AD Readers Debate: Alejandro Aravena's Pritzker Prize and More

由专筑网赵泽民，杨帆编译

普林兹克奖的颁布是建筑界中每年最重要的新闻。今年也毫不例外：Alejandro Aravena获得了这个殊荣，他所做的社会公共建筑引起了评审团的特别关注。伴随着Aravena-directed威尼斯双年展的即将到来，今年我们会更多得谈到这位48岁的智利建筑师。

我们的评审部早早就开始了这番工作，让读者对于普林兹克奖评审团所做决策的利弊进行讨论。接着往下读你就会明白我们的读者为何不得不提及Aravena，同样你会了解到他最近几周的传奇故事。

The announcement of the Pritzker Prize is often the biggest news story of the year in architecture. This year it seems will be no different: the accolade went to Alejandro Aravena, with the jury paying particular attention to his social housing work, and with the Aravena-directed Venice Biennale right around the corner, it seems that this year we'll be talking a lot about the 48-year-old Chilean.
That discussion has already begun in our comments section, where readers debated the pros and cons of the decision by the Pritzker Jury. Read on to find out what our readers had to say about Aravena and the other big stories of recent weeks.

Aravena赢得了普林兹克奖

Aravena Wins the Pritzker Prize

将普林兹克奖授予Alejandro Aravena在许多人看来，是普林兹克对近期社会意识建筑的潮流最清晰的认可。该奖项的颁布也得到了较多ArchDaily读者的认可。

“对建筑业来说，这是一个与文化习俗做没有硝烟的斗争的时代。”恭喜Alejandro Aravena。得此殊荣当之无愧。——Daniel Carrapa

跳过这段评论，一些人认为普林兹克奖应是一个“终身成就”奖项。但从行业标准来说，48已经不算年轻，而且他曾一度相当具有影响力。除了大量的社会工作以外，还有非常出色的建筑作品。——Chris

The decision by the Pritzker Prize to award Alejandro Aravena was seen by many as the Pritzker’s clearest endorsement yet of the current trend of socially-aware architecture. The award generally went down pretty well with many of ArchDaily’s readers.
“It's time for an Architecture that goes against the culture of "non-crisis". Congratulations Alejandro Aravena. Well-deserved. - Daniel Carrapa
Skimmed the comments, apparently some folks think the Pritzker should be a ‘lifetime achievement’ award. But hey, 48 isn't super young even by our industry’s standards, and he has had a profound impact in that amount of time. Including some badass Architecture in addition to his massive amount of social work. - Chris

当然，并不是所有人都赞同这个奖项的颁布：

“在这位人士接受普林兹克奖的同时，也否认了其他很多有天赋的，有创造力的思考者，对于获得该奖项的能力。是什么样的信息传达给学生学者，建筑所能做的便是“综合现有条件”？它究竟有何种意义？创造出前所未有的条件境况又会怎样？如果最好的建筑师回过头来最先解决最重要的贫困问题，它又会如何解释？可持续发展？这些实用性的问题是否真的是我们关注的焦点？那么形式方面的问题呢？空间方面的问题呢？——ben”

Of course, not everyone was in agreement with the award:
“In receiving the Pritzker this man denied so many other talented, creative thinkers this important award. What kind of message does it send to students that the best architecture can do is ‘synthesize existing conditions’? What in God's name does that even mean? What about inventing new conditions never thought possible? What does it say if the best architect bends over backwards to first and foremost solve issues about poverty? sustainability? Should those pragmatic issues really be our focus? What about beauty? What about space? - ben”

但是在读过ben的评论之后，我们的许多读者认为我们应该去保护普林兹克评审团所做出的决定：

“你坚持认为对形式的追求与对社会问题的追求分开，但对于我来说，这样做表明了你对建筑师，或者与建筑相关的其他专业最基本方面上的无知。建筑师的工作并不是坐在象牙塔中创造概念化的抽象的形式，而是去提供庇护所，追求美学与身心上、社会上和技术上的内容相结合。艺术并不是功能。——HeywoodFloyd”

But after reading ben’s comment, many of our readers felt the need to come to the defense of the Pritzker Jury’s decision:
“Your insistence that the pursuit of beauty be segregated from any engagement with social issues to me is at the very least ignorant of what it is an architect does, or what the profession of architecture can be. The job of an architect is not to sit in an ivory tower and conceptualize abstract form, it is to provide shelter and pursue aesthetics within physical, social and/or technological contexts. Art cannot have a function. - HeywoodFloyd”

一位读者甚至将该奖项置于历史范畴中去争论证明普林兹克奖项并不符合新的潮流和方向，但回归到原则上说，它在过去的一个世纪中引领了建筑方向：

“19和20世纪中最伟大的“创造性思维”的发展，首要体现在城市现代主义中的一些基本的“社会”项目。正是在通过追求（或反对）实际情况的过程中，新的空间观念得到了发展。我们会看到资本主义接管了建筑功能与形式方面的发展，从而改变了世界的面貌。一切都来源于群众的关注和大规模生产。我并不是怀旧或者虔诚，但正是在20世纪七十年代，那些被遗忘的年代之后，所有人都开始抱怨“已经毫无意义”、“建筑已失去其代表性”。——Captain Zero”

One reader even put the award in a historical context to argue that the Pritzker’s new direction is not a new trend at all, but a return to the principles that guided architecture for much of the past century:
“The greatest ‘creative thinking’ movement of the 19th and 20th centuries was packaged primarily in the ‘social’ project of urban Modernism. It was through engagement with actual conditions (or the denial of them, etc) that new notions of space were developed. We got to watch capitalism take over the functional and aesthetic aspects of the movement, and change the way the world looked. Wow. All from concern with the masses and mass production. I'm not being nostalgic or reverent, but it was only after that was all abandoned in the 1970s that everyone starts complaining that ‘meaning is dead’ and ‘architecture has lost its capacity for representation.’ - Captain Zero”

或许你还想去海外工作？

Perhaps You Still Want to Work Abroad?

我们从The Architect’s Guide上转载了一篇文章，内容是关于为什么在国外工作可能会阻碍你事业的发展。值得一提的是Craig Robertson在 Facebook上的评论“并不是说‘不要在国外工作’而是‘要意识到潜在的不可预见的后果，’”许多人仍然做出回应，指出Brandon Hubbard的七个观点并不是普遍适用的：

只有你身处于第一世界的国家中，这篇文章才是适用的。但对于我们其他世界，若想成功，全球竞争力才是关键。是的，即使在建筑学中，也存在政治因素。如果你来自第三世界的国家，在国外工作是很有好处的。能获得足够的经验，并发展全面（咨询方面或设计方面或建设方面或者全部）。我们要比在圈子中的一般人表现更出色，在第一世界国家中见证我们从如今的学徒变为未来的老板。——Carmen Tator

Our republished article from The Architect’s Guide on why working abroad can actually be a hindrance to your career ruffled a lot of feathers. While it’s worth remembering Craig Robertson’s comment on Facebook that “He's not saying ‘don't work abroad’ but ‘be aware of the potentially unforeseen consequences,’” many people still responded by pointing out that Brandon Hubbard’s 7 points may not be universally applicable:
[This article is] applicable only if you belong to a first world country. But for us rest of the world, global competence is the key if one wants to be a successful. Yes, even in Architecture, there is also politics. Coming from a 3rd world country, working abroad is a great advantage. Getting enough experience trying to cover all the bases (consultancy path or design path or construction path or all). We need to be better than the average Joe to be in the loop, or suffer by witnessing our (first world) apprentice becoming our own boss in the future. - Carmen Tator

另一些人，不管他们是否同意作者观点，都热衷于分享在国外工作的经验——从如何在第一步寻求到合适的机会，到怎样确认某一天你会成功的经历。

“我认为他的观点挺有道理，我也在我的工作中达到了这些，我知道很多在毕业后出国的人们如今正在尝试回国。他们解决了很多讨论中的问题，并不是因为几年的工作经验或者是在国外工作。它也取决于你在哪个国家工作，例如从英国到美国工作，要比从中国到美国工作简单——因此它是相对的。也就是说，我认为在国外工作的是为了在大公司积累经验，并且让人们知道你对国际项目感兴趣（并不是每个人都是这样）。我在中国呆了6个月，所有的支出费用均来自于一个有趣的工作项目，并且能够游览很多地区。这样的生活持续了将近2年，我也有幸参与其他国家的各个不同项目，这些都是宝贵的经验。同时我也了解到其他在国外工作的人也有相似的经历。”——Scott Smith

Others, whether they agreed with the author or not, were keen to share advice about working abroad - from how to get the opportunity in the first place to how to ensure you make a successful return one day:
“I think he makes a lot of fair points and I have reached the point in my career where I know a lot of people who went abroad after school and are now trying to come back. They are running into a lot of the issues he talks about potential firms not counting their years of experience either at all or fully because of it being abroad. It also depends on what country you work in - the UK to USA is a much easier transition than China to USA - so it's all relative. That said, I think an alternate option to working abroad is to work for a large firm and make it known that you are interested in working on international projects (not everyone is). I spent about 6 months in China, all expenses paid working on a very interesting projects and was able to travel quite a bit around the region. It almost turned into 2 years. I have also been fortunate enough to travel to other countries for various projects/proposals that were all rewarding experiences. Also know others who have had very similar experiences working all over the world this way.” - Scott Smith

Scott Smith的评论只是对于国外工作提出宝贵经验中的一个，因此如果你正在考虑有大的举动的话，我建议你看看在这儿的读者所说的一切。

Scott Smith’s is just one comment of many that gave valuable advice about working abroad, so if you’re truly considering a big move, I recommend that you check out everything our readers had to say here.

Maya Lin 设计的 Tribeca 大厦

Maya Lin Designs a Tribeca Mansion

Maya Lin，越南老兵纪念碑的设计者，最近在纽约设计的一项“城市建筑”吸引了许多读者进行评论。下面是项目中一些问题的概述：

“很棒，它是一个20000平方英尺的私人综合建筑。这将是一个真正的为城市邻里之间服务的建筑。11人的卫生间是否满足人们的适用频率呢？5000平方英尺的健身房可以接纳会员吗？”——bed stuy

The news that Maya Lin, of Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial fame, is designing an “urban mansion” in New York attracted criticism from many readers. Some took issue with the project’s brief:
“Good that a mixed use building is being replaced with 20,000 square foot private mansion. Would be a real gain for the neighborhood. How often do these people need to use the restroom to warrant 11 of them? Will the 5,000 square foot gym be accepting members?” - bed stuy

而其他人则专注于建筑设计的外观：

“除了相当蹩脚的概念图设计之外，玻璃则使其看起来更加商业化，标志性建筑委员会因此更容易拒绝该设计。”——HeywoodFloyd

While others focused on the external appearance of the design:
“In addition to the fairly lame schematic design, all that glass looks commercial which will make it twice as easy for Landmarks Preservation Commission to reject.” - HeywoodFloyd

还有一些人更加关注她的项目与环境之间的关系：

在我印象中，Maya Lin非常有天赋，但是不幸的是这个项目在设计方面看起来没有在头脑中经过完整的思考，或者说只像是凭一时的感觉。

And others focused more on the project’s relationship with its context:
“My impression of Maya Lin is that she's otherwise quite talented, but unfortunately this project feels like it was designed without first having a site in mind, or even a sense of scale.” - Alan

HeywoodFloyd指出：有如此多的评论是一件好事，但这个项目注定要被排斥吗？

With so many angles for criticism, is it a good thing that, as pointed out by HeywoodFloyd, the project seems destined for rejection?

希望评论不断！你可以在下面评论中发表你的意见。

Keep the debate flowing! Please post any responses to these topics in the comments below.

出处：本文译自www.archdaily.com/，转载请注明出处。