集體形象：俄羅斯館

建筑設計：謝爾蓋·卓班，阿列克謝·依雷因，瑪麗娜·庫茲涅茨卡亞/SPEECH建筑事務所

Architects: Sergei Tchoban, Alexei Ilyin, Marina Kuznetskaya/SPEECH

集體形象：俄羅斯館

Image of the Collective: Russian Pavilion

建筑設計：謝爾蓋·卓班，阿列克謝·依雷因，瑪麗娜·庫茲涅茨卡亞/SPEECH建筑事務所

Architects: Sergei Tchoban, Alexei Ilyin, Marina Kuznetskaya/SPEECH

2 首層平面/Floor 0 plan

項目信息/Credits and Data

建筑設計/Architecture: SPEECH (Sergei Tchoban, Alexei Ilyin, Marina Kuznetskaya)

客戶/Client: Government of the Russian Federation

總承包/General Contractor: RT Expo

展覽概念/Exhibition Concept: Yuri Avvakumov

展覽設計/Exhibition Design: Simpateka RUS

總面積/Total Area: 3260m2

攝影/Photos: Roland Halbe, Alexey Naroditskiy

渲染/Renders: SPEECH architectural office

3.4 外景/Exterior views

2015世博會俄羅斯國家館在設計前面臨著艱難而復雜的任務——場館不僅要在這場世界最大規(guī)模展會中以獨立自主的精神塑造和出人意表的建筑形象為我們的國家代言，更需要充分反映世博會“滋養(yǎng)地球，生命之源”的主題。保持國家館設計中長久以來所存在的連續(xù)性對于項目作者來講至關重要。

俄羅斯參加世博會的歷史可以追溯到世博會誕生的1851年，始終擁有獨立場館進行國家主題展覽，并且由當時最具影響力的建筑師主持場館設計。這許多年來的每一座場館都以獨特展覽建筑的姿態(tài)書寫了建筑歷史，然而，這些場館的建筑形象表達中仍舊能夠?qū)ひ挼角逦墓灿刑卣鳎浩渲械脑S多場館都具有動感、簡潔、令人記憶深刻的形式，并且著力強調(diào)了建筑的主入口空間。

由建筑師康斯坦丁·梅爾尼科夫為1925年巴黎世界博覽會設計的蘇聯(lián)館正是如此。建筑師放棄了傳統(tǒng)的窗戶，而使用了2層通高安裝的大玻璃幕墻；通常的方盒子體量也被一座開放的大樓梯對角切開，樓梯被覆以交錯的木質(zhì)板，而入口處立起的裝飾桅桿更是為整個設計畫上了濃墨重彩的一筆。建筑師伊利亞·戈洛索夫的作品同樣具有創(chuàng)新精神，他在設計中使用了輕微錯置而彼此鑲嵌的石板形成構圖，因此創(chuàng)造出了運動般的視覺效果。此后，同樣的主題在鮑里斯·約凡為1937年巴黎世界博覽會所做的設計中被再次使用，他的方案將建筑置于類似臺基的體量上，通過動態(tài)的空間構成描摹出一條拋物線，并以薇拉·穆欣娜的著名雕塑“工人與集體農(nóng)莊中的女人”作為結(jié)束，形成了整個空間的最高潮。僅僅兩年后，約凡再次為1939年的紐約世博會建造了國家館——這次的設計核心又一次落在可以被清晰解讀的、急速展開的空間構成方式上（這次的建筑呈馬蹄形），以掀起高潮的入口動態(tài)空間告終。這一傳統(tǒng)被后繼的諸多建筑師繼承發(fā)展——譬如1962年紐約世博會上康斯坦丁·梅爾尼科夫的設計，以及米哈依爾·波索欣在1967年蒙特利爾世博會和1970年大阪世博會當中的作品。

通過這些例子，整個20世紀中不同建筑師們的世博會國家館設計概念顯得頗為清晰，甚至可被貫以共同的清晰脈絡——對簡潔易記的體量的青睞凸顯出來。而在對21世紀展館建筑進行類型學分析之后，我們試圖使用現(xiàn)代建筑語言來繼續(xù)表達相同的建筑性格，以結(jié)合傳統(tǒng)形式演化后的絕對現(xiàn)代表達及作為藝術載體與化身的存在狀態(tài)，完成令人過目難忘的創(chuàng)造。

長達30m的曲線形大懸挑，為整個構筑物帶來的令人難忘的輪廓線，在2015世博會的群像中也清晰可觀。在主入口一側(cè)，這一懸挑元素選擇了拋光鋼材表面，不僅為參觀者提供了陽光下的舒適蔭涼和夜晚時反射燈籠的柔和光線，其自身也成為了一個具有吸引力的元素——一面巨大的鏡子，參觀者能夠?qū)χR子自拍而得到自己與環(huán)境的合影。

木材作為首選材料被使用——它不僅是最為環(huán)保的建材，同時也是俄羅斯建筑中最傳統(tǒng)的用料。展館的整個頂部都被飾以木板材，而底層外表面采用了透明或不透明的玻璃。入口區(qū)域被透明玻璃強調(diào)出來，同時在展館與世博會場地之間塑造了可達的、彈性的邊界。此外，很重要的一點是場館中使用的全部材料都易于安裝——所有的木材、玻璃和金屬都事先預制好，在現(xiàn)場可以被簡易、快速地組裝到金屬框架上。木材的主題一直延續(xù)到展館室內(nèi)設計的部分，包括接待柜臺、儲物柜、貴賓層裝飾等。

在該項目的設計概念中，一個關鍵想法在于這座展館不應僅僅作為展覽的場地，還應該是一處能夠吸引參觀者的、有意思的公共空間。這也恰恰是我們屋頂設計的動因：平屋頂朝入口方向逐漸升高，被景觀處理為適于行走的場所，同時提供了絕佳的觀景平臺。借助這樣的設計，參觀者可以穿過展館爬上屋頂，體驗到縱覽其他場館的視角。另外，因此而形成的建筑形體，也使其與展覽組團布局形成了無縫銜接與自然整合，又通過輕緩的坡度起伏突出描繪了其與俄羅斯景觀特征的關聯(lián)。

2015世博會致力于為未來世界可能發(fā)生的食物短缺尋找解決途徑，在這樣一系列與資源問題直接相關的嚴肅話題下，以不合理的巨大耗資建造一座擁有自命不凡形式的展館看起來似乎是與主題相悖的——這也是我們力求塑造極度簡明卻優(yōu)雅動人的體量的原因。然而，盡管建筑呈現(xiàn)出顯而易見的簡潔性，入口上方的30m大雨棚仍一處精致有趣的結(jié)構，無論從工程、材料還是與俄羅斯建筑傳統(tǒng)一脈相承的形式的角度——這種傳承不僅來自對創(chuàng)新展覽建構的探索，也來自對木質(zhì)建筑原型的沿用?！酰ㄖx爾蓋·卓班 撰文， 陳茜 譯）

5 二層平面/Floor 1 plan

6 內(nèi)景/Interior view

The Russian national pavilion at Expo 2015 had a difficult and complex task set before it – to not only become a self-sufficient and architecturally striking representation of our country at the world's largest fair, but also adequately reflect its theme of "Feeding the Planet, Energy for Life". Preserving the continuity of the long-standing tradition of creating national pavilions became no less important for the authors of the project (architects Sergei Tchoban, Alexei Ilyin and Marina Kuznetskaya, SPEECH architectural bureau).

Russia has participated in the world's fair from the very beginning of its existence in 1851, and almost always presented a national Exposition in a freestanding pavilion designed by the leading architects of the time. Each of them went down in architectural history as a unique exhibition structure, but common features can also be clearly traced in their architectural appearance: many of the pavilions have a dynamic, simple, and memorable form with a significant emphasis on the main entrance area.

The USSR pavilion designed by architect Konstantin Melnikov at the International Exhibition of 1925 in Paris was exactly this. Instead of traditional windows, two-story high glazing was used, and the usual rectangular box exhibition volume was cut diagonally with an open staircase, covered with interlacing panels, while the entrance was punctuated by a decorative mast. Ilya Golosov offered a no less innovative pavilion, basing his design on the motif of slabs embedded into one another and placed with a slight shift so that they created the impression of motion. Later, the same motif was used by Boris lofan for the 1937 World Exhibition in Paris; he proposed a pavilion in the form of a pedestal, a dynamic composition which progressed as a parabola and ended with a powerful accent in the form of the famous sculpture by Vera Mukhina, "Worker and Kholkhoz Woman". Just two years later lofan once again built the national pavilion at the 1939 EXPO in New York, and again at the core of the design a swiftly expanding composition is easily read (this time the building received a horseshoe shape), culminating in a dynamically accentuated entrance. This tradition continued to be developed by many other architects, such as Konstantin Melnikov's design for the 1962 Expo in New York and Mikhail Posokhin's designs for the Montreal (1967) and Osaka (1970) exhibitions.

Even from these few examples, it can be easily observed that the ideas of the different architects who designed the world fair's national pavilions during the 20th century are united by a clear, common thread – the attraction to a laconic, memorable, and forward-striving volume. In addressing the typology of an exhibition pavilion in the 21st century, we sought to express the same features using the vocabulary of contemporary architecture, to create a memorable combination of evolved traditional forms with an absolutely modern embodiment of art.

The plot allocated for the construction of the pavilion has a narrow and very specific L-shape, which is closely surrounded on three sides by structures of other participating countries. These limitations also directed us to the necessity of putting the main emphasis precisely on the entrance area – the pavilion's main facades do not influence the silhouette. There was another important restriction: in accordance with the exhibition area's master plan, the height of the pavilion was limited to 12 meters, and only in oneplace could be increased to 17 meters. Covering an area of 3,260 square meters, the structure virtually repeats the given plot of land with an elongated parallelepiped configuration, thrusting forward an energetic, cantilevered protuberance where space and regulations allow for this – above the pedestrian area in front of the main entrance to the pavilion.

7 外景/Exterior views

8 剖面/Section

Almost 30 meters in length, the cantilever has a curved outline that gives the whole structure a memorable silhouette, clearly visible in the panorama of Expo 2015. From the side of the main entrance this element is lined with polished stainless steel, so that the cantilever will not only provide visitors shade from the sun and reflect the light of lanterns in the evening, but in and of itself would be an attraction – a giant mirror in which people will be able to photograph themselves and their surroundings.

Wood was selected as the principal material – it is at once the most environmental-friendly and the most traditional material in Russian architecture. The entire top tier of the pavilion is finished with wood paneling, while the lower tier is faced with transparent and opaque glass. The entrance area employs transparent glass and is an approachable, inherently conventional boundary between the Expo territory and the exhibition. It is also important that all of the pavilion materials are easy to install – all wooden and glass-and-metal parts are prefabricated and are easily and quickly assembled on site onto a metal frame. The wood theme is extended to the interior of the pavilion in the designs of reception desks, cabinets, VIP floor trimming, etc.

One of the key ideas of our project is that the pavilion can be both a place for exhibition and an interesting public space that attracts visitors.That's precisely why the roof is flat, gradually rising towards the main entrance, landscaped and turned into a place for walking as well as a platform for observing. Thanks to this design, visitors will be able to pass through the pavilion to enjoy a panoramic view of other exhibitions from the roof. In addition, the resulting shape seamlessly integrates the building into the exhibition ensemble, and stresses its connection with the identity of the Russian landscape, which is characterized by gently sloping ascents and descents.

Expo 2015 is dedicated to finding ways to prevent future food shortages around the world, and as such a serious subject that is directly connected with the problem of resources; to us it seemed incompatible with a pretentious pavilion form demanding unreasonable financial investments. That is why we strove for a maximally laconic, but nonetheless expressive and elegant volume. However, despite its apparent simplicity, the pavilion's 30-meter canopy above the entrance will create a sophisticated and interesting structure in terms of engineering, whose materials and form are an integral continuation of the traditions of Russian architecture – both in innovative exhibition structures and in archetypal wooden architecture.□(Text: Sergei Tchoban)

9 外景/Exterior view

10.11 景觀屋頂/Landscaped roof

12 細部/Detail

13 景觀屋頂/Landscaped roof

評論

劉晨：入口之“鏡”讓人聯(lián)想起塔可夫斯基的電影《鏡子》，至少在意念上折射出俄羅斯文化的精微復雜。我們習慣了與鏡子里的自己對面相遇，而此處的鏡子卻冷眼俯瞰蕓蕓眾生，當我們仰望鏡中的自己時，又驚詫于它的包容萬象。就俄羅斯館本身而言，這是其得意之處，太得意，反倒削弱了它在整個世博會場地中的關鍵位置，即主干道與次干道的交口。如果說米蘭世博會是重現(xiàn)古羅馬城市棋盤布局上的《最后晚餐》，那么俄羅斯之“鏡”不過是餐桌上的一盤菜，它映射著不散的筵席，同時也反射出華麗的失敗。它的“鄉(xiāng)愁”不過是幻象，附庸“現(xiàn)代”之風雅才是實在，居高臨下的姿態(tài)更是欲蓋彌彰。

張昕：如果在世博會的街道上隨機抽兩人，玩“一個表演、另一個猜”的游戲，俄羅斯館應該是最易肢體表達并被快速猜到的展館之一，應該比蜜蜂和麥子容易些。于是，回到了展館形式到底跟誰競標、被誰批準、為誰服務、被誰消費的老問題。這4個問題的答案差不多也就推導出所謂景觀上的“俄羅斯范"了。至于是否讓人聯(lián)想到廣袤大平原、諾亞方舟，是否實現(xiàn)了建筑師承諾的簡潔、紀念性、開拓奮進的形象，都已不重要。

Comments

LIU Chen: The mirror at the entrance reminds of Andrei Tarkovsky's film Mirror, and so reflects Russia's sophisticated culture, at least conceptually. We are accustomed to looking straight at ourselves in the mirror, yet here the mirror glances down with cool detachment, while we marvel at its all-encompassing capacity when we look up to meet ourselves. This is a proud gesture as long as the Russian pavilion is taken as an independent structure, so proud that its critical location at the intersection of the site's two main streets tends to be compromised. If the 2015 Milan Expo can be regarded as a Last Supper represented on the cardo-decumanus orthogonal grid system of the ancient Roman city, then the mirror of the Russian pavilion is no more than a meal on the grand table; beneath the illusion of "nostalgia" is a strong desire for unending "modern" feast, which eventually leads to failed splendor.

ZHANG Xin: If randomly choosing two people from the streets around the Expo to play the game of "one performs, the other guesses", the Russia Pavilion should be the easiest building to be performed and guessed, at least much easier than those of bees and wheat. Now we come back to the old questions that with which the form of this pavilion competes, approved by whom, serve for whom, and consumed by whom? The answers to these four questions will lead to the so-called "Russian style" landscape. Whether the building reminds people of the great plain and the Noah's Ark, or whether it fulfills the architect's commitment to creating a plain, commemorative, and inspiring image, does not matter now.