a host of indoor competitions.
改造现有建筑也不失为具有吸引力的选择：利用更少的资源，对环境造成的影响更小，投入更少。这方面典型的例子就是雅典对帕那辛纳克体育场（1896年第一届现代奥运会开幕式场地）的利用，2004年该场馆被用作2004雅典奥运会射箭比赛场地和马拉松比赛的终点。里约奥运的组织者也效仿此法改造利用了桑巴大道（里约狂欢节场地）。在2000年，悉尼会展中心也被用类似的方法改造成了室内比赛场地。
Relocating9 venues can lead to potential legacy gains as well， experts note. The
blue-and-pink surface used by hockey10 competitors in the London 2012 Olympics， for example， now graces the pitches of Sheffield Hallam University in Yorkshire. The cost of relocating is a big problem， however. Hence the plans to relocate the basketball stadium used in London 2012 for the Rio Olympics were given up.
专家们称，场地整体搬迁也能带来潜在的益处。比如2012伦敦奥运会使用的蓝紫相间的曲棍球比赛场地地面，如今为约克郡的谢菲尔德海兰姆大学的球场增添了一份优雅。然而，整体搬迁的费用是个问题。因此，搬迁2012伦敦奥运的篮球场用作里约奥运场馆的决定最终被放弃。
If there’s a single factor on which the legacy question rides， it is the extent to which Games’ venues are integrated into a city’s existing infrastructure. The vogue11 for a long time （especially in the United States） was to build stadia on huge empty lots out of town.
如果说只有一个因素决定了遗存物问题是否得当，那就是运动场地与当地现存基础设施的融合程度。很长一段时间以来都流行在城区外的空旷地区建造体育场馆（尤其是在美国）。
Today， the thinking has turned full circle： the more central， the better. Barcelona， which used the 1992 Olympics to regenerate downtown industrial areas of the city， provides a successful example. Tokyo is taking Barcelona’s lead and using the Olympics to hopefully regenerate its downtown waterfront district. 如今，想法又回到了原点：离中心越近越好。巴塞罗那利用1992年的奥运场地重振中心工业区为此提供了一个成功的例子。东京则效仿巴塞罗那，希望借奥运使海滨中心区域重获新生。
“By locating venues in the heart of a big city， you have the benefit of not creating white elephants on the edge of town and instead creating spaces that can be easily reused by businesses and others，” says Rob Turner， an urban infrastructure expert. “You also get the benefit of existing transport infrastructure， which makes them easier for people to access and popular with businesses.”
城市基础设施专家罗伯·特纳说：“在大城市中心建造场地的好处是不会在城市边缘建造‘白象’，而是建造了能够很容易就被企业或者其他人再次利用的空间。这同样也为现有的交通带来好处，即变得更加便捷，更受商业的欢迎。”
Notes：
1. legacy [] n. 遗赠物；先人或过去遗留下来的东西
2. rationality [] n. 理性；合理性
3. deprived [] adj. 被剥夺的
4. white elephant n. 白象（一种罕有的白色或浅灰色亚洲象，在印度被视为圣物，后引申为累赘）；昂贵又无用之物
5. retrofit [] v. （飞机等）式样翻新；改进
6. infrastructure [] n. 基础；基础设施
7. repurpose [] v. 为……改变用途；改换意图
8. house [] v. 给……房子住；储存（某物）；容纳
9. relocate [] v. 重新装置；再配置；放在新地方
10. hockey [] n. 曲棍球
11. vogue [] n. 时尚；流行
During the Rio 2016 Olympics， the eyes of the world were trained on Rio de Janeiro， Brazil. But what happens to those Olympic stadiums once the athletes are done and the last spectators go home？
2016年里约奥运会期间，世界目光聚焦巴西的里约热内卢。但是当运动员们完成比赛，当最后一群观众返程回家后，这些奥运会场馆会怎么样？
Answer：“legacy1”. To prove the rationality2 of the huge cost of the major sporting championships， Games organizers have to prove it worthwhile to spend every penny. What to do with all those stadiums， dining halls and so on？
答案是：“遗存物”。为了证明主要体育赛事的巨额费用的合理性，赛事主办方必须证明花出去的每一分钱都是值得的。所有这些体育场、餐厅、自行车场之类要怎样处理呢？
Get it right and you can regenerate a deprived3 part of a city， as the London 2012 Olympics are widely credited for doing. Get it wrong and you can be left stuck with Olympic-sized white elephants4.
这事处理的好，那么城市曾被“剥夺”的那部分就能得到重生，就像2012伦敦奥运会被广为称赞的那样。如果处理的不好，那么你就会被庞大的奥林匹克“白象”困扰。
Repurposing， reusing and even relocating buildings are among the various strategies for securing a sporting venue’s long-term legacy， says Glenn Scott， an expert at design practice Hassell. Whichever option organizers end up choosing， they should make the decision before the end of the game rather than hesitating after the Games.
悉尼的哈塞尔设计公司的基础设施专家格伦·斯科特称，重新定位、重新利用，甚至重新选址搬迁都是保护一处运动场馆长久留存的策略。无论组织者最终选择哪一种，都应在比赛结束前计划好，而不是在比赛结束之后还犹豫不决。
“On paper the easiest thing to do is design a bunch of Olympic venues， which then you end up after an Olympics trying to retrofit5 for some other use... Far better is to decide what a country actually needs and then fit an Olympic event into that building，” Scott says.
斯科特说：“纸上谈兵最容易的就是设计一大堆的奥运场馆，而它们在奥运过后最终却又被你改作其他用途……更好的做法是确定什么才是国家真正需要的（设施），然后使之与奥运赛事结合。”
Of all the infrastructure6 used for major sporting events， stadia are by far the most inflexible. Their opportunities for reuse are limited.
所有用于大型赛事的基础设施中，体育场到目前为止是灵活度是最差的。它们被再利用的机会非常有限。
London has learned the hard way. The cost of converting the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park into a home ground for Premier League football club West Ham United has topped 700 million—making it more expensive than refitting Wembley stadium.
伦敦在这方面已经尝到了苦头。将伊丽莎白女王奥运公园改造成为英超西汉姆联队足球俱乐部主场的费用高达7亿英镑，比重修温布利体育场还要昂贵。
“If they’d at first thought it was going to be a football stadium， then they’d have designed it first and foremost as a football venue and retrofitted it for the Olympics. But they did it the other way around，” Scott says. 斯科特说：“如果他们一开始就想过这里日后会用作足球场，那么他们首先就会以足球场的需要来设计，然后再为奥运做相关的改造。然而他们实际却本末倒置了。”
Smaller， more flexible venues and facilities are certainly easier to repurpose7. Olympic villages are the most obvious case in point， as the Chaoyang district in Beijing now testify. Or take the international broadcast centre at London’s Olympic Park， which now houses8 TV and editing suites for the television channel BT Sport.
更小的、更灵活的场地和设施肯定更容易改变用途。在这一方面，奥运村就是最显而易见的例子。北京朝阳区如今就是最好的证明。或者以位于伦敦奥运公园的国际广播中心为例，那里现在是广播电视的大本营，也承担了BT Sport电视频道的编辑工作。
Adapting existing buildings presents an attractive option too： less resource use， less environmental impact， less investment. The classic example here is Athens’ use of the Panathenaic stadium （scene of the opening ceremony of the first modern Olympics in 1896） for the archery competition and marathon finish in the 2004 Olympics. The Rio organizers followed suit， adapting the Sambódromo （the venue of the Rio Carnival） to the same ends. In 2000， the Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre was similarly modified for a host of indoor competitions.
改造现有建筑也不失为具有吸引力的选择：利用更少的资源，对环境造成的影响更小，投入更少。这方面典型的例子就是雅典对帕那辛纳克体育场（1896年第一届现代奥运会开幕式场地）的利用，2004年该场馆被用作2004雅典奥运会射箭比赛场地和马拉松比赛的终点。里约奥运的组织者也效仿此法改造利用了桑巴大道（里约狂欢节场地）。在2000年，悉尼会展中心也被用类似的方法改造成了室内比赛场地。
Relocating9 venues can lead to potential legacy gains as well， experts note. The
blue-and-pink surface used by hockey10 competitors in the London 2012 Olympics， for example， now graces the pitches of Sheffield Hallam University in Yorkshire. The cost of relocating is a big problem， however. Hence the plans to relocate the basketball stadium used in London 2012 for the Rio Olympics were given up.
专家们称，场地整体搬迁也能带来潜在的益处。比如2012伦敦奥运会使用的蓝紫相间的曲棍球比赛场地地面，如今为约克郡的谢菲尔德海兰姆大学的球场增添了一份优雅。然而，整体搬迁的费用是个问题。因此，搬迁2012伦敦奥运的篮球场用作里约奥运场馆的决定最终被放弃。
If there’s a single factor on which the legacy question rides， it is the extent to which Games’ venues are integrated into a city’s existing infrastructure. The vogue11 for a long time （especially in the United States） was to build stadia on huge empty lots out of town.
如果说只有一个因素决定了遗存物问题是否得当，那就是运动场地与当地现存基础设施的融合程度。很长一段时间以来都流行在城区外的空旷地区建造体育场馆（尤其是在美国）。
Today， the thinking has turned full circle： the more central， the better. Barcelona， which used the 1992 Olympics to regenerate downtown industrial areas of the city， provides a successful example. Tokyo is taking Barcelona’s lead and using the Olympics to hopefully regenerate its downtown waterfront district. 如今，想法又回到了原点：离中心越近越好。巴塞罗那利用1992年的奥运场地重振中心工业区为此提供了一个成功的例子。东京则效仿巴塞罗那，希望借奥运使海滨中心区域重获新生。
“By locating venues in the heart of a big city， you have the benefit of not creating white elephants on the edge of town and instead creating spaces that can be easily reused by businesses and others，” says Rob Turner， an urban infrastructure expert. “You also get the benefit of existing transport infrastructure， which makes them easier for people to access and popular with businesses.”
城市基础设施专家罗伯·特纳说：“在大城市中心建造场地的好处是不会在城市边缘建造‘白象’，而是建造了能够很容易就被企业或者其他人再次利用的空间。这同样也为现有的交通带来好处，即变得更加便捷，更受商业的欢迎。”
Notes：
1. legacy [] n. 遗赠物；先人或过去遗留下来的东西
2. rationality [] n. 理性；合理性
3. deprived [] adj. 被剥夺的
4. white elephant n. 白象（一种罕有的白色或浅灰色亚洲象，在印度被视为圣物，后引申为累赘）；昂贵又无用之物
5. retrofit [] v. （飞机等）式样翻新；改进
6. infrastructure [] n. 基础；基础设施
7. repurpose [] v. 为……改变用途；改换意图
8. house [] v. 给……房子住；储存（某物）；容纳
9. relocate [] v. 重新装置；再配置；放在新地方
10. hockey [] n. 曲棍球
11. vogue [] n. 时尚；流行