張利/ZHANG Li

從整體名聲上說(shuō)，我們的時(shí)代不是個(gè)對(duì)基本事物感興趣的時(shí)代。隨著量子物理學(xué)與混沌理論蔓延到我們?nèi)粘Ｉ畹狞c(diǎn)點(diǎn)滴滴——或者至少被智者們聲稱(chēng)是這樣——似乎任何與絕對(duì)或基本有關(guān)的事物都變得過(guò)時(shí)了。正如基阿尼·瓦蒂莫所說(shuō)，在后現(xiàn)代，一切都只是一種闡釋而非結(jié)論，包括這個(gè)論點(diǎn)自身。

建筑學(xué)也發(fā)生了變化。寬泛的語(yǔ)義學(xué)聯(lián)想總是試圖讓建筑學(xué)遠(yuǎn)離物質(zhì)空間的純粹喜悅；而且無(wú)論這些聯(lián)想多么牽強(qiáng)，總在事實(shí)上被認(rèn)為是學(xué)術(shù)新領(lǐng)域的定義。設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)踐本身越來(lái)越接近文藝批評(píng)而不再是空間干預(yù)。

然而，還是有些人試圖拒絕這種潮流的——張軻便是其中之一，他選擇重新審視基本。在過(guò)去的20年中，他和他的同事長(zhǎng)期致力于基于句法學(xué)的設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)踐探索。無(wú)論是在密集的中國(guó)城市還是在廣袤的中國(guó)鄉(xiāng)村，他們的空間實(shí)驗(yàn)一直在延續(xù)。

張軻自主、中立的取向賦予了他的作品以一種頗具識(shí)別性的語(yǔ)言。對(duì)材料和空間的抽象、不涉及倫理（或接近不涉及倫理）的操作使他的作品對(duì)任何評(píng)述而言都是開(kāi)放的。它們有時(shí)在中國(guó)和西方會(huì)得到截然不同的解釋?zhuān)@恰恰證明了這種抽象性和中立性。正是建筑學(xué)的基本，而不是別的任何任何東西，讓張軻的作品成就其本身。在張軻的作品中能夠看到幾何：理性的、但令人愉快的多邊形幾何。它既不同于正統(tǒng)現(xiàn)代主義者的多米諾原型，又無(wú)視死硬派參數(shù)化主義者的炫技翹曲。那些相信歐幾里德幾何必然會(huì)導(dǎo)致無(wú)聊的人可能需要重新考慮一下自己的主張了，因?yàn)閺堓V的幾何游戲確實(shí)取得了一定的有機(jī)復(fù)雜性，很容易讓人聯(lián)想到像沃爾特·弗德?tīng)柲菢拥姆钦y(tǒng)現(xiàn)代先鋒試驗(yàn)。

在張軻的作品中能夠看到光：充足，甚至過(guò)度的日光從四面八方渲染著通常十分狹促的室內(nèi)空間，呈現(xiàn)出令人印象深刻的氛圍。正是在由建筑的開(kāi)口（窗戶(hù)、隧道、光井，隨便你怎么稱(chēng)呼它）帶來(lái)的光暈下，張軻把他最大膽的冒險(xiǎn)應(yīng)用到材料與身體空間的互動(dòng)之中。

在張軻的作品中能夠看到材料：對(duì)巨石意象的癡迷使張軻致力于對(duì)不同的材料進(jìn)行各種各樣的實(shí)驗(yàn)，以試圖模仿混凝土的三維塑性。其結(jié)果有時(shí)精彩絕倫，有時(shí)毀譽(yù)參半，但無(wú)論如何，從未枯燥乏味。

在張軻的作品中能夠看到功能：或更準(zhǔn)確地說(shuō)，類(lèi)似于功能的目的性。張軻的建筑通常突出泛化、柔性、粗獷但具有社會(huì)性企圖的功能。它們從來(lái)不是其建筑的目的，而是支持其建筑邏輯的方法。在張軻的建筑中，有時(shí)我們很難找到具體的業(yè)主或最終使用者。但是，必須說(shuō)明的是，既然功能中立性可以有助于讓建筑保持更明確的設(shè)計(jì)自主性聚焦，那么何樂(lè)而不為呢？

最后，在張軻的建筑中能夠看到樂(lè)觀：對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)干預(yù)的樂(lè)觀。與一些西方評(píng)論完全相反的是，對(duì)于過(guò)去的30年中國(guó)發(fā)生的超高速城市化，張軻的回應(yīng)既不是抵抗也不是叛逆。他可以選擇適應(yīng)，但拒絕折衷純粹的、由設(shè)計(jì)產(chǎn)生的價(jià)值。他試圖在所有類(lèi)型的建筑中找到合適的切入點(diǎn)，從那開(kāi)始通過(guò)設(shè)計(jì)導(dǎo)致正向的改變。也許有人會(huì)說(shuō)，張軻的設(shè)計(jì)樂(lè)觀主義既是一種結(jié)果又是一種對(duì)他設(shè)計(jì)作品所處環(huán)境的適應(yīng)性機(jī)制：很明顯，在中國(guó)，最大的挑戰(zhàn)與最大的興奮長(zhǎng)期共存。

我們?cè)跒橐黄趯?zhuān)輯中瀏覽張軻的作品，希望通過(guò)它們重溫建筑的基本。當(dāng)然，對(duì)任何的基本而言，重溫永遠(yuǎn)好于忘卻。□

Our time is not known for its interest for the basics.With quantum physics and chaos theory flexing their muscles in our daily life, or at least said to be so, anything with hints to the absolute or the essential seems outdated.As Vattimo puts it, in the post-modern age, everything is just an interpretation rather than a conclusion, even this argument itself.

There has been shifts in Architecture as well. Broad semantic associations pulling architecture away from the pure joy of physicality of space, no matter how far-fetched,have become the de-facto definitions of new scopes that are widely celebrated. The practice of design itself is becoming more of critique than of intervention.

There are though, a few people trying to resist the trend. ZHANG Ke for one, chooses to revisit the basics.Over the past two decades, he and his colleagues have been committed to syntactical design enquiries and have been taking continuous experiments, both in the dense of superhigh-rise Chinese cities and in the thin of the vast Chinese countryside.

The autonomous, neutral approach of ZHANG Ke has imparted his works with an identifiable language. The abstract, ethics-free (or quasi-ethics-free) treatments of material and space are open to all kinds of commentaries.The fact that ZHANG Ke's works are sometimes interpreted dramatically differently in China and in the west is a proof of this abstraction and neutrality. It is exactly the basics of architecture, more than anything else, that make ZHANG Ke's work what they are.

There is geometry. Rational, yet delightful polygonal geometry that defies both the Domino of the orthodox modernists and the warping of the die-hard parametricists.Those who believe Euclidean geometry is only destined for boredom may have a second thought. ZHANG Ke has certainly achieved some organic complexity in his play of geometry, reminiscent of some non-orthodox modern pioneers those of Walter Foerderer.

There is light. Ample, even excessive daylight from all directions renders the usually humble interior spaces with an impressive aura. It is by the openings (windows, tunnels,wells, you name it) of light that ZHANG Ke take his boldest adventures into materiality and body space.

There is material. An obsession with monolithic quality drives ZHANG Ke to a variety of experiments, trying to mimic the 3D plasticity of concrete in all kinds of materials.The results are sometimes sound, sometimes arguable, but never boring.

There is the programme, sort of. General, flexible,broad-brush-definition yet social programmes are usually used to support ZHANG Ke's buildings. They are not the ends of the buildings, but the means. Sometimes it is even hard to find specific owners or users of certain buildings.After all, being programme-neutral helps to maintain more autonomous design focuses, so why not?

Finally, there is optimism: the optimism of design interventions. Quite contrary to some western observations,ZHANG Ke is neither resistant nor rebellious in his reaction to the super-fast urbanisation taking place in China in the past 30 years. What he cannot compromise, however, is the value generated purely by design. He tries to find the anchor point in all typologies from where he can deliver a positive change through design. One may argue that the design optimism of ZHANG Ke is both a product of and an adaptive mechanism to the environment his practice is in:the challenging and exciting situations in China.

Do let ZHANG Ke's works in this special issue take us to some basics of architecture. When it comes to the basics, it's always better to revisit than forget.□