對“差錯”的禮贊
——銀川當(dāng)代美術(shù)館

柯林·福涅爾/Colin Fournier

馮元玥 譯/Translated by FENG Yuanyue

對“差錯”的禮贊
——銀川當(dāng)代美術(shù)館

In Praise of The Glitch: The Yinchuan Contemporary Art Museum

柯林·福涅爾/Colin Fournier

馮元玥 譯/Translated by FENG Yuanyue

1 西立面/West facade

銀川當(dāng)代美術(shù)館是一座無法單憑外表就對其下定論的建筑。人們最初看到的似乎就是相當(dāng)熟悉的當(dāng)代建筑語匯之下的形式表現(xiàn)，因?yàn)樗鼕Z目的線條流動性和對參數(shù)化驅(qū)動之下的建筑結(jié)構(gòu)，以及玻璃纖維增強(qiáng)水泥（GRC）技術(shù)的應(yīng)用都與扎哈·哈迪德或者M(jìn)AD近期的建筑作品十分相似。但是，第一印象在某種程度上都具有欺騙性：究其本質(zhì)，這座建筑是新鮮的、獨(dú)特的，在某種程度上，它甚至與我們這個時代占據(jù)主流的設(shè)計(jì)思想相背離，與既成的正統(tǒng)相割裂，卻讓人倍感鼓舞。

銀川當(dāng)代美術(shù)館不同于當(dāng)前建筑設(shè)計(jì)的總體現(xiàn)狀，它的這種“特異性”令人不禁想到埃德加·愛倫·坡的兩本杰出的小說：《鐘樓魔影》和《奇怪天使》，它們預(yù)示著一個非常重要的變化時刻，在這個時刻，一些非常吊詭的事物出乎意料地開始出現(xiàn)在文化版圖之中，可能是一個意外的轉(zhuǎn)折、一次突然的切割、一段流暢狀態(tài)下的驟然斷裂——一次“差錯”。

為了徹底理解這座博物館的重要性，我們必須將它置于近年來建筑學(xué)理論和實(shí)踐發(fā)展的語境之中，置于全球化的大時代背景下。與此同時，我們還必須承認(rèn)包括中國在內(nèi)的全世界正在發(fā)生的切實(shí)變化，是一種準(zhǔn)一體化的全面進(jìn)程，是一種文化多樣性和建筑復(fù)雜性史無前例般的匱乏，甚至在某種程度上，就連那些僅有的可以稱得上例外的存在也流于樣板，遵循著一種意料之內(nèi)的范式。

現(xiàn)代主義甚至在其發(fā)展的巔峰時期，都從未達(dá)到過如此程度的單一主導(dǎo)、重復(fù)和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化，從未將相同的設(shè)計(jì)語言不斷復(fù)制生產(chǎn)，進(jìn)而實(shí)現(xiàn)完美的“克隆”。少數(shù)離經(jīng)叛道的建筑師站出來反對這種強(qiáng)權(quán)，至少這樣的時代變節(jié)者可以稱得上是真正的“壞孩子”。后現(xiàn)代主義呢？盡管持續(xù)時間不長，也在它陷入東拼西湊的拙劣模仿之前出現(xiàn)過孕育反叛符號的短暫時期。可是，為何我們?nèi)缃裆硖幍耐砥诂F(xiàn)代主義時代卻在文化系統(tǒng)中幾乎難有“差錯”？

今天全球范圍內(nèi)的城市化和建筑生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)，不僅在物質(zhì)資料的生產(chǎn)模式上，還是在概念工具以及批評話語的智力實(shí)踐層面，都已經(jīng)達(dá)到了一種“完美”層面的統(tǒng)一。為什么會產(chǎn)生這樣的情形？一個可能的解釋就是這一系統(tǒng)已經(jīng)能夠消化、融合基于其自身產(chǎn)生的異見。

正如保羅·維利里奧說過，“它的運(yùn)作方式好比一場軍事行動，包含相互關(guān)聯(lián)的兩部分：戰(zhàn)略和戰(zhàn)術(shù)。”在戰(zhàn)略層面，它包括建筑環(huán)境的大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)、同質(zhì)化的住宅區(qū)與商業(yè)開發(fā)項(xiàng)目的激增，這些都在以指數(shù)級速度使整個城市環(huán)境趨于“標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化”；在戰(zhàn)術(shù)層面，則包括那些零星、孤立的真正的創(chuàng)作，這些作品散落四處，而這其中具有標(biāo)志性的特異作品通常被視為品牌化、定制化的“明星建筑”。然而，這里重點(diǎn)需要理解的是，在基本的文化層面，標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化與明星式的特異建筑并沒有顯著的區(qū)別：二者互為補(bǔ)充，且已經(jīng)變得越來越難以辨析。

This contemporary art museum is not what it seems. It appears, at first, to be a fairly familiar manifestation of the contemporary architectural discourse, and indeed the striking fluidity of its lines and its impressive mastery of parametrically enabled tectonics as well as GRC technology put it on a par with recent buildings by Zaha Hadid or MAD, but this first impression is somewhat deceptive: the building is, in fact, refreshingly unique and a radical point of departure from the dominant design ideology of our times, a significant rupture from the orthodoxy. And a very promising one.

In its bold departure from the status quo, it is reminiscent of two of Edgar Allen Poe's extraordinary tales: "the Devil in the Belfry" and "the Angel of the Bizarre": it is the symptom of a very important moment of change, the moment when something really strange unexpectedly begins to occur in the cultural landscape, a point of inflection, a sudden cut, a disturbing break in the flow, a glitch.

To fully understand its significance, one has to situate this museum within the context of recent developments in the theory and practice of architecture, in our age of globalisation. One has to acknowledge that what has actually been happening all over the world, including China, has been a quasi universal process of homogenisation, an unprecedented impoverishment of the diversity and complexity of architecture, to the point that even its rare exceptions also fall into the same mould and follow a predictable norm.

Modernism, even at the peak of its power, had never been able to achieve such a level of hegemony, repetition, standardisation, of reproduction of the same design tropes, taken to the level of perfect cloning. At least its renegades, the few rebel architects who resisted its diktats, were true "enfants terribles": Postmodernism, although it did not last long, occasionally generated, for the brief period of time before it sabotaged itself by falling into pastiche, some promising signs of deviance. Why is it that now, in late modernism, there are hardly any more glitches in the system?

One of the possible explanations of why our global system of urbanism and architectural production, which includes not only its material modes of production but also its conceptual tools and its intellectual practices of critical discourse, has reached such a "perfect" level of uniformity, is indeed that it has now managed to incorporate its own dissent.

As Paul Virilio would say, its modus operandi consists, like military warfare, of two interconnected parts: the strategic and the tactical. At the strategic level, it consists of the mass production of the built environment, the proliferation of generic residential blocks and commercial developments that are standardising the urbanised world at an exponential rate; at the tactical level, it consists of the sporadic creation, here and there, of token singularities commonly nurtured as bespoke items of branded "starchitecture". What is important to understand is that, at a fundamental cultural level, there is no significant difference between the two: the standard and the bespoke need each other and they have effectively become indistinguishable from one another.

From a political and ideological perspective, this similarity is not so hard to analyse and decode. Aesthetically, however, it is harder to identify: anyone can perceive the self-similarity of commercial architectural typologies, but it is harder to become aware of the extent to which even the outstanding acts of design heroism are themselves clones, artificially transplanted onto their sites out of nowhere, detached from both space and time.

2 功能圖解/Diagram of functions

3.4 剖面/Sections

It is only the rare "glitches", like the Yinchuan museum, that can make us understand, by contrast, the nature of the orthodoxy, the codes of normal practice and their underlying motivations: their key characteristic is the persistent but partlyunconscious attempt to sublimate materiality and hallucinate the perfect pure form, to pursue the illusion of a seamless world, spotless, ageless, homogeneous, universal, consistent and predictable, with no signs of any doubt, no dialectics, no history, no complexity nor contradiction. Surprisingly, symmetry, which logically should have been an important part of this normalised repertoire of design virtues, is no longer considered to be de rigueur, having fortunately been unable to survive the repeated attacks of deconstructivism. But otherwise, the dominant aesthetic of our contemporary period of late modernism is one that does not tolerate any notable autonomy and differentiation of the parts within the whole.

從政治和意識形態(tài)角度來看，分析和破解這種相似性并不難。然而，從審美角度來看，標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化和特異性的建筑則變得難以界定：任何人都能夠察覺出商業(yè)建筑類型（學(xué)）的自相似性，但是不容易意識到，在一定程度上，甚至設(shè)計(jì)英雄主義驅(qū)動之下的非凡作品也開始陷入對自我的不斷復(fù)制，在一個個地點(diǎn)中進(jìn)行著莫名其妙的生硬的移植，與建筑所處的時間和空間相脫節(jié)。

只有像銀川當(dāng)代美術(shù)館這樣罕有的“差錯”，才能讓我們反向理解那些正統(tǒng)建筑的本質(zhì)、慣常的行事法則以及陳規(guī)背后潛藏的動機(jī)：它們的核心特征表現(xiàn)在堅(jiān)定地、部分無意識地對建筑實(shí)體升華和完美純粹造型設(shè)想的嘗試，試圖追求一個幻想中的無縫世界，一個纖塵不染、歲月無痕、同質(zhì)同源、普世通達(dá)、和諧一致、意料之中的世界，一個摒棄懷疑、無關(guān)辨證、擺脫歷史、拒絕復(fù)雜、沒有矛盾的世界。令人意外的是，對稱性，這一本應(yīng)成為正統(tǒng)設(shè)計(jì)的優(yōu)點(diǎn)的特質(zhì)，卻已經(jīng)不再流行，在解構(gòu)主義的反復(fù)攻擊之下土崩瓦解了。但是在其他方面，在我們身處的晚期現(xiàn)代主義的當(dāng)代社會中，主流審美卻不能容忍整體中局部的任何顯著自主和異化。

這看上去非常矛盾，甚至有些反直覺，因?yàn)檫@種普遍存在的同質(zhì)化現(xiàn)象竟然恰恰在今天這個時代得以實(shí)現(xiàn)——如今諸如Rhino和Grasshopper這樣具備強(qiáng)大數(shù)字功能和精密軟件系統(tǒng)的工具對設(shè)計(jì)師而言可謂唾手可得。這些工具以及在背后驅(qū)動它們的人工智能程序并沒有文化偏見。不同于人類，它們無法培育出任何內(nèi)在的風(fēng)格傾向。它們身處的是一個充滿了無窮變化和無限可能的概率世界，不免盲目的同時也幸運(yùn)地?cái)[脫了任何的先驗(yàn)意味，或者至少不會受到哲學(xué)決定論的支配。然而，為什么當(dāng)這些工具隨著不斷地應(yīng)用逐漸發(fā)展出一套參數(shù)化設(shè)計(jì)的法則時，卻陷入了“自我復(fù)制”的境遇呢？

5 出口平臺/Platform

6 中庭展廳/Exhibition room in atrium

這可能是因?yàn)橐环N新媒介形式所帶來的消極影響。而且，它在對建筑產(chǎn)生影響之前就已經(jīng)對文學(xué)產(chǎn)生了影響。馬歇爾·麥克盧漢最早提出了“媒介即訊息”的論斷：正如古騰堡印刷機(jī)的問世將人類思想表達(dá)的多樣性封裝在如楔形文字一般的統(tǒng)一性和普遍性之中，從而易于印刷；參數(shù)化主義的工具現(xiàn)今所做的則是將設(shè)計(jì)表達(dá)的復(fù)雜多樣性包裝成一種語言，從而對其運(yùn)行模式產(chǎn)生影響。如果這種通過媒介產(chǎn)生的信息篡用可以對文學(xué)產(chǎn)生影響——盡管文學(xué)媒介的首要目的在于傳遞信息，而非分析自身形式的優(yōu)越性——這種介質(zhì)的力量甚至更可能影響建筑，使得人們的關(guān)注點(diǎn)著眼于參數(shù)化這種媒介形式自身，而對其所傳遞的信息內(nèi)容興趣寥寥。

It appears to be quite paradoxical and somewhat counterintuitive that this phenomenon of ubiquitous homogeneity has been achieved precisely at the time when powerful digital capabilities and sophisticated software systems, such as Rhino and Grasshopper, have finally become available to designers. Such tools, together with the artificial intelligence programmes that inform them, have no cultural preconceptions. Unlike human beings, they cannot cultivate any inbuilt stylistic preferences. Theirs is a probabilistic universe of infinite variations, of limitless possibilities, blind as well as blissfully free from any apriori meaning, at least not one dictated by philosophical determinism. How come, therefore, that the evolution of these tools into the definitive dogmas of parametric design has reinstated all the bad habits of the ancien regime?

7 中庭/Atrium

It could be that this is the perverse effect of a new medium. It happened to literature before it happened to architecture. It was Marshall Mc Luhan who first understood that "the medium is the message": it could indeed also be that, in the same way that the Gutemberg press, by wrapping all the diversity of human expression within the flowing uniformity and universality of the cuneiform script, easy to print, the tools of parametricism are now wrapping the complex variety of design expressions within one language that inevitably imposes its mould. If this usurpation of the message by the medium can happen to literature, even though the literary medium is primarily intended to convey the message rather than to point out the merits of its own form, the power of the medium is even more likely to affect architecture, obsessed as it is with its own formal qualities as a medium and never more than marginally interested in the content of its message.

基于上述觀察，可以看出，盡管銀川當(dāng)代美術(shù)館給人的第一印象是一個不斷流動的復(fù)雜幾何體，但真正使得它引人注目的還是其對自身所處場地以及對獨(dú)特地理歷史特征的高度風(fēng)格化演繹。這無疑借助了參數(shù)化的手段，卻明顯不是簡單借由參數(shù)化算法的內(nèi)在數(shù)理邏輯生成，而是源于一種精準(zhǔn)的設(shè)計(jì)敏感度。長久以來，泥沙的沉積與河水的沖刷緩慢而持續(xù)地塑造著黃河周邊的自然環(huán)境，述說著古老的歷史，而這種設(shè)計(jì)的敏感度正是源自于對它們的尊重與體悟。

近距離觀察建筑就會發(fā)現(xiàn)，這座建筑并不是追求無暇、永恒的正統(tǒng)設(shè)計(jì)思想的產(chǎn)物，而是由獨(dú)特的獨(dú)立的局部構(gòu)成。意料之外的是，雖然考慮到雙曲GRC幕墻嵌板的幾何復(fù)雜性，但建筑師并沒有畏懼將板與板之間的縫隙暴露出來——沒有灌漿，可以解讀為一種斷裂、褶皺的肌理。他們同時還盡量避免以任何形式對外立面進(jìn)行涂裝和打底，這意味著建筑將隨著時間的流逝流露出歲月經(jīng)年的痕跡。

更為令人驚喜的是，這座建筑是異構(gòu)、多元的，由區(qū)別顯著的各個部分組合構(gòu)成。尤其是建筑東側(cè)（面向城市一側(cè)）和西側(cè)（面向保護(hù)濕地一側(cè)）之間形成的巨大張力和差異，并且它們彼此的這種對比是顯而易見的：西側(cè)宛如平流沉淀層一般層層堆積，東側(cè)是由塊狀巨石堆疊而成的立面，一道巨大垂直的裂縫則被開辟為洞穴般的入口。

就其外觀而言，融合了相當(dāng)豐富的設(shè)計(jì)語匯：反差、獨(dú)特、斷裂、褶皺、裂縫、拉扯、拼接、非連續(xù)性、非常規(guī)性、個體獨(dú)立、差錯，甚至缺陷，稱得上是一種高度特定場域、精雕細(xì)作的設(shè)計(jì)手法。

在建筑內(nèi)部，設(shè)計(jì)呈現(xiàn)出了一種強(qiáng)烈的對比：連接兩個主入口的天窗式中庭的明晰性和簡潔性；展覽空間與其他組合元素的多樣性。在此，我們能夠從平面圖和兩張關(guān)鍵的剖面圖看出，設(shè)計(jì)語言建立在營造差異化之上，與那種平滑無虞的同構(gòu)連續(xù)性截然不同，強(qiáng)調(diào)了異質(zhì)性和層次感：當(dāng)人們進(jìn)入建筑自上而下行走，能夠感受到光線從暗到亮的逐漸過渡，與此同時，材料的質(zhì)感也從粗糙向平滑轉(zhuǎn)變，增強(qiáng)了起伏變化的游覽體驗(yàn)。

令人欣喜的是，建筑師們尋找到了合適的方式，賦予建筑許多不同層次的感覺和意義。他們喜歡將自己的建筑稱之為“化石”，認(rèn)為它真正的歸宿屬于這片土地的地質(zhì)歷史，屬于綿延于歷史長河的悠久文明。正是這種對時間意義的執(zhí)著以及其他不迎合時尚的設(shè)計(jì)初心構(gòu)筑了博物館的自身形態(tài)——多變而不重復(fù)、分裂而不連續(xù)、匠心獨(dú)具而不是重復(fù)性的工業(yè)生產(chǎn)、突然的差錯而不是連續(xù)的信號，這所有的一切使這座建筑成為了一種獨(dú)特的人文和藝術(shù)主張。

一如前文所述，這座建筑之所以具有重要的意義，在于其與習(xí)慣范式的背離，而它的締造者正是這樣一家年輕而有才華的建筑事務(wù)所。讓我們拭目以待這樣的堅(jiān)持在未來將指引他們走向何處?！?/p>

8 出口/Exit

9 概念/Concept

第一步/Stage 1

水流帶走河床泥沙堆積導(dǎo)致河水改道

Soft layered semiment is removed by river water

第二步/Stage 2

河水改道河床受力減小產(chǎn)生向上“卸載”作用

Reduced pressure results in unloaded occuring

第三步/Stage 3

底部沉積巖受上下作用力產(chǎn)生褶皺肌理

Underlying stone pushes upwards pinching rock layers

In the light of these observations, the Yinchan museum stands out, despite its first appearance as a continuously flowing abstract geometrical form, as a highly idiosyncratic celebration of the specific characteristics of its site and of its particular geological history. Although developed, without doubt, by means of parametrics, the project clearly did not originate from the intrinsic mathematical logic of parametric algorythms, but from a design sensitivity attentive to the immemorial narrative of the slow, cumulative processes of sedimentation and erosion that created the natural environment along the Yellow River.

A closer look at the design reveals that, rather than conforming to the orthodoxy of the seamless and of the timeless, the form is made up of distinct individual segments; unexpectedly, considering the geometric sophistication of the double curved GRC fa?ade panels, the architects were not afraid to express the joints, which are not grouted and are allowed to read as fissures; they also refrained from painting or rendering in any way the concrete outer surface of the panels, which means that they will deliberately be allowed to age and show the passage of time.

Even more surprisingly, the building is heterogeneous, clearly made of different constituent parts. In particular, there is a strong tension and differentiation between the Eastern side (the one facing the city) and the Western side (facing the protected wetland), a big contrast between the horizontal sedimentation layers of the latter and the blocky mass of the cyclopean fa?ade in the former, with its large vertical crack forming a cave entrance.

Externally, the design language is therefore one comprising a rich vocabulary of contrasts, singularities, ruptures, folds, fissures, tears, "pinching" conditions, discontinuities, surprises, autonomous parts, glitches and even imperfections, a highly site specific, crafted design approach.

Internally, the design plays on a theatrical contrast between the clarity and simplicity of the central, top-lit atrium space linking its two main entrances, and the variety of its gallery spaces and other programmatic elements. Here again, as can be seen from the plans and particularly the two key sections, the design language is one of differentiations, stressing heterogeneity and layering as opposed to smooth isomorphic continuity, with transitions from dark to light as one goes up inside the building, as well as from rough to smooth materials, heightening the difference between the experience of rising and that of falling.

It is a pleasure to see the delight that the architects have found in endowing their building with so many different layers of sensations and meaning. They like to think of their building as a "fossil", something that belongs to the geological history of the site and also, perhaps, to the ancient civilisations that may have lived there a long time ago. This sincere commitment to the importance of time, together with the other unfashionable design motivations that have given the museum its form, in particular the emphasis on differentiation rather than sameness, on disruption rather than continuity, on craftsmanship rather than on repetitive industrial production, on the sudden glitch rather than the continuous signal, that make this building a unique intellectual and artistic proposition.

It is, as stated above, a very significant point of departure from the norm, playfully initiated by this young and very talented architectural firm. Let's see where it will lead them next! □

項(xiàng)目信息

客戶：寧夏民生房地產(chǎn)有限公司

建筑/室內(nèi)設(shè)計(jì)：waa 未覺建筑事務(wù)所

設(shè)計(jì)團(tuán)隊(duì)：張迪，Jack Young，Ruben Bergambagt，Huang Yisu

幕墻及二次鋼結(jié)構(gòu)設(shè)計(jì)：Buro Happold

土建施工圖設(shè)計(jì)：寧夏建筑設(shè)計(jì)研究院

室內(nèi)施工圖設(shè)計(jì)：北京冠亞偉業(yè)

土建/室內(nèi)施工：中鐵建設(shè)

幕墻施工：江河幕墻+倍立達(dá)

室內(nèi) GRG 施工：恒豪國際

場地面積：13,188m2

建筑面積：15,006m2

建筑設(shè)計(jì)：2011.07-2015.06

室內(nèi)設(shè)計(jì)：2012.05- 2015.05

建設(shè)時間：2012.01- 2015.06

建成時間：2015.08

攝影：Iwan Baan

香港中文大學(xué)建筑學(xué)院訪問教授

2015-08-20