天大建筑學人：哲匠齊物，亦禮亦詩

張利/ZHANG Li

天大建筑學人：哲匠齊物，亦禮亦詩

Tianjin University Architecture Alumni: Craftmanship, Principles and Poetics

張利/ZHANG Li

又是五月，又是我們聚焦于文革以后中國建筑教育的時刻。每年的這個時刻都是令人興奮的，而在今年尤為如此，因為此時恰逢我們所關注群體的母校80周年校慶。我們今天所注視的是一個堅韌執著、嚴謹求實，以哲匠精神推動中國當代本土建筑創作前進的群體——天津大學建筑學院（前天津大學建筑系）的建筑學人。新中國、特別是改革開放后中國最好的建筑作品中，有相當大的一部分是來自于這個群體的。對這一群體的審視也讓我們從一個縱切面接近中國當代本土建筑創作的中堅。按照慣例，我們的觀察范圍仍然是在1977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。

天大建筑學人在認識論上保持著一種中立與清醒。這與天津這座城市的歷史不無關系。從明代的海岸衛城到第二次鴉片戰爭后的開埠，天津幾乎被強制性地從舊制軍事重鎮轉化為多元外來文化的商貿集散地。此后一個世紀的激烈文明碰撞與價值觀摩擦在賦予天津活力的同時，也帶來不停的動蕩。天津承載了近代中國的軍事與工商業的重要發展，也目睹了民族主義對外來宗教滲透的抵制、列強租界的頻繁易手與戰亂年代的權力紛爭，直至其“城頭變幻大王旗”的格局隨著新中國的建立而結束。這種在相對緊湊的時空范圍內密集呈現的多元價值沖突與交替在事實上造就了天津知識界的中立視角，及其在種種潮流面前的不動聲色。作為根植于天津的高等教育機構，天大建筑秉承了這一城市的知性傳統。在改革開放后的30余年中，輸入式思潮對中國本土建筑教育沖擊頻繁，“后現代主義”、解構主義、參數化設計、平權與社會批評等，林林總總，每次皆有摧枯拉朽之勢，每次亦擄得信眾蕓蕓。而天大建筑在每次沖擊前都表現出一種從容與冷靜，處亂不驚，恪守其關于建筑學與建筑教育的基本立場。這種認識論上的中立態度使天大建筑與其他院校相比自成一體：它既非儒之倫理，亦非道之逍遙，而更似墨之非攻。

天大建筑學人在方法論上維系著一種篤信與堅守。自創建以來，天大建筑學人一直是建筑形式美基本原則的踐行者和捍衛者。在建筑的故事中，從阿爾伯蒂的建筑師修養，到哈姆林的“建筑藝術所特有的均衡與寧靜”，到西扎的“一切都是關于比例”，基本的形式美一直是建筑貢獻于文明史的最令人信服的方式。遺憾的是，后工業社會對“更新的新”的群體盲動把對基本形式美的顛覆看成是“自由”與“解放”的必要途徑，也使陌生化成了唯一的審美訴求。在國際建筑教育界中持“基本形式美落伍”論的大有人在（所幸多為書面建筑人士）。然而，見異思遷的機會主義從來不是天大建筑方法論的一部分。創立者徐中先生所奠定的對“建筑中美的存在形態與美的協調”的關注貫穿了天大建筑60余年來的教學、研究與實踐，即使在近年的面向國際化的銳意改革之中，也從未中斷。當世界上一些潮流建筑學院開始以畫圖為“恥”時，天大建筑的空間組合、形態合成與建造呈現體系仍然在不斷地豐滿，且與時俱進。在我國建筑學界的交流過程中，無論是學生還是專業人士，多數都會對天大建筑在形式美方面的基本功積累留下深刻的印象。從漂亮的鋼筆線條、精致的平面布局、清晰的工程邏輯到典雅的建成空間，從脫穎而出的學生競賽作品到當代中國城市的重要公共建筑，天大建筑把對基本形式美的信念帶入一個又一個新的時空。

天大建筑學人在目的論上承載著一種博愛與包容。如果說“意司契而為匠”，則天大建筑之“意”在于對本地實情的深入體察與對建筑介入的頑強信心，因此而成天大建筑學人為之自豪的立足本土、務實創新的執業取向，也因此而成穿越建筑類型或尺度壁壘的共通影響力。在當今社會的“細分市場”結構下，建筑師也難免被逐漸專業化，歸入文化、醫療、商業、交通、行政、居住、實驗等諸多彼此割裂的領域，鮮見有人能在多個領域同時創作出有影響力的作品。天大建筑學人是一個群體性的例外，我們看到多人在小至國際藝術展裝置、大至城市綜合體的跨度內游刃有余地連續推出佳作，以不變的本土精神詮釋文化性、紀念性、公共性、實驗性等多方面訴求，他們自己也因此身處中國當代建筑的引領者行列。這種以平等的關懷對待不同的建筑類型或尺度，以同樣的求索來抵達建筑的秩序與詩學的素養，已經成為了天大建筑的一種可識別的性格。

每個當代的建筑學院都需要面對巨大的挑戰，天大建筑對此當頗有感觸。全球化浪潮所導致的超級區域性資源集聚使天津面對更為復雜的地緣形勢；網絡文化所帶來的審美消費快餐化在不斷沖擊著社會的形式美底線；國際化的競爭要求本土設計思維積極向外輻射；等等。然而，可以預期的是，無論如何革新與精進，天大建筑仍將作為中國本土哲匠精神的一個鮮明代表，在中國當代建筑與當代建筑教育中獨樹一幟。

感謝天津大學建筑學院張頎教授、宋昆教授及馮琳老師為本輯付出的努力，是他們的工作使本期專輯成為可能。

It is May now, time again for us to focus on post-cultural-revolution architecture education in China. This usually exciting time gets even more exciting this year, since it coincides with the 80th anniversary of the university to which the school we are about to look at belongs. We are about to observe a community known for its consistent contribution to Chinese land-based design: Tianjin University Architecture Alumni. It is fair to say that a chunk of the best built spaces in China after 1949 is from this community, even more so after 1978. A closer look at this community brings us eventually to some of the key figures in the domestic design fi elds of China. As all the other issues of our alumni series, the people we publish in this issue are those who were educated in the School of Architecture (previously Department of Architecture) of Tianjin University after 1977 and later became important fi gures in Chinese architecture.

There is an impartialism and calmness in the epistemology of Tianjin University architecture. Part of this comes from the history of the city of Tianjin. In the 1860s, the city was rapidly transformed from a 17th century seafront Fortress to a 19th century trade harbour of multi-cultural colonialism. A century of clash of civilisations thereafter defined the Tianjin's vibrancy as well as its turmoil. Up to the end of WWII, Tianjin boosted the early development of Chinese military and industry, witnessed anti-Christian movements of the Boxers, hosted transfers of concessions among western powers, recorded the worst of war-time power struggles. Until all types of disarray settled down after 1949, Tianjin has experienced extraordinarily frequent shift and replacements of short-lived dominating values. This helped the creation of impartialism among Tianjin intellectuals. They tend to show disinterest in trendy stuff. The School of Architecture of Tianjin University has inherited this intellectual quality. After 1978, numerous trends in western architecture education has hit Chinese shore and has taken many Chinese schools as followers. First there was "post-modernism", then there was deconstruction, then anxious social critiques, then parametric design. Tianjin University Architecture remained sombre in each of these waves. They have managed to adhere to their fundamental position in architecture education. They have kept a unique epistemological character which is quite different from both the ethics of Confucianism and the escape of Taoism. Rather, it is more like Mo Di's non-attack.

There is faithfulness and persistence in the methodology of Tianjin University Architecture. Since it was founded, the School of Architecture of Tianjin University has become a de-facto guard of basic principles of architecture beauty in China. We all know that basic and universal beauty is what architecture has contributed most to human civilisation. The basic principles have been reiterated throughout millenniums by voices like Alberti, Laugier, Hamlin and Siza. Only in the post-industrial time recently that these principles are deemed by some as outdated. Driven by collective unconsciousness, "new for the sake of new" has effectively set the departure from basic principles as the norm for new and liberal architecture. Architecture writers give further mandate to this departure. Interestingly, going-with-the-wind is never a part of Tianjin University Architecture approach. Its founding father, Professor XU Zhong, initiated a lasting investigation into the existential state of architecture beauty. This investigation has been carried on throughout the 60+ years of teaching, research and practice of Tianjin University Architecture. While some contemporary architecture schools of the world are deeming it "shameful" for architects to draw, Tianjin University Architecture still encourages its community to draw and make. While the faith in composition and form synthesis remains untouched, the vocabulary of Tianjin University Architecture is getting constantly updated. In the Chinese architecture circle, it is no news that people from Tianjin University Architecture know how to draw and make in a beautiful way. From fine line drawings, to crystal-clear floor plans, to well-sorted construction logic, to elegant built spaces, Tianjin University Architecture always try to bring the basic principles of architecture beauty to the next level.

There is tolerance and compassion in the teleology of Tianjin University Architecture. A Chinese proverb says that craftmanship is led by meaning. Tianjin University Architecture's craftmanship is certainly led by its deep insight into the reality of Chinese life and its belief in architectural intervention. For decades, Tianjin University Architecture alumni have taken pride in doing projects by and for reality, and making good works across the spectrum of building scales and types. Even when today's design market is sophisticatedly divided into small patches of buildings for culture, health, commerce, transportation, offices, housing, experiment, etc., Tianjin University Architecture alumni still find their ways into creating good things regardless of scale and building type. Several leading figures have even managed to produce highly regarded works in all building genres, from installations at biennales to complexes in metropolitan cities, fusing multiple qualities such as monumentality, identity, civic life and experiment into one localised interpretation. Treating all buildings (sizes and types) equal, and searching for moments of poetics has been a distinctive character of Tianjin University Architecture's way of looking at the profession.

Every architecture school of our time faces huge challenges. Tianjin University Architecture certainly has its fair share. Globalisation has resulted in ultracentralisation of resources in mega-cities and has put cities like Tianjin in a difficult position. The cultural life (or the lack of) in the internet era has dramatically lowered people's regard on beauty principles. International competition has made it a must for any domestic/local design approach to test itself in another culture. No matter what, we can anticipate Tianjin University Architecture to continue its own role as a unique representative of Chinese design.

Our special thanks to Mr ZHANG Qi, Mr SONG Kun and Ms FENG Lin, who have made this issue possible.

清華大學建筑學院/《世界建筑》

2017-05-11