地址:北京市海淀區(qū)中關(guān)村北大街100號(北樓)北京大學(xué)建筑與景觀設(shè)計學(xué)院一層 Email:info@landscape.cn
Copyright ? 2013-2022 景觀中國(www.36byz.com)版權(quán)所有 京ICP備05068035號 京公海網(wǎng)安備 110108000058號
前不久,在悉尼舉行的國際景觀設(shè)計師聯(lián)盟(IFLA)東區(qū)會議中,各位代表的發(fā)言給我們提了個醒:我們不僅要加強對世界范圍內(nèi)日益多樣的景觀實踐的關(guān)注,還要加深自己對于環(huán)境的理解(城市人口、農(nóng)村人口對于環(huán)境的理解是不同的,不同區(qū)域、不同國家對于環(huán)境的理解也是不一樣的)。
我們現(xiàn)在所能想到的最有意思的問題就是:環(huán)境是如何塑造我們的稟性以及生活方式的?我們又是怎樣適應(yīng)、回應(yīng)環(huán)境的?早些年在澳大利亞,殖民者們?yōu)榱俗屪≌谶m應(yīng)當?shù)貧夂蛱攸c的同時又保持住殖民時代建筑的獨特風(fēng)格以及親切感(對于殖民者而言),他們采用了在喬治亞式的建筑中加入走廊的方式,他們喜歡讓環(huán)境適應(yīng)自己的需要?,F(xiàn)在我們拆掉了走廊,安裝上了空調(diào),這表示現(xiàn)在我們還是喜歡讓環(huán)境適應(yīng)我們自己的需要。
我們繼續(xù)依仗高科技扮演著無所不能的角色,我們繼續(xù)樂于讓環(huán)境適應(yīng)我們的需要。我們的行為應(yīng)該是對我們的環(huán)境的回應(yīng),但是包括經(jīng)濟利益在內(nèi)的各種壓力和動機驅(qū)使我們對環(huán)境做出了過于草率的回應(yīng)。經(jīng)濟動機很少欣賞“慢工出細活”,經(jīng)濟動機欣賞的是:在最短的時間內(nèi)獲得最大的回報。
雖然環(huán)境的變化是緩慢的、不明顯的,但是對環(huán)境了解得越多,我們就越能感受到環(huán)境對于我們行為的約束力和影響力。我們民族身份的確立以及國家意識的形成都與環(huán)境息息相關(guān),從這個方面來理解環(huán)境對于我們的影響再好不過了。
會議中有關(guān)新西蘭項目的例子都是從新西蘭那塊土地里長出來的,這就是說你一看到這些例子就可以聯(lián)想到新西蘭,因為這些項目浸透著對于新西蘭的環(huán)境、新西蘭的人民,以及造就他們民族稟性的種種元素的深刻理解和認同。會中提到的有關(guān)澳大利亞的項目,也是建立在對本國環(huán)境以及社會特征的深度了解基礎(chǔ)上的。項目大小不一,但是所有國家的優(yōu)秀項目都很好地體現(xiàn)了對于人和環(huán)境的理解。
森林破壞、漁業(yè)減產(chǎn)、水資源不足、空氣污染,以及由此而致的文化身份的喪失等危機——不僅是澳大利亞景觀設(shè)計師所要面對的挑戰(zhàn),也是中國以及東南亞景觀設(shè)計師當前所要面對的主要挑戰(zhàn)。如何為傳統(tǒng)花園設(shè)計以及傳統(tǒng)農(nóng)業(yè)景觀管理融入專注于環(huán)境、文化回應(yīng)的時代元素也是我們需要考慮的問題。
一位演講人在大會中談到:“過去20年里,中國很多城市的GDP增長率都高得驚人,但是每年由于環(huán)境和生態(tài)退化所造成的損失也高達7﹪-20﹪,這相當于、甚至高于每年的GDP增長率”。[1]
相應(yīng)的,我們還面臨著文化身份喪失的問題?!吧矸莸奈C在城市設(shè)計中尤為明顯。當一位法國設(shè)計師為了實現(xiàn)他自己的夢想而將他的杰作(中國國家大劇院)移植到中國首都的腹地的時候,或者是當巨大的、功能紊亂的中央電視臺新大樓的修建只是為了“創(chuàng)造迷惑的力量”(daniel Bumham)的時候,作為設(shè)計師我們必須捫心自問:我們到底想向世界呈現(xiàn)什么”。[2]
就像大會里面講到的,比起傳統(tǒng)景觀,現(xiàn)在的景觀項目規(guī)模都很大,項目所服務(wù)的人群也不一樣了。在景觀設(shè)計師手中演繹出來的優(yōu)秀景觀,不僅體現(xiàn)了環(huán)境意識,還體現(xiàn)了精神蘊涵。“景觀基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施是一個融會貫通了各種過程的界面,在這個界面上,自然、人、神復(fù)歸統(tǒng)一。景觀基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施是一個有效的景觀安全格局,這個安全格局不僅保護著我們的生態(tài)環(huán)境完整性,還保護著我們的文化身份,并為人們的精神需要提供著保障?!?SUP>[3]
目前,國際景觀設(shè)計師聯(lián)盟(IFLA)加強了與聯(lián)合國教科文組織(UNESCO)、世界遺產(chǎn)中心( WHC)、聯(lián)合國人居署(UN Habitat)、 國際建筑師協(xié)會(UIA)、國際城市與區(qū)域規(guī)劃師學(xué)會(ISoCARP )等政府機構(gòu)和民間組織的合作,共同支持解決有關(guān)全球環(huán)境與文化的問題。
IFLA目前的工作就是通過“對話”與“教育”這兩個主要工具展開的?,F(xiàn)在在澳大利亞,景觀設(shè)計師已經(jīng)得到了廣泛的認同。而僅僅在40年前,澳大利亞還沒有一個教授景觀設(shè)計的學(xué)校、沒有一本有關(guān)景觀的書,景觀設(shè)計不僅沒有得到政府的認可,也沒有得到任何政策、項目的支持,可以說,當時想要定義我們的學(xué)科可謂是舉步維艱。
目前在中國,只有很少的教授景觀設(shè)計的學(xué)校,但是現(xiàn)在到了景觀設(shè)計學(xué)扮演主要角色的時候了?!爸袊F(xiàn)在正處于重塑城鄉(xiāng)景觀的關(guān)鍵時刻。城市化、全球化以及唯物質(zhì)主義把景觀設(shè)計推到了應(yīng)對挑戰(zhàn)的前沿,這些挑戰(zhàn)包括:尋找解決能源與環(huán)境危機的方法,重拾文化身份,重建精神與土地的聯(lián)系。
景觀設(shè)計學(xué)之所以能夠在處理這些世界性挑戰(zhàn)中扮演重要角色,是因為景觀設(shè)計學(xué)是協(xié)調(diào)發(fā)生在景觀上的一切問題的最為可行的界面——在景觀這個界面上各種自然的、生態(tài)的過程,文化的、歷史的過程,以及精神的過程都協(xié)調(diào)了起來?!?SUP>[4]
不管是在景觀的發(fā)現(xiàn)過程中,還是在景觀的再發(fā)現(xiàn)過程中,景觀設(shè)計學(xué)都是屬于未來的學(xué)科。景觀是協(xié)調(diào)、融會各種自然的、文化的、精神的過程的界面。像IFLA這樣具有代表性的景觀設(shè)計師協(xié)會,不僅有義務(wù)提醒景觀設(shè)計師對于本地以及全球的責(zé)任,還應(yīng)該促進景觀設(shè)計師的協(xié)同合作。
注釋:[1] [2] [3] [4]均引自俞孔堅在IFLA東區(qū)會議(2006年5月,悉尼)上所作的主旨報告。
作者:James Hayter 國際景觀設(shè)計師聯(lián)盟(IFLA)東區(qū)副主席、澳大利亞景觀設(shè)計師協(xié)會理事(FAILA)
IFLA Eastern Region conference: Positioning Landscape Architecture
IFLA News No.66, July, 2006
James Hayter, FAILA, Vice President, IFLA Eastern Region
The presentations at the recent IFLA Eastern Region conference in Sydney reminds us not only of the increasingly diverse nature of landscape architectural practice throughout the world, but also the continuing underlying theme of environmental perceptions which varies between urban and non-urban populations, within regions and across countries.
One of the most interesting questions we can speculate on is how our environments have shaped our character and way of life, and how we have adapted or responded. We will all continue to adapt our environments to our own needs – adding a verandah to a Georgian box was an early means of responding to climate in Australia whilst retaining the familiarity and aesthetic of colonial architecture, and yet now we revert back to removing the verandah and installing air conditioning, preferring to adapt the environment to us.
We will continue to live as technological man, preferring to adapt the environment to our needs. Our behavior is a response to our environment, and so it should be, and a result of the many and varied forces and motives driving us, including economics. Economic motives are always complex with short-term gain rarely appreciated in terms of long-term consequences.
The greater the understanding we have of our environment, the more we understand its constraints and the effects of our behavior where changes are slow and outcomes might not be visible for many years. There is no better reason to understand our environment than its influence on identity and national consciousness.
The New Zealand projects illustrated at the conference were clearly from that country, imbued with a deep-felt and realized understanding of the New Zealand environment, its people and the qualities that characterize them. The same applies with those projects from Australia – these showed that Australian landscape architecture has come of age in terms of social and environmental identity. Scale varies, but the best projects in both countries share the commons threads of understanding the man-environment interface.
The challenges of forest destruction, fishery depletion, water scarcity, air pollution and the resulting loss of cultural identity may seem outside of our immediate sphere of influence in Australia, yet landscape architects in China and South East Asia are seeing this as their primary challenge, building on traditions of garden design and management of traditional agricultural landscapes to offer contemporary alternatives focused on environmental and cultural responses.
According to one speaker, “While the GDP growth rate in the past twenty years is at an astonishing number in most Chinese cities, the annual loss caused by the environmental and ecological degradation is 7 – 20% of the GDP, which is about equal to, or even higher than, the annual GDP growth”. 1
Equally destructive is the loss of cultural identity. “This identity crisis is particularly obvious in the area of urban design. When a French designer put his masterpiece (the National Grand Opera House) into the center of China’s capital to realize his own dream, or when the majestic but ‘dysfunctional’ Central TV Tower is built only for the “power to bewitch” (Daniel Burnham), we must, as designers, ask ourselves what are we trying to show the rest of the world?” 2
As illustrated at the conference, the scale of projects is large as traditional landscapes are transformed and populations displaced. The best of these projects by landscape architects reveals not only an environmental consciousness, but also the spirit that is contained within the landscape. “... landscape infrastructure becomes an integrated media of various processes that bring nature, man and spirit together, it is the efficient landscape security pattern that safeguards ecological and environmental integrity, cultural identity and provides for people’s spiritual needs.”3
At a global level, the International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA) joins UNESCO, the World Heritage Centre, UN Habitat, the International Union of Architects (UIA), the International Society of City and Regional Planners (ISoCARP) and other government and non-government organizations supporting those addressing global environmental and cultural issues.
IFLA’s key tools are dialogue and education – in Australia we take for granted the presence of landscape architects now, but only 40 years ago there were no schools of landscape architecture, no publication, no recognition by government of the profession, nor policies or programs that collectively define our discipline.
In China, there are very few schools of landscape architecture and yet landscape architecture as a profession can play a key role. “China is now at an age of reshaping the rural and urban landscape. Urbanization, globalization and the spread of materialism have positioned landscape architecture as a profession to address three major challenges/opportunities in the coming decades: finding solutions to energy and environmental crisis, regaining cultural identity and the building of a spiritual connection to the earth.
The significance of landscape architecture as a profession in dealing with these worldwide challenges lies in the fact that landscape architecture is the most legitimate profession that acts on landscape – the media where natural and biological processes, cultural and historical processes, and spirit interact and can be harmonized.”4
In either the discovery or recovery of the landscape, landscape architecture is the profession of the future. The landscape is the medium where natural, cultural and spiritual processes collectively rest. Representative organizations like IFLA have a role to play in reminding us of our local and global responsibilities and the need to act on both.
1,2,3,4 Kongjian Yu, Keynote Speech. IFLA Eastern Region Conference, Sydney, May 2006