2014 WA中國建筑獎：緣起與觀察

張利/ZHANG Li

2014 WA中國建筑獎：緣起與觀察

WACAA 2014: Intensions and Observations

張利/ZHANG Li

建筑獎項與其他文化藝術(shù)領(lǐng)域的獎項一樣，其初衷是對杰出范例或個人貢獻的表彰與集粹。然而，從20世紀中葉至今，隨著當(dāng)代建筑的發(fā)展，建筑獎項逐步脫離了單純表彰與集粹的初衷，而成為建筑價值觀散布與建筑思潮涌動的直接參與者；同時，建筑獎項也脫離了單純面向?qū)I(yè)人士的目標范圍，而是試圖影響業(yè)內(nèi)與業(yè)外的廣泛人群。可以說，建筑獎項被越來越多地賦予了明顯的媒體角色。在此，我們無意判斷這種建筑獎項的媒體化本身的是與非。我們關(guān)注的是，在這種全社會泛媒體化的語境之中，建筑獎項應(yīng)如何應(yīng)變，才能持續(xù)發(fā)揮其對建筑文明演進的積極作用，而不是淪為消費媒體時代獵奇與悅眾的工具。

WA中國建筑獎由王路教授創(chuàng)立于2002年，是中國大陸地區(qū)首次以當(dāng)代中國建筑師的自主實驗為唯一關(guān)注的獎項。問世之初，它便通過鮮明的個性、毫不折衷的勇氣和完全獨立的評委判斷而得到了各界的認可與支持。后歷經(jīng)10余年持續(xù)數(shù)屆的努力，WA中國建筑獎已成為了最受關(guān)注的中國非官方建筑獎項之一，也是當(dāng)代中國的非官方建筑獎項謀求國際影響力的一個示例。

10余年間,國際與中國建筑語境發(fā)生了很多變化，這是包括WA中國建筑獎在內(nèi)的所有中國建筑獎項必須面對的現(xiàn)實。如果說10年前，既定規(guī)則的破除、陌生形式的沖擊與大眾回饋的瞬時效應(yīng)曾經(jīng)是建筑獲得社會關(guān)注的原因的話，那么在今天，環(huán)境資源的可持續(xù)性、廣義的人的平等生存以及傳統(tǒng)智慧的重新發(fā)現(xiàn)與詮釋則正在成為建筑貢獻于當(dāng)代文明的最佳可能。不僅如此，隨著在世紀之交得勢的少數(shù)形式極端主義者在各地的騷動與干擾，“設(shè)計實驗”一詞不可避免地被濫用、曲解和狹義化，其原有的積極意義也持續(xù)地被個別國際建筑明星的自我營銷與精英主義所折衷。面對這些變化，WA中國建筑獎需要以更開放的方式呈現(xiàn)、推崇在當(dāng)代中國建筑中產(chǎn)生的更多樣的價值。

有鑒于此，《世界建筑》的團隊征求了王路教授與其他相關(guān)學(xué)者、建筑師的意見，對2014年的WA中國建筑獎在價值取向界定、獎項設(shè)置、評委會構(gòu)成以及評審過程等方面進行了調(diào)整，多元化是所有這些調(diào)整的基本主題。這其中，最重要的多元化是獎項設(shè)置的多元化——通過WA獎輔助更多有意義的建筑追求在業(yè)內(nèi)外得到肯定與尊重。

2014年的WA中國建筑獎共包含了6個獎項：

設(shè)計實驗獎延續(xù)了WA獎的原有取向，并進一步將核心價值定義為設(shè)計的自主探索，獎勵那些在理念或建筑本體層面上的卓有成效的實驗性成果。與前幾屆WA獎相比，本屆的設(shè)計實驗獎增加了對建筑規(guī)模的限制（3000m2以下）。這一新增的規(guī)模限制也引發(fā)了一些相關(guān)的討論。

社會公平獎的核心價值是以建筑推進社會公平，獎勵那些服務(wù)于社會弱勢群體的，通過建筑手段推進社會公平、踐行人文關(guān)懷的成果。這一獎項的設(shè)置所面對的是當(dāng)前中國社會的重要問題之一：如何使財富、機會更均衡地分布，以造福于更多的人和更廣泛的地域。

城市貢獻獎的核心價值是大型公共項目對城市生活的積極作用，獎勵那些以積極有力的介入為城市環(huán)境與城市生活所作出的突出貢獻。這一獎項的設(shè)置面對的是當(dāng)前中國城市化進程中的主流公共建筑項目。

居住貢獻獎的核心價值是居住品質(zhì)和居住環(huán)境的提升，獎勵那些對居住模式與居住環(huán)境問題的卓越解決方案。無需贅述，這一獎項的設(shè)置所面對的是當(dāng)前中國最普遍的、也是最容易被建筑師忽略的居住問題。

技術(shù)進步獎的核心價值是技術(shù)的切實進步，獎勵那些創(chuàng)造性地使用技術(shù)手段解決現(xiàn)實問題的成果。這一獎項的設(shè)置所面對的是在當(dāng)代中國建筑中，設(shè)計應(yīng)如何駕馭技術(shù)的問題。

建筑成就獎的核心價值是建成空間環(huán)境的長久價值，獎勵那些經(jīng)歷了相當(dāng)?shù)臅r間考驗、展現(xiàn)了建筑的長久性價值的典范性成果。這一獎項的設(shè)置所面對的是當(dāng)前中國城市因過度求“新”而忽視建成環(huán)境的長期使用效果、對正處于建筑生命周期“壯年”的建筑較少受到關(guān)注的問題。

2014年WA中國建筑獎的擴容受到了各界的關(guān)注，這使我們備感鼓舞。此次WA獎的擴容與改變也引發(fā)了不少的討論（有時候是爭論，更有時候是質(zhì)疑），這也同樣使我們感到興奮。在此我們要向所有關(guān)注WA中國建筑獎、慷慨地提供建議與意見的人表示感激?；仡櫞舜蜽A獎的舉辦，我們有如下的觀察。

其一，當(dāng)代中國建筑創(chuàng)作的多元化是不可逆的。正像在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)時代人們很難再被排他的單一信仰統(tǒng)一一樣，在中國當(dāng)前以新媒體驅(qū)動的建筑信息環(huán)境中，建筑人也很難再被排他的單一建筑價值觀所統(tǒng)一。過去建立在信息資源不平衡、信息傳播渠道不平衡的基礎(chǔ)之上的建筑話語特權(quán)甚至是話語霸權(quán)，在今天都在迅速地喪失其存在的合法性。黑格爾式的普適終極目標與統(tǒng)一過程正在事實上被康德式的共通判斷力和自主過程所取代。在此次WA獎的申報項目中，我們注意到，即使是在領(lǐng)域相對明確的獎項（如社會公平獎和居住貢獻獎）中，仍然可以看到對類似問題的出乎意料的多樣化的解答。這種以建筑師的個人思辨為根基的多元化真不啻為建筑文化的一道福音。我們終于不再需要爭論誰的目標比誰的目標更正確，而是可以安下心來證明誰在自己的方向上走得更遠、走得更好了。

其二，當(dāng)代中國建筑文化的發(fā)展要求更成熟的中國建筑獎項的出現(xiàn)。申報2014年WA中國建筑獎各獎項的300余項建筑作品在整體上展現(xiàn)了一種令人信服的質(zhì)量。對此，出席獎項評審的32位建筑師、學(xué)者均表達了這樣一種期望，即中國的高質(zhì)量建筑作品需要有成熟的、高影響力的中國建筑獎項在全球化的話境中推廣傳播。中國的建筑獎項，特別是非官方建筑獎項，不應(yīng)滿足于把傳播范圍僅限于國內(nèi)。

其三，與建筑一樣，建筑獎項也是一項伴隨著遺憾的事業(yè)。2014的WA中國建筑獎雖然得到了各界的支持與鼓勵，但還是有不少遺憾的。這在以下4個方面表現(xiàn)的猶為突出：

（1）獎項設(shè)置的方向。2014年的WA關(guān)注了建成2年以內(nèi)的建筑和建成5～10年的建筑，但沒有為當(dāng)今建筑創(chuàng)作的一個越來越重要的領(lǐng)域——舊建筑改造與遺產(chǎn)利用——設(shè)置單獨的獎項，而這一領(lǐng)域是我們今天的建筑文化中最為活躍的部分，也很有可能是中國建筑的可見未來中舉足輕重的部分。

（2）獎項彼此之間的界定。設(shè)計實驗獎的最大規(guī)模定在3000m2，導(dǎo)致近年來一些非常優(yōu)秀的建筑實驗作品不能申報設(shè)計實驗獎，不得不參與到核心價值不是設(shè)計實驗的其他獎項的競爭之中。

（3）獎項的申報規(guī)則。2014年WA中國建筑獎的各項獎除了少數(shù)彼此互斥外（如設(shè)計實驗與城市貢獻、建筑成就與所有其他獎），多數(shù)獎項是可以用同一作品重復(fù)申報的，而且規(guī)則也明確了這一點。不少評委在評審過程中認為這一規(guī)則是值得商榷的：既然明確各獎項的核心價值，就應(yīng)要求申報者根據(jù)其作品的核心價值擇一獎項申報。

（4）獲獎建筑師的分布。本期《世界建筑》的封面上給出了獲獎項目的地域分布，這或多或少可以用近期再受關(guān)注的胡煥庸線加以解釋。獲獎建筑師集中于北京、上海、深圳、香港等一線城市，這也可以用知識、技術(shù)與財力資源的集中來解釋。但女性建筑師與非漢文化背景建筑師在獲獎?wù)咧械膸捉毕瘎t完全沒有反應(yīng)出相應(yīng)群體在當(dāng)代中國建筑界的活躍程度。這一點也勢必應(yīng)引起我們重視。

我們期待在下屆WA中國建筑獎回應(yīng)這些問題，與您一起把這一獎項辦得更好。

Like all art awards, architecture awards started with the original intention of selecting and recognising the best works or people. From mid-20th century up to now, along with the development of contemporary architecture discourse, architecture awards have gone far beyond their original role. Some awards have become the disseminators of architecture values and propellers of architecture movements. Most awards are trying to reach out to a much broader audience outside the profession. Architecture awards have become a unique type of architecture media. We are not here to debate on the pros and cons of this identity shift of architecture awards. We are concerned however, with the strategies and processes of architecture awards adapting to the changing time. It is of course better for architecture awards to continue to be positively engaged in the evolution of the story of architecture, rather than feeding the ever-growing consumer appetite for the new, cheerful, silly or simply bizarre.

The World Architecture Awards for Chinese Architecture (WAACA) was initiated by Professor Wang Lu in 2002. It was the first architecture award in mainland China to focus entirely on domestic design experiments. It was immediately well received by the Chinese architecture population, not only for its distinctive identity, but also for its uncompromising approach and independent judgment. After more than a decade since its founding, WAACA is now one of the most revered non-governmental architecture awards in China. WACAA has also enjoyed attention from the international circle.

Lots of things have changed in the Chinese architecture discourse in the past decade, a reality that has to be addressed by all Chinese architecture awards. Ten years ago, it was applausable for architecture to hit headlines by revolting against existing principles, posing striking forms, or shaking public beliefs. Now, it is through sustainability, equality and the creative re-interpretation of traditional wisdom that architecture generates real incentives to contemporary life. Moreover, the spectacles and turbulence introduced by some formal extremists at the turn of the century worldwide have put big question marks behind the word "design experiment", with the word itself being continuously abused, distorted, narrowed and tarnished by a handful of self-promoting international stars. Facing these changes, WAACA has to take a much more open approach, and a much active attitude towards diversity and pluralism.

The team for WAACA 2014 have been meticulously collecting ideas from the best minds in Chinese architecture, including Professor Wang Lu, the founder of WACAA. This lengthy inquiry finally led us to the reforms in WAACA 2014: Multiple categories were created. Diversity in values was encouraged. The line-up of the Jury was expanded. The Jury process was refined. Underlying all these changes was the key concept of pluralism. The key move was the establishment of more than one award categories.

There are six categories in WAACA 2014:

The Design Experiment Award carries on the original WAACA focus. It honours design adventures in small buildings. Comparing with previous WAACAs, this award in 2014 limits the candidate projects to buildings with a floor area of less than 3000 square metres. This limit has caused some arguments.

The Social Equality Award focuses on social equality. It honours projects that assist the poor and theweak through architecture. This category address one overarching issue in China: how to distribute wealth and opportunities more equally across the society, and by doing this benefit more communities in more places?

The City Regeneration award focuses on the urban quality of medium to large scale buildings. It honours medium to large public buildings that have made outstanding contributions to urban environments and urban life. This category addresses the mainstream buildings in the on-going, rapid Chinese urbanisation.

The Housing Award focuses on housing exploration and adventure. It honours projects that provide excellent solutions to the ubiquitous housing problem. Obviously, this category address the housing issue which is so demanding in China yet so often neglected by Chinese architects.

The Technological Innovation Award focuses on technological innovations. It honours buildings that solve practical problems through the creative use of technologies. This category addresses the issue of getting technologies to serve design.

The Achievement Award focuses on the longterm impact of buildings. It honours buildings that have been proven to be excellent solutions by time. This category tries to tackle the issue of the hunger for the new and the general overlook of any building 4-5 years after its completion.

The new format of WAACA 2014 has attracted attention from all corners in the Chinese architecture community. We feel thrilled by this. We are more thrilled by the fact that the new format of WAACA 2014 has also evoked questions and debates. We would like to express our gratitude here to everyone who has kindly contributed their opinion to WAACA. We have some observations on WAACA 2014 ourselves:

[I] The trend of diversification in contemporary Chinese architecture design is irreversible. In the time of Internet, it is no longer possible to unify people's minds for a single, exclusive belief. Similarly, in the time of a new Chinese architecture discourse largely driven by self-media, it is impossible to unify the architects' minds for a single, exclusive idea. The existence of dominant voice supported by a painful imbalance of information and communication resource has been a past. The Hegelian universal agenda and progress has been replaced by the Kantian common judgment and autonomous processes. In WAACA 2014, we saw multiple values and approaches even on one narrow issue, e. g., in the Equality Award and the Housing Award. This is truly great news to Chinese architecture culture. Gone are the useless arguments of rights and wrongs. Replacing them, are now the debate and competition on who has covered more distance in his/her own path.

[II] Better Chinese architecture asks for better Chinese awards. The 300+ candidate projects in WAACA 2014 have demonstrated the quality of contemporary Chinese architecture with convincing evidence. All the jurors have expressed the same feeling that, to send the message of Chinese architecture across the globe, better architecture awards are crucial vehicles. It is time for Chinese architecture awards to take a step further and get into the uncharted water of international territory.

[III] Like architecture, architecture awards are never without regrets. Though WAACA 2014 has been praised by the vast majority people, there are still lots of things that cry out for improvement:

(1) The categories of awards. An important category is missing. WAACA 2014 has covered buildings completed in the last two years and buildings that have built for 5-10 years. Yet no category has been setup particularly for old buildings. This is even more significant an absence considering the vitality in conservation and adaptive reuse. Smart adaptive reuse will surely play a key role in the sustainability of Chinese cities.

(2) The boundary between different categories. In WAACA 2014, the Design Experiment Award is open only to buildings under 3000 square metres. This has caused some headache in a number of cases when a truly experimental building is larger than 3000 square metres.

(3) The rules of submission. Currently, a built project can apply to more than one categories. Many jurors have expressed the point that it could be better, both for WAACA and the candidates, if one building could only apply for one category.

(4) The distribution of winning architects. On the cover of this special issue, there is a map showing the places of the winning/highly commended projects. This conforms to the locations of the major cities. But the virtual absence of female architects, and architects who doesn't bear a Han-Chinese background, is disproportionate to the vividness of these two groups in contemporary Chinese architecture.

We look forward to tackling the abovementioned issues in the next WAACA. Together with the help from you, we can have a WAACA that will be even better next time.

成都寬窄巷子歷史文化保護區(qū)保護性改造工程（攝影/Photos: 陳春林/CHEN Chunlin）

清華大學(xué)建筑學(xué)院 /《世界建筑》

2015-03-01