瓦伊達(dá)斯·皮特路利斯/Vaidas Petrulis

黃華青 譯/Translated by HUANG Huaqing

2015年4月15日，布魯塞爾為“1919-1940年的考納斯”授予歐洲遺產(chǎn)標(biāo)識(shí)，印證了這個(gè)立陶宛臨時(shí)首都在歐洲建筑史的重要地位。同年，考納斯獲頒聯(lián)合國教科文組織“設(shè)計(jì)創(chuàng)意之都”稱號(hào)，兩次世界大戰(zhàn)期間的建筑遺產(chǎn)也被視為考納斯獲得該稱號(hào)的重要砝碼。這些建筑遺產(chǎn)在考納斯成功申辦2022年“歐洲文化首都”的過程中亦被提及。為該事件策劃的文化日程，將包括一項(xiàng)名為“面向未來的現(xiàn)代主義”的項(xiàng)目，將戰(zhàn)間建筑遺產(chǎn)置于更廣闊的藝術(shù)、社會(huì)及文化背景中詮釋。2017年，考納斯現(xiàn)代主義建筑被列入聯(lián)合國教科文組織世界遺產(chǎn)預(yù)備目錄。顯然，現(xiàn)代主義建筑遺產(chǎn)已被推動(dòng)并采納為這座城市特征的核心元素之一——它記載著20世紀(jì)上半葉的現(xiàn)代歐洲，以及當(dāng)代城市身份建構(gòu)過程中新涌現(xiàn)的、可持續(xù)的部分，是考納斯過去到未來的橋梁。有趣的是，將這部分建筑納入文化遺產(chǎn)的進(jìn)程出乎意料地?fù)碛幸欢魏荛L(zhǎng)的歷史。早在1972年，部分建筑就已被認(rèn)定為地方性建筑紀(jì)念物，這也是現(xiàn)代建筑被納入文化遺產(chǎn)名錄的最早案例之一。

現(xiàn)代主義作為場(chǎng)所的城市性特征

在展開立陶宛現(xiàn)代主義圖景之前，有必要短暫回顧相關(guān)的政治背景。一戰(zhàn)結(jié)束后，立陶宛和其他波羅的海國家一起獲得獨(dú)立。然而不久后的1919年，古都維爾紐斯淪陷，立陶宛共和國政府不得不遷往考納斯——當(dāng)時(shí)的第二大城市。這座曾經(jīng)的沙俄軍事重鎮(zhèn)，直至1939年皆作為立陶宛的臨時(shí)首都。在這段短暫而高強(qiáng)度的時(shí)期，考納斯經(jīng)歷了其歷史發(fā)展中最重要的階段。作為國家首都，考納斯掀起了一波建設(shè)熱潮，目的是建造一切必須的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施：政府機(jī)構(gòu)、博物館、教育機(jī)構(gòu)（包括一座大學(xué)及其他研究機(jī)構(gòu)和學(xué)校）、辦公樓、賓館、工業(yè)設(shè)施、住宅及其他城市基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施（供水系統(tǒng)、下水系統(tǒng)、新的交通系統(tǒng)、道路和公園）。多文化背景下，考納斯的建筑景觀因不同文化族群的建筑而日益豐富，如教堂、銀行和學(xué)校等，各具形式表達(dá)之特色（1937年城市人口的組成包括61%立陶宛人、25.5%猶太人、3.9%波蘭人、3.3%日耳曼人及3.3%俄羅斯人）。1938年，考納斯吸納了整個(gè)立陶宛城鎮(zhèn)建設(shè)投資的68%。城市建成區(qū)擴(kuò)大了逾7倍（從1919年的5.57km2到1939年的39.40km2）。

1維陶塔斯大帝軍事博物館，1936年建造，建筑師維拉蒂米拉斯·杜本涅奇斯，卡羅利斯·雷索那斯和卡茲米爾斯·克里斯茨卡迪斯/Vytautas the Great War Museum, architects Vladimiras Dubeneckis, Karolis Reisonas and Kazimieras Kri??iukaitis, built in 1936.（攝影/Photo: Gintaras ?esonis）

2考納斯駐軍官員俱樂部總部大樓，1937年建造，建筑師斯塔塞斯·庫都卡斯等/Officers Club Ramov?, built in 1937, architects Stasys Kudokas and others. （攝影/Photo:Romualdas Po?erskis）

今天的考納斯，依然保存著逾6000座兩次世界大戰(zhàn)期間建造的建筑。維陶塔斯大帝軍事博物館（圖1）、復(fù)活教堂、考納斯駐軍官員俱樂部總部大樓（圖2）、立陶宛銀行及其他一些標(biāo)志性建筑，至今依然是城市景觀的主宰，塑造著考納斯的城市標(biāo)志物之網(wǎng)。此外，臨時(shí)首都的記憶，亦根植于日常生活環(huán)境之中。仍在運(yùn)行的贊利亞卡涅斯青丘纜車索道和阿勒索塔斯纜車索道（圖3）、公寓住宅 （圖4、5）、學(xué)校、工廠和其他建筑，共同編織起一副多元而豐富的城市骨架。獨(dú)一無二的地方精神不僅來源于建筑立面，亦包括建成環(huán)境中無數(shù)細(xì)小而原真的細(xì)節(jié)。在城市街道中漫步，細(xì)數(shù)數(shù)百扇木門，每一扇皆具有個(gè)性化的現(xiàn)代設(shè)計(jì)。室內(nèi)裝飾著原創(chuàng)性的扶手和其他元素。因此，當(dāng)我們談到考納斯這樣一座將現(xiàn)代主義內(nèi)化為地方精神一部分的城市時(shí)，也有必要意識(shí)到，這是一個(gè)多層面的現(xiàn)象，不僅關(guān)乎那些標(biāo)志性建筑，也是一種日常性的習(xí)慣。

On 15 April 2015, Brussels conferred the European Heritage Label on "1919-1940 Kaunas"as a testament to the importance of the provisional Lithuanian's capital's phenomenon in the building of Europe. That same year, Kaunas was designated a UNESCO Creative City of Design, with the Interwar heritage acknowledged as a principal criterion for the designation. The architectural legacy was also mentioned in Kaunas'successful bid to be named European Capital of Culture for 2022. The cultural agenda for that year will include a programme entitled'Modernism for the Future', interpreting the Interwar heritage within a broader artistic, social and cultural context. In 2017, Kaunas' modernist architecture was included in the tentative list of UNESCO world heritage sites. Clearly, the modernist heritage has been promoted and adopted as a central element of the city's character – a testament to the modern Europe of the first half of the twentieth century and an emerging and sustainable part of the city's identity, building a bridge from Kaunas' past to its future. It is interesting, that the process of acceptance of this legacy as a cultural heritage has a surprisingly long history. Some buildings were recognised as architectural monuments of local significance as early as 1972 which is one of the earliest inscriptions of modern architecture into cultural heritage list.

Modernism as an urban character of the place

On entering the scene of Lithuanian modernism,it is important to take a short glimpse on the political entourage. Just after the end of WWI,Lithuania, along with the other Baltic countries,gained independence. However, soon after this, in 1919, the historical capital, Vilnius was lost, and the government of the Republic of Lithuania had to move to Kaunas – the second largest city. Previously military town of Tsarist Russia became the temporary capital of the country until 1939. During a short but very intense period, Kaunas lived through the most important phase in its historical development. Its status as a capital city provoked a huge construction boom, aiming to create the entire necessary infrastructure: government institutions, museums,educational institutions (a university, academies and schools), business offices, hotels, industrial premises, housing, and the general infrastructure of the city (water supplies, the sewerage system, a new transport system, roads and parks). The architectural landscape of multicultural Kaunas was enriched by the buildings of various ethnic communities, such as churches, banks and schools, with distinctive forms of expression (in 1937 the population of the city was 61% Lithuanian, 25.5% Jewish, 3.9% Polish, 3.3%German, and 3.3% Russian). In 1938, it attracted 68%of all Lithuanian investment in the construction of towns and cities. The area of the city expanded more than seven times (from 5.57km2in 1919 to 39.40km2in 1939).

More than 6,000 buildings built during the interwar period are still standing in today's Kaunas.Vytautas the Great War Museum (Fig. 1), Resurrection Church, The Officers Club Ramov? (Fig. 2), the Bank of Lithuania and other iconic buildings have survived as the urban dominants and shape the network of urban landmarks of today’s Kaunas. However, reminiscences of the temporary capital are also embedded in the daily life environment. Still-functioning funicular railways in ?aliakalnis and Aleksotas (Fig. 3), residential houses(Fig. 4,5), schools, factories and other objects weave a diverse and manifold urban structure. The unique local spirit is created not only by the fa?ades but also by the small original details of the surroundings. Walking through the streets of the city, we can count hundreds of wooden doors, and each one has its individual modern design. The interiors are decorated with authentic handrails and other elements; therefore,when it comes to Kaunas as a city where modernism is an integral part of the local spirit, it is important to realise that this is a multifaceted phenomenon which is directly related not only to the monuments but also to daily routine.

In essence, the status of the "temporary capital"gave considerable political, cultural and economic impulse to the transformation of Kaunas. It was explicitly recognised by contemporaries who would boast that "no other capital in the Baltic states is so'capitally' prominent like Kaunas <...>." The Lithuanians longing for the old Vilnius haven't even noticed yet that they have already built a new Vilnius”[1]. In a few decades of independence, Kaunas acquired a whole constellation of interwar-period buildings and experienced a large-scale modernisation of the city.This brought Kaunas to a point in the late 1930s when it was already perceived as a city "erasing the traces of the style imposed by the Russians, discovering more and more unique features and acquiring the nature of a modern Western European city"[2].

Modernity as urban manifestation first of all is being defined by functional division of a city into zones, by groups of multi-storey houses, by the principles of free planning, and by certain formal features of architecture that are perhaps most notably expressed in Le Corbusier's five points of modern architecture. The key source of ideological inspiration is overall improvement of hygiene and management of social processes in the city. All of this comprised the common modernist framework, which could be expressed both through individual architectural experiments and larger urban formations depending on specific circumstances. Political aspirations of the new state of Lithuania to build as many "cheap,accurate, hygienic and fireproof dwellings"[3]as possible clearly reflect these tendencies of Modern Movement. However, the actual processes were somewhat different.

3仍在運(yùn)營的贊利亞卡涅斯青丘纜車索道，1931年建造/Funicular of Green hill (?aliakalnis) still in operation, built in 1931. （攝影/Photo: Vaidas Petrulis）

Although a plan for urban development was drawn up in 1923 by Danish architect Peter Marius Fandsen and Lithuanian Antanas Jokimas (Fig.6), most of the construction was carried out not in separate, newly-designed quarters, but the buildings were embedded in the already existing urban structure. Despite a boom in construction,most city offices and residents remained in Tsaristera buildings, which were later renovated, expanded and increased in height. Therefore the life was buzzing in the streets of the constantly changing and modernising Tsarist city. In this way, the modernisation of the environment was characterised not by strict functional zones or dramatic urban redevelopment, but by the consistent urban development with a diverse building, where the aesthetics of the 1930s remain the most characteristic layer and the source of inspiration. Here the interwar architecture dominates not only physically, but also as the most important vector of urban development and the essential part of identity.

根本上說，“臨時(shí)首都”的地位賦予了考納斯城市轉(zhuǎn)型極大的政治、文化和經(jīng)濟(jì)動(dòng)力。同代人曾如此直言不諱地宣稱，“沒有其他任何波羅的海國家首都擁有考納斯這樣杰出的‘首都性’……那些渴望恢復(fù)老維爾紐斯的立陶宛人或許還未意識(shí)到，他們已然重建了一座新的維爾紐斯。”[1]在獨(dú)立后幾十年間，考納斯建起了一大批戰(zhàn)間建筑，經(jīng)歷了大規(guī)模的城市現(xiàn)代化。在1930年代末，考納斯已發(fā)展至這樣一個(gè)節(jié)點(diǎn)，被認(rèn)為是一座“抹除了俄國強(qiáng)加的風(fēng)格、愈發(fā)獨(dú)具特色、擁有現(xiàn)代西歐城市特征”的城市[2]。

現(xiàn)代主義作為一種城市宣言，基本定義即表現(xiàn)為城市功能分區(qū)、多層住宅區(qū)、自由規(guī)劃原則、以及某些建筑形式上的特征——或許最顯而易見的標(biāo)志就是勒·柯布西耶提出的新建筑五點(diǎn)。其意識(shí)形態(tài)上的重要源頭即城市衛(wèi)生的整體改觀及社會(huì)進(jìn)程的管理。這些理念構(gòu)筑起現(xiàn)代主義的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)框架，不僅體現(xiàn)在個(gè)體建筑實(shí)驗(yàn)中，也表現(xiàn)于特定條件下的大范圍城市建設(shè)。立陶宛這個(gè)新國家力圖建設(shè)盡可能多的“廉價(jià)、精準(zhǔn)、衛(wèi)生、防火的居所”[3]的政治目標(biāo)，明確反映了現(xiàn)代主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的某些趨勢(shì)。然而，實(shí)際進(jìn)程不盡如此。

1923年，丹麥建筑師彼得·馬里烏斯·范森和立陶宛建筑師安塔納斯·喬奇馬斯制定了城市發(fā)展規(guī)劃（圖6），但大部分建造并不是在另辟新建的街區(qū)、而是嵌入業(yè)已存在的城市結(jié)構(gòu)之中。盡管經(jīng)歷了建造熱潮，但城市中大部分辦公和居住功能依然沿用沙俄時(shí)期的建筑，這些建筑后來經(jīng)歷了修復(fù)、擴(kuò)建及加高。因此，在這座不斷變化及現(xiàn)代化中的沙俄城市的街道上，生活甚為繁忙。如此，城市環(huán)境的現(xiàn)代化并不表現(xiàn)為嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)墓δ芊謪^(qū)或激進(jìn)的城市重建，而是多樣化的持續(xù)城市發(fā)展建設(shè)。其中，1930年代的審美觀持續(xù)作為最具特征的表現(xiàn)層次和靈感之源。戰(zhàn)間建筑不僅在物理環(huán)境中占據(jù)主導(dǎo)地位，也是城市發(fā)展及身份建構(gòu)中最主要的部分。

4凱米蘇奈家族建造的住宅，1931年建造，建筑師維陶塔斯·蘭德斯別爾基斯-雅姆卡里尼斯/House built by Chaimsunai family, built in 1931, architect Vytautas Landsbergis-?emkalnis. （攝影/Photo: Gintaras ?esonis）

5凱米蘇奈家族建造的住宅背面，1931年建造，建筑師維陶塔斯·蘭德斯別爾基斯-雅姆卡里尼斯/Back fa?ade of the house built by Chaimsunai family, built in 1931, architect Vytautas Landsbergis-?emkalnis. （攝影/Photo: Gintaras ?esonis）

6丹麥建筑師彼得·馬里烏斯·范森和立陶宛建筑師安塔納斯·喬奇馬斯制定的考納斯城市發(fā)展規(guī)劃，1923年，部分實(shí)現(xiàn)/City development plan prepared for Kaunas by the Danish architect Peter Marius Frandsen and Lithuanian architect Antanas Jokimas.1923. Partly implemented.（圖片來源/Source: 立陶宛中央國家檔案館/Lithuanian Central State Archives）

以建筑建構(gòu)國家身份

從今天的視角回顧20世紀(jì)建筑遺產(chǎn)的價(jià)值傳承，必須注意的是政治因素在其中發(fā)揮的作用——不僅體現(xiàn)在城市的直接物質(zhì)變化，也影響著意識(shí)形態(tài)背景。在此語境下，最關(guān)鍵的一步就是試圖建構(gòu)國家身份的建筑進(jìn)程。對(duì)所謂“國家風(fēng)格”的追尋，顯然與國家最重要的地緣政治目的之一相關(guān)——即強(qiáng)化它在文化領(lǐng)域的地位，由此建立一個(gè)強(qiáng)有力的民族國家。這一追求“國家風(fēng)格”的目標(biāo)可用當(dāng)時(shí)立陶宛最著名的建筑師之一、也是該項(xiàng)目標(biāo)的制定者卡羅利斯·雷索那斯的話來闡釋：“我們立陶宛人，必須發(fā)揮極高的創(chuàng)造力，使我國的建筑屹立于世界之林，以證明我們并非白白活著，并非白白占據(jù)這個(gè)星球的一部分?！盵4]因此，建筑被賦予一項(xiàng)特殊使命——?jiǎng)?chuàng)建獨(dú)一無二的城市環(huán)境，不僅能代表民族國家身份，且彰顯出一種完全不同于沙俄傳統(tǒng)的建筑形象。

在建筑學(xué)領(lǐng)域，大部分“國家風(fēng)格”的案例皆被視為某種意義上的歷史主義，即將傳統(tǒng)風(fēng)格要素替代以裝飾性的民間藝術(shù)母題（圖7）。某些情況下，建筑師的訴求接近于當(dāng)時(shí)典型見于北歐國家的地域主義。這一情境下，立陶宛的地方建筑傳統(tǒng)發(fā)揮著重要作用，提供了國家建筑身份的可能來源。“我們?yōu)楹我V諸國外案例？不如去探索薩莫吉希亞（立陶宛西北地區(qū)）的農(nóng)場(chǎng)，在保持其風(fēng)格的同時(shí)適應(yīng)更先進(jìn)、衛(wèi)生的要求，這樣不是更好嗎？”[5]——當(dāng)時(shí)其中一本最重要的城市建筑期刊如此發(fā)問。

保守民族主義與現(xiàn)代主義建筑的爭(zhēng)端往往是通過民間藝術(shù)傳統(tǒng)的裝飾元素來調(diào)解的。其中的決定性角色是民間藝術(shù)的研究者和支持者，他們確信“國家風(fēng)格”最合適的基礎(chǔ)就是廣義上的民間藝術(shù)。這類觀點(diǎn)集中體現(xiàn)在一批文章中，強(qiáng)調(diào)一種立陶宛的獨(dú)特“藝術(shù)感”及裝飾化的趨向。正如立陶宛著名藝術(shù)家亞當(dāng)馬斯·瓦爾納斯所宣稱的：“裝飾性木十字架在民間藝術(shù)中的使用，完全是一個(gè)立陶宛式現(xiàn)象。它在某種意義上就是我們國家的金字塔。”[6]談到這個(gè)，值得一提的是2011年聯(lián)合國教科文組織將“立陶宛十字架雕刻及其象征體系”納入人類口頭與非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)名錄。

盡管在職業(yè)工匠體系中尋找立陶宛精神并不是一個(gè)普遍現(xiàn)象，但各種如今可與裝飾藝術(shù)運(yùn)動(dòng)相聯(lián)系的裝飾（不僅是“國家風(fēng)格”），依然是整個(gè)獨(dú)立期間考納斯建筑的重要元素。即便在1940年代晚期，新一代建筑師費(fèi)利克斯·比林斯基依然深信“裝飾的形式必須表達(dá)整座建筑的意義和使命。一個(gè)裝飾的特寫，就需傳達(dá)出這座建筑整體的功能?！盵7]考納斯中央郵局就很好地體現(xiàn)了這一愿景，它將現(xiàn)代性與裝飾細(xì)節(jié)中的地方特征相結(jié)合（圖8、9）。窗框模仿了木雕風(fēng)格，鋪地磚的設(shè)計(jì)采用了傳統(tǒng)織物紋樣，室內(nèi)裝飾亦基于民間藝術(shù)設(shè)計(jì)，這一切則與條形長(zhǎng)窗、平屋頂?shù)痊F(xiàn)代主義的標(biāo)志元素相結(jié)合。

現(xiàn)代主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的地方詮釋

Search for national identity in architecture

Looking back from today's perspective at the inheritance of this 20th century legacy, it is important to notice that political issues had an impact, not only on the direct physical changes of the city, but also on its ideological background. In this context, probably the most important development was of the architectural processes that indicated a search for a national identity. A search for a socalled "national style" was obviously interconnected with one of the most important geopolitical aims of the state – to strengthen its role in the cultural field in such a way as to construct a strong national state. Such an objective for the "national style" can be described in the words of Karolis Reisonas, one of the most famous Lithuanian architects of that time,who formulated the task: "we, Lithuanians, have to show high creativity, and to make our architecture interesting in a global scale; to prove that we live not in vain, not in vain occupy the part of the globe."[4]Therefore, architecture had a special mission –to create a distinctive urban environment which represented the national state and demonstrated an architectural expression which was completely dissimilar to that of the tsarist Russian legacy.

Most of the examples of a "national style" in professional architecture were treated as a kind of historicism in which traditional stylistic elements were replaced by the decorative motifs of folk art(Fig. 7). In some cases, architectural aspirations could be placed somewhere close to those of a kind of regionalism that was typical for Nordic countries of that time. In this context the local architectural traditions of Lithuanian regions played an important role, indicating possible sources for national architectural identity. "Why do we have to seek examples somewhere abroad? Isn’t it better to explore the Samogitian [north-western region of Lithuania]farmsteads instead, and to adapt them to new progressive and hygienic requirements, while preserving their style?"[5]– asks one of the most important journals on urban and architectural issues.

The dispute between conservative nationalism and modern architecture, were often complemented by rhetorics resembling folk traditions. The decisive role in this discussion was played out by folk art researchers and supporters, who had no doubt that the most excellent basis for a "national style" of architecture should be folk art, in a broad sense. Texts emphasising a special Lithuanian "art feeling" and an inclination toward ornamentation were the main foci of this point of view. As the famous Lithuanian artist Adomas Varnas claimed: "the decorative wooden cross, as it was used in our folk art, is an entirely Lithuanian phenomenon. It is a kind of pyramid of our own."[6]In this context, it would be interesting to remember that UNESCO proclaimed in 2011 that Cross Crafting and Symbolism in Lithuania as part of the oral and intangible heritage of humanity.

Although the attempts to search for the Lithuanian spirit in professional masonry construction are not a dominant phenomenon, various decorations(not only in the national-style) that can now be linked to Art Deco, remain an important piece of Kaunas'architecture during the entire period of independence.Even in the late 1930s, the new generation architect,Feliksas Bielinskis, was convinced that "the ornament must, in its form, interpret the meaning and designation of the entire building. Its thumbnail needs to express what is the function of the building in the whole picture"[7]. Kaunas central post office,could be a good illustration of such aspiration to integrate modernity and local character expressed in ornamentation (Fig. 8,9). Window frames imitating wooden carving, floor tiling designed like the ornament of traditional textiles and interior ornament based on folk art was combined with such expressive signs of modernism as wide strip windows and flat roof.

Local interpretations of Modern Movement

Keywords of modernism in Lithuanian architectural theory and practice become dominant in the 1930's, when the younger generation of Lithuanian architects began to return from their studies in European universities (Rome, Prague,Berlin etc.) and brought with them new ideas of how contemporary capital should look. Newspapers and journals began to explain the aesthetics of modernism, and local officials after their visits to Germany, England and Sweden, brought back descriptions of the construction of schools, social housing and other civic infrastructure. One of the first voices, that of Vladas ?vipas, a student of the Bauhaus in 1927 writes: "our cities have many historical documents that do not touch our minds anymore because they are past their time. Therefore,as a matter of course, architects who still design using historical styles, have to take responsibility for their preference. These houses are mummies, corpses which will stand publicly for centuries. "[8]

Such theoretical assumptions of the 1930s was transformed into world-renowned modernist aesthetics: the consonance of ribbon windows, flat roofs, geometric volumes and planes. The representative office of "Pienocentras" (a manufacturer of milk products, one of the richest companies in Lithuania at that time) – could be a good example of the emergence of modernist ideas in all areas. In the 1937 Paris International Exposition, which was dedicated to Art and Technology in modern life, building won a prize for its architectural design, and became one of the symbols of modern ideas in Lithuanian architecture of the time (Fig. 10). Another symbolical illustration of architectural processes is the Resurrection Church(Fig. 11,12). After long process of completion and public discussions Karolis Reisonas began to develop his grandiloquent building which was completed and started to serve as a church just in 2004. Rising above the slope horizon surrounding the city the church reminds the concept of Stadtkrone – the City Crown – formulated by the renowned German architect Bruno Taut.

Probably the most numerous part of the Kaunas school of modernism is private housing. Many important examples by such architects as Arnas Funkas (Fig. 13), Bronius Elsbergas (Fig. 14) Jokūbas Peras (Fig. 15), Jonas Kri??iukaitis and others are distinguished by original and expressive forms, which,without a doubt, represents the best achievements of Lithuanian interwar modernism. The modernisation of the housing environment was accompanied by a considerably broad theoretical discourse, with the principles of modern housing being discussed both in print and in the public at large, emphasising efficiency and rationalism. A new concept for housing was first presented in the Lithuanian press by Vladas ?vipas.His series of articles, begun in 1927, evolved into a separate publication based on the principles of the Bauhaus, published in 1933 under the title "Urban Residential Homes"[9].

However, when trying to define the characteristic of Kaunas modernism, one has to deal with a phomement much more diverse than simplicity of Modern Movement. One of the elements of the local spirit is the importance of tradition. Although new buildings often used innovative technologies,such as reinforced concrete or glass (Fig. 16), the modernist principles of existential minimalism and standardisation were not adopted in the architecture of Kaunas. Aspirations for modernisation in many cases have been overwhelmed by conservative thoughts. Classical architecture was not forgotten even when advanced technologies were used. For example, Landsbergis-?emkalnis, who designed the Palace of Physical Education (Fig. 18), wrote in 1932 that he sought "to combine two things and two forms into one building: the classics, the first great pioneer of physical culture (Greece), with our times"[10]. Such a monumental classical rhythm of modern forms describes many buildings of Kaunas built in the 1930s (Fig. 17).

現(xiàn)代主義的關(guān)鍵詞在1930年代立陶宛的建筑理論和實(shí)踐中占據(jù)主導(dǎo)，原因是年輕一代立陶宛建筑師在歐洲的大學(xué)（羅馬、布拉格、柏林等）學(xué)成歸國，帶回關(guān)于現(xiàn)代首都形象構(gòu)設(shè)的全新理念。報(bào)紙和刊物爭(zhēng)相闡釋現(xiàn)代主義美學(xué)，地方官員在訪問德國、英格蘭、瑞典后，亦帶回關(guān)于學(xué)校、社會(huì)住宅及其他市政基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施建設(shè)的見聞。其中，最早發(fā)聲的是1927年一位包豪斯學(xué)生瓦拉達(dá)斯·斯法帕斯：“我們的城市中包含很多歷史信息，卻無法再觸碰我們的心靈，因?yàn)樗鼈冊(cè)缫堰^時(shí)。因此，那些仍采取歷史風(fēng)格做設(shè)計(jì)的建筑師理應(yīng)為他們的品味負(fù)責(zé)。這些住宅就是歷史的干尸和尸體，竟要在公共眼前繼續(xù)矗立幾個(gè)世紀(jì)。”[8]

7Tulp?合作公寓樓，1926年建造，建筑師安塔納斯·馬茨賈卡斯/Tulp? Cooperative apartment building, built in 1926,architect Antanas Maciejauskas（圖片來源/Source: M. K. 茨瑞利翁尼斯國家藝術(shù)博物館檔案/M. K. ?iurlionis National Art Museum Archives）

8考納斯中央郵局，1931年建造，建筑師菲利薩斯·維茨巴拉斯/Kaunas central post office, built in 1931, architect Feliksas Vizbaras. （攝影/Photo: Gintaras ?esonis）

9考納斯中央郵局內(nèi)景，1931年建造，建筑師菲利薩斯·維茨巴拉斯/Interior of Kaunas central post office, built in 1931,architect Feliksas Vizbaras. （圖片來源/Source: 安塔納斯·伯爾庫斯個(gè)人收藏/personal collection of Antanas Burkus）

10"Pienocentras"公司辦公樓，1932年建造，建筑師維陶塔斯·蘭德斯別爾基斯-雅姆卡里尼斯/Office building of"Pienocentras" company, built in 1932, architect Vytautas Landsbergis-?emkalnis. （圖片來源/Source: 安塔納斯·伯爾庫斯個(gè)人收藏/personal collection of Antanas Burkus）

11復(fù)活教堂，1931年建造，建筑師卡羅利斯·雷索那斯/Resurrection Church, built from 1931, architect Karolis Reisonas. （攝影/Photo: Gintaras ?esonis）

12復(fù)活教堂內(nèi)景，1931年建造，建筑師卡羅利斯·雷索那斯/Resurrection Church, built from 1931, architect Karolis Reisonas. （攝影/Photo: Gintaras ?esonis）

13伊利納艾家庭住宅，1934年建造，建筑師阿爾納斯·芬卡斯/House for Iljinai family, architect Arnas Funkas, built in 1934. （攝影/Photo: Vaidas Petrulis）

1930年代的理論預(yù)設(shè)后轉(zhuǎn)化為舉世聞名的現(xiàn)代主義美學(xué)體系：帶形窗、平屋頂、幾何體量和平面的交響?！癙ienocentras”公司（奶制品生產(chǎn)企業(yè)，是當(dāng)時(shí)立陶宛最富有的公司之一）代理辦公室是各地涌現(xiàn)的現(xiàn)代主義理念的一個(gè)典型代表。在1937年巴黎世博會(huì)——那屆獻(xiàn)給現(xiàn)代生活的藝術(shù)與技術(shù)的盛會(huì)上，這座建筑的設(shè)計(jì)斬獲大獎(jiǎng)，也成為當(dāng)時(shí)立陶宛建筑現(xiàn)代理念的象征（圖10）。這一建筑進(jìn)程的另一標(biāo)志物是復(fù)活教堂（圖11、12）。經(jīng)過長(zhǎng)時(shí)間的競(jìng)賽和公共意見征詢，卡羅利斯·雷索那斯設(shè)計(jì)的這座宏偉建筑物直到2004年才建成并投入使用。這座教堂從城市郊區(qū)平緩的地平線上拔地而起，使人聯(lián)想到德國著名建筑師布魯諾·陶特提出的“城市皇冠”概念。

考納斯現(xiàn)代主義學(xué)派最高產(chǎn)的建筑類型應(yīng)是私人住宅。由阿爾納斯·芬卡斯（圖13）、布羅尼烏斯·埃爾斯貝格斯（圖14）、喬庫巴斯 ·波拉斯（圖15）、喬納斯·克里斯茨卡迪斯等建筑師創(chuàng)作的一批重要作品的形式皆具獨(dú)創(chuàng)性、表現(xiàn)性，無疑代表了立陶宛戰(zhàn)間現(xiàn)代主義的最高成就。居住環(huán)境的現(xiàn)代化伴隨著相當(dāng)廣泛的理論探討，強(qiáng)調(diào)效率和理性的現(xiàn)代住宅原則在理論界和公眾領(lǐng)域皆引發(fā)討論。住宅的新理念最早由瓦拉達(dá)斯·斯法帕斯刊載于立陶宛媒體。他從1927年開始連載的系列文章最后匯集為一本基于包豪斯原則的出版物，于1933年出版，題為《城市居住的家》[9]。

然而，當(dāng)我們?cè)噲D定義考納斯現(xiàn)代主義的特征，面臨的現(xiàn)實(shí)遠(yuǎn)比現(xiàn)代主義運(yùn)動(dòng)所倡導(dǎo)的簡(jiǎn)約要多樣得多。地方精神中一個(gè)重要的元素是傳統(tǒng)。盡管新建筑往往采用增強(qiáng)混凝土或玻璃等新技術(shù)（圖16），但存在主義式的極少主義和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化等現(xiàn)代建筑原則并未體現(xiàn)于考納斯的建筑中。在很多情況下，對(duì)現(xiàn)代化的渴求被保守思想所壓制。即便在先進(jìn)技術(shù)被廣泛使用的年代，古典建筑仍未被遺忘。例如，體育教育館（圖18）的建筑師蘭德斯別爾基斯-雅姆卡里尼斯在1932年寫道，他試圖“將兩條頭緒、兩種形式融入一座建筑：古典——來自物理學(xué)先驅(qū)的時(shí)代（古希臘）——與當(dāng)代?！盵10]這種具有紀(jì)念性古典韻律的現(xiàn)代形式，是1930年代很多考納斯建筑的縮影（圖17）。

綜上所述，兩次世界大戰(zhàn)期間立陶宛、尤其是考納斯的建筑，展現(xiàn)出現(xiàn)代主義運(yùn)動(dòng)、“民族風(fēng)格”詮釋及地方建筑品味的有趣融合。盡管考納斯建造的初衷是重現(xiàn)維爾紐斯這樣的歷史古都，但樂觀主義的居住者們創(chuàng)造出的卻是一座由高品質(zhì)且耐用的建筑構(gòu)成的切時(shí)、現(xiàn)代而風(fēng)格多樣的城市。戰(zhàn)間建筑最重大的目標(biāo)之一——?jiǎng)?chuàng)造一個(gè)原創(chuàng)性的立陶宛建筑模式——完全是通過建筑學(xué)層面的城市現(xiàn)代化、而非幼稚的民間藝術(shù)效仿來實(shí)現(xiàn)的。如今，我們不妨把該時(shí)期的建筑遺產(chǎn)理解為立陶宛現(xiàn)代主義學(xué)派?！?/p>

14波洛納艾和維索卡艾家庭住宅，1933年建造，建筑師布羅尼烏斯·埃爾斯貝格斯/House for Baronai and Visockiai families, architect Bronius Elsbergas, built in 1933. （圖片來源/Source: M. K. 茨瑞利翁尼斯國家藝術(shù)博物館檔案/M.K. ?iurlionis National Art Museum Archives）

15波斯凡奇斯和科利薩斯家庭住宅，1958年建造，建筑師喬庫巴斯·波拉斯/House for Posvianskis and Klisas family,architect Jokūbas Peras, built in 1958. （攝影/Photo:Gintaras ?esonis）

16國家儲(chǔ)蓄銀行（現(xiàn)考納斯市政局）的屋頂，1940年建造，建筑師阿爾納斯·芬卡斯/Ceiling in State Savings Bank(now Kaunas City Municipality), architect Arnas Funkas,built in 1940. （攝影/Photo: Vaidas Petrulis）

17工業(yè)貿(mào)易及手工業(yè)大廈，1938年建造，建筑師維陶塔斯·蘭德斯別爾基斯-雅姆卡里尼斯/Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Crafts, built in 1938, architect Vytautas Landsbergis-?emkalnis. （圖片來源/Source: M. K. 茨瑞利翁尼斯國家藝術(shù)博物館檔案/M. K. ?iurlionis National Art Museum Archives）

18體育教育館，1934年建造，建筑師維陶塔斯·蘭德斯別爾基斯-雅姆卡里尼斯/Palace of Physical Education, built in 1934, architect Vytautas Landsbergis-?emkalnis. （圖片來源/Source: 立陶宛中央國家檔案館攝影文件部/Lithuanian central state archive, photodocuments department）

To sum up, architecture of the interwar period in Lithuania, and especially in Kaunas exhibits an interesting mixture of the Modern Movement,interpretations of so-called "national style", and of local architectural taste. Although Kaunas was built with a hope of restoring the historic capital of Vilnius,the optimistic residents created a contemporary,modern and stylistically diverse city with durable buildings of high quality. One of the most important goals of the interwar architecture – to create an original formula of Lithuanian architecture was completely implemented through modernisation of the city instead of na?ve folk art imitations in professional architecture. Now we understand this legacy as a school of Lithuanian modernism. □

參考文獻(xiàn)/References

[1]Est? ?urnalista apie Kaun? [Estonian journalist on Kaunas]. Rytas, 7 February 1935:5.

[2]Kaunas i?augo ? modern? miest?. "Polska Zbrojna"atsiliepimas [Kaunas grew into modern city. Opinion by"Polska Zbrojna"], Lietuvos aidas, 22 March 1939:2.

[3]Lietuvos atstatymo komisariato aplinkra?tis [Circular of the Lithuanian Reconstruction Commissariat], 1923 m., LCVA, f. 377, ap. 8, b. 4:64.

[4]Karolis Reisonas, Naujos id?jos architektūroje [New ideas in architecture], Savivaldyb?, 1933, no. 9:35.

[5]Kaim? ir miesteli? pagra?inimas [The embellishment of villages and townships], Savivaldyb?, 1938, no. 4:98.[6]Adomas Varnas, Lietuvi? kry?iai [Lithuanian crosses],Baras, 1925, no. 5:81.

[7]Bielinskis, Feliksas. Architektūros esm? [On Essence of Architecture], Savivaldyb?, 1937, nr. 2:61–62[8]Vladas ?vipas, Architektūros reikalu [On matters of architecture], Kultūra, 1927, no. 7–8:334.

[9]Vladas ?vipas, Miesto gyvenamieji namai [Urban Residential Homes]. Kaunas, 1933.

[10]Landsbergis, Vytautas. Fizi?ko aukl?jimo rūmai [House of physical Education]. Fizi?kas aukl?jimas, 1931, nr. 2:109–115.