同濟建筑學人：一枚開啟中國建筑現代性的鑰匙

張利/ZHANG Li

同濟建筑學人：一枚開啟中國建筑現代性的鑰匙

張利/ZHANG Li

五月總是有各種理由讓人感受到青春與樂觀主義，這其中的一個理由便是每年此時我們都會聚焦于文革以后的中國建筑教育。今年，我們觀察的是一個在中國建筑現代性的進程中不可替代的群體：同濟大學建筑與城規(guī)學院（建筑系）的建筑學人。對中國建筑現代性的求索貫穿了這一群體存在的歷史，而了解這一群體對于認知、梳理中國建筑現代性而言，無異于一枚鑰匙。當然，按照慣例，我們的觀察范圍仍然是在1978年后在此接受建筑教育、目前在建筑設計及相關領域中具有代表性的人。

同濟建筑學人對中國建筑現代性的求索源于其根。不可否認，我們今天所談及的一般意義上的現代性是來自西方的。在這方面，上海這座在中國近代史上（甚至在亞洲近代史上）獨一無二的城市為同濟提供了得天獨厚的文化土壤。眾所周知，上海在整個中國現代史中所扮演的、被羅茲·墨菲稱為“現代中國之匙”的角色起于19世紀中葉，延續(xù)發(fā)展至今。其間，現代性的標識性特征——新興的工業(yè)、經濟變革與社會思潮——在到達中國時，幾乎無一例外地首先在上海著陸。如果暫且拋開其作為殖民者的輕狂與偏見，英國傳教士慕維廉在其1893年外灘演講中所提到的“上海是我們的高度文明與基督教精神對整個中國產生影響的中心”這一論斷實際上從另一個視角證實了，上海自西學東漸以來在國際時代思潮引入中國方面所一直起到的作用。得益于這種文化環(huán)境的持續(xù)滋養(yǎng)，于1952年成立的同濟大學建筑學院（系）自然地繼承了其前身圣約翰大學建筑系、之江大學建筑系等校博采西學眾家之長的底蘊，從一開始便奠定了以理性精神和多元路徑來探求中國建筑現代性的身份，并隨著其一代又一代杰出學者的推動，在中國建筑教育中獨樹一幟。

同濟建筑學人對中國建筑現代性的求索執(zhí)于其性。回溯歷史，中國建筑的現代性遠非一個甜蜜的故事，中國建筑教育對現代性的態(tài)度亦體現為時近時疏的搖擺。考慮到多數中國高等學府都或多或少是西學方法與儒學傳統(tǒng)的合體，而儒學傳統(tǒng)與現代性之間有著被黃秉泰稱為“不可避免”的沖突，這一歷史糾葛并不令人感到意外。然而，作為中國高等教育中最少儒家重負的學院之一，同濟建筑學院（系）在“物”“我”兩個層面都表現出了對中國建筑（及中國建筑教育）現代性的執(zhí)拗。于“物”，即教育的客體目標方面，同濟建筑教育始終堅持了重技、務實、創(chuàng)新的“包豪斯”精神。無論是在建國之初的古典主義復興時期，還是在改革開放初期的“民族后現代主義”時期，同濟建筑學人都體現了群體性的連貫與堅持，敢冒天下之大不韙，積極介入、引領了中國城市與建筑現代化的線索。于“我”，即教育的主體組織方面，同濟建筑教育更是建立起了引以為豪的、在國內罕見的現代“學術民主”生態(tài)。歷經半個多世紀，這一學術生態(tài)的成就是令人擊節(jié)贊嘆的：不僅因為其在數十年間所造就的寬廣學術高原，或者說同濟建筑學人在教育、研究、公共管理、實踐、市場等眾多方面的成功；更因為這一以“群峰”取代“尖峰”的多元化機制與當今國際化體系的兼容，因為其在好奇心、競爭、更新、修正與激發(fā)創(chuàng)新方面的持久動力。如果說前者影響的是中國建筑學界與業(yè)界，后者影響的則已經超出了學科本身，而上升到了中國高等教育現代性的范疇。

同濟建筑學人對中國建筑現代性的求索見于其行。自馮紀忠先生起，同濟建筑學人群體堅持置身于中國現代建筑的前沿，從早期的對現代建筑的引入到今天的當代中國建筑創(chuàng)作、評論、策展與傳播。他們不僅創(chuàng)造了中國現代建筑歷史上相當一部分的經典作品，更在建筑文化的各個層面積累起成功案例的清單：專門報道中國建筑、進入西方建筑書店的期刊，關注建筑與城市問題的藝術展覽，國際重要建筑獎項的評委，先進的制造實驗室，等等。我們清晰地看到，同濟建筑學人作為一枚中國建筑現代性的鑰匙，其開啟的已不僅是輸入之門，也同時是輸出之門。

攻擊，特別是來自自身的攻擊是建筑教育現代性的一部分，科林·羅的言論為我們提供了典型的佐證。作為中國建筑教育現代性的代表之一，同濟自然不能回避這樣的部分，特別是當它處于中國現代史上這樣一座特殊的城市、有著與眾不同的文化識別性時。然而歷史向我們表明，攻擊未曾動搖同濟建筑學人群體對中國建筑現代性的求索，反倒強化了其樂觀主義的態(tài)度。過去如此，現在如此，未來也將是如此。

行文至此不得不提及在此輯“同濟建筑學人”形成過程中的兩個令人難忘之處：其一是李振宇教授提出希望突破“學人”系列每輯50人的常規(guī)，因為同濟方面寧愿為收錄更多學人以體現年齡與方向上的多樣性而縮減其余內容的篇幅，這是一個令人無法拒絕的要求。其二是在確定入輯人選的過程中，同濟方面不僅依賴自己學科專業(yè)委員會的判斷，更邀請了同濟之外的人士參與投票選擇，這多少是有點令人意外的。此兩處權作現代性開放多元特征的實例罷。

感謝同濟大學建筑學院李振宇教授、李翔寧教授、蔡永潔教授及其他為本輯付出努力的教授。是他們的工作使本期專輯成為可能。□

We have good reasons to feel young and optimistic in May. One of the reasons is that it is time again for us to focus on post-culture-revolution architecture education in China. This time, we will present a community that is indispensable in the development of Chinese modern architecture, namely Tongji alumni. Throughout the history of this community, there has been a persistent inquiry into what Chinese modern architecture is. This community is effectively a key to modernity in Chinese architecture. To continue the norm in our architecture school series, we will study only architecture alumni of Tongji after 1978.

The Tongji inquiry into modernity in Chinese architecture comes from its root. Few will argue that the concept of modernity has been a western construct. In this regard, Shanghai has been a unique substrate in Chinese history （or even in Asian history） which fosters modernity. Shanghai has been performing the role of the key to modern China, as Rhoads Murphey put it. This role started in mid-19th century, and has been continued up to now. When major marks of modernity, such as new industry, new economy and new ideas arrive in China, they arrive in Shanghai first. Putting its colonial arrogance and prejudice aside, William Muirhead's famous sentence in his 1893 speech at the Bund Park, "Shanghai is the pivotal point of our advance civilisation and Christianity influencing the entire China", still gives a tangible proof of the role of Shanghai from an alternative view point. It was from this cultural ground that the Tongji Architecture Department, right from its founding in 1952, inheriting the tradition of both its predecessors, St. John and Zhijiang, defined its identity as the pursuer of Chinese modernity. Propelled by the hard work of generations of talents, Tongji now enjoys a unique place in Chinese architecture education.

The Tongji inquiry into modernity in Chinese architecture has been built into the persona of its people. Modernity in Chinese architecture is by no means a sweet and happy story. Chinese architecture education's take on modernity has been at best a pendulum movement. Most Chinese higher education institutes are mergers between western academic systems and Confucianism core beliefs. According to HWANG Byung-tai, there have been inevitable contradictions between modernity and Confucianism. This partially explains the reluctant attitude towards modernity adopted by many Chinese universities. Tongji is a rare supply in this regard. It doesn't have much Confucianism heritage to live with. That is why Tongji has always been enthusiastic to modernity, both in its pedagogy and its faculty. In its pedagogy, Tongji has a Bauhaus-like tradition which emphasises technology, practicality and innovation. Whether in the Chinese classic-revival time of the 1950s or in the national post-modernism time of the 1990s, Tongji stayed virtually undistracted, adhering to its own modernism preoccupation. In its faculty, Tongji has built a modern academic democracy, something unusual in China. Five decades into its existence, this academic democracy has been found by many to be convincing. Not only has it produced an academic plateau, a collection of numerous influential people and success in a wide range of fields, it has also built a pluralistic institution that is highly compatible with the international systems today. If the impact of the former is still limited to Chinese architecture education, the latter has gone far beyond that, and addresses Chinese higher education as a whole.

The Tongji inquiry into modernity in Chinese architecture has been proven with substance. Ever since Prof. FENG Jizhong's pioneering practice, the Tongji community has been staying in the front row of Chinese modern architecture. From introducing modern architecture into China in the early days, to the design, criticism and communication of today, Tongji hasn't stop evolving. The Tongji community has not only made some of the best buildings in modern China, but also has been collecting a long list of successes in multiple fields: architecture media focusing specifically on contemporary Chinese architecture, modern Chinese exhibitions on cities and architecture, sitting in the juries of prestigious international awards, state-ofthe-art fab-labs, etc. Tongji as a key to modernity in Chinese architecture has not only opened the door of overseas input, but also the door of the other way around.

Self-attack is something modern architecture education has to live with. The famous quote from Collin Rowe proved that. Tongji cannot be immune, particularly when it is located in such a unique city. But history has demonstrated that the Tongji community won't bend to attacks. On the contrary, they have been sharpening themselves and have become more determined in its faith in modernity.

Finally, two things are worth mentioning here about the making of this issue. One is the request from Tongji to publish more than 50 individuals in order to accommodate diversity. To do this they have agreed to cut the size of related materials. The other is the involvement of outsiders in the selection of the final list. Both are examples of openness, pluralism and modernity.

We would like to express our thanks to Prof. LI Zhenyu, Prof. LI Xiangning, Prof. CAI Yongjie, and many others, who have made this issue possible. □

Tongji Architecture Alumni: A Key to Modernity in Chinese Architecture

清華大學建筑學院 /《世界建筑》

2016-05-10