氣質(zhì)性的空墟—圍繞城市性格的策展人手記

畢月/Beatrice Leanza

徐知蘭 譯/Translated by XU Zhilan

劉晨 校/proofread by LIU Chen

氣質(zhì)性的空墟—圍繞城市性格的策展人手記

畢月/Beatrice Leanza

徐知蘭 譯/Translated by XU Zhilan

劉晨 校/proofread by LIU Chen

1-3胡同材料目錄，2015研究項目，由速溶胡同/頭條工作室完成/Hutong Material Catalogue， research project 2015， by Instant Hutong/Ramoprimo Studio

“……行動就是形式?！?/p>

——凱勒·伊斯特林，《超國家機器——基礎設施空間的力量》［1］21

目前有一股來自當代設計知識領域的變質(zhì)效應正在加速產(chǎn)生影響。它產(chǎn)生于一個重要的時間節(jié)點，即技術進步與設計師最終產(chǎn)品——無論是物件、設施、還是程序——為人們所接觸到的容易程度相互交疊，正在讓個體能夠與他們的構成性規(guī)則及結(jié)構形成更為個人、更具感染力和更為日常可見的關系。信息作為對不斷影響擴大的全球參與范式進行形態(tài)轉(zhuǎn)換的終極標志，現(xiàn)在與數(shù)據(jù)、設備和空間緊密交織在一起，它們的結(jié)合似乎給我們提供了能在現(xiàn)實生活中自發(fā)成為活躍的用戶、消費者和生產(chǎn)者的機會。凱勒·伊斯特林的《超國家機器》探索了這種隨著“基礎設施技術”而新出現(xiàn)的表面上的透明性所具有的短路效應，今天這種技術“不僅僅包含管線組成的網(wǎng)絡，還具有通用的標準和理念，它們控制著從技術配件到管理風格的所有事物?！c隱而不見的狀態(tài)相反，現(xiàn)在，基礎設施是在我們所有人之間進行聯(lián)絡和交通往來的顯性節(jié)點——它們是統(tǒng)治日常生活空間的規(guī)則”［1］11。伊斯特林對于當代去物質(zhì)化控制機制的調(diào)查揭示了空間的固有語義學意義，它將基礎設施定義為“構成城市形態(tài)的操作系統(tǒng)”，即規(guī)則和環(huán)境——從免稅區(qū)到寬帶網(wǎng)不一而足，由此實現(xiàn)的全球化治理是有形物件和無形協(xié)議共同繁育的成果。她的發(fā)現(xiàn)證實了一處批判性的邊緣地帶，代表了一些策展人的視角，他們有志于將城市與對變化和反思的參與性實踐項目聯(lián)系在一起，并提出具有建設性的理論暗示結(jié)論。

伊斯特林對基礎設施空間的解讀擴展了拉圖爾創(chuàng)立的行動者網(wǎng)絡理論［2］的譜系，這一理論關注“中介”，也就是無形的社會敘事。它作為一種積極的形式幫助形成了我們與空間和物質(zhì)對象之間的關系——從建筑到社區(qū)、街道和機動車——后者也同樣具有積極的形式“作用”。全球化城市的空間與社會行為的程式化——市區(qū)、郊區(qū)、度假村、大型商城等——本質(zhì)上包含著一種預設的“性格”或趨勢，使?jié)撛诘男袨榈靡园l(fā)生。因此，城市的背景可以被視為一系列歷史元素構成的網(wǎng)絡，它們層層疊加在一系列空間、行為與文化的關聯(lián)性詞匯上，這些關系在城市的“主操作系統(tǒng)”中被消費、再生產(chǎn)和得到體現(xiàn)。隱喻地說，如果電子設備表面上賦予了我們許多手段與工具，讓我們能在新興的“數(shù)字城市主義”大道上縱橫馳騁、自由地定制所有這些詞匯，那么，它們所具有的分裂和瓦解效應也同時需要新的干預策略來提升系統(tǒng)的各項機能，產(chǎn)生新的集體參與和契約倫理。

通過基礎設施對城市進行反思，并將城市作為基礎設施進行思考，提示我們應該重新想象時代與空間的關系。社會與個人形成于過去的物質(zhì)條件背景下，這些條件也限定了社會與個人的現(xiàn)在與未來，因此當代城市（重新）產(chǎn)生的軌跡成為這些特質(zhì)性關系之間的相互作用——也就是在其維護與再生產(chǎn)過程中涉及的空間、組織與道德經(jīng)濟之間的相互作用。這種進行中的重塑過程，調(diào)和了政治敘事、社會選區(qū)和消費大眾之間的對話，彌合了各種不同知識領域與人類實踐對于未來的設想，它居于當代文化“行動”的核心位置，考慮到20世紀中期以來各類藝術實踐領域的不斷拓展，這一過程可被視為一種對空間政治的回歸批判。從由極簡主義與概念藝術的出現(xiàn)而引發(fā)具象空間的死亡，到“關系美學”與“體制批判”所擅長的去物質(zhì)化論辯，直至固執(zhí)己見的“客體本體論”，這些思潮的往復變遷與1980年代以來針對后現(xiàn)代背景下游離地理學進行的跨學科研究的轉(zhuǎn)折交織在一起，它們在隨之產(chǎn)生的后續(xù)思潮“對立文化實踐”中具有主導地位，而后者回應了不斷變化的、因地而異的身份與知識的概念，它們依托于后殖民主義話語，同時也推動了許多批判性實踐，催生了新的 “社區(qū)”范式與“歸屬感”1）［3］?？臻g、場所、身份之間的變革性關聯(lián)，及其與不斷排列組合的機構與地點之間的聯(lián)系，終將被21世紀的創(chuàng)意產(chǎn)業(yè)理性化，融入為消費主義、壯觀景象與游憩活動提供服務的基礎設施空間，在博物館一般的購物中心的崛起過程中，這一現(xiàn)象達到了頂峰。

策展人批判性的努力可能佯裝為伊斯特林所謂的“乘數(shù)器”形式進入當代城市空間，這些要素會影響或調(diào)整各自所在體系的性格或氣質(zhì)。它們植入了能夠評估、反映并重新審視我們的意識的中介，同時讓我們親身感受那些橫貫在生活環(huán)境中的變化。戲劇《諸多無限》在這方面提供了一個有說服力的案例。這項獲得許多大獎的杰出劇目最初在2002年公演，由遠見卓識的導演盧卡·隆柯尼與劍橋大學宇宙學家和數(shù)學家約翰·戴維·巴羅的共同合作完成。以巴羅為劇作家，隆柯尼為舞臺魔術師，《諸多無限》通過5幕獨立的場景，探索了“無限”的數(shù)學概念。每一幕劇都別開生面，并關注各自獨特的方面。這出戲的演出場地是斯卡拉倉庫的空曠場地——這座飛機庫一樣的建筑綜合體曾經(jīng)是斯卡拉歌劇院的實驗室所在地，位于米蘭曾經(jīng)的偏遠工業(yè)區(qū)博威薩。觀眾一到達劇場，就被分為70人一組進入演出場地。他們會按順序上樓，分別經(jīng)過5個不同的演出場景，因此空間里總是同時有5組觀眾占據(jù)其中?！吨T多無限》將城市作為劇場，在其中營造了一個“瞬間”，由此不同形式的智力活動、空間活動和社會運動都在其中得到了活生生的體驗和集體上演。巴羅對此解釋說：“講故事似乎是刺穿層層（關于無限概念的）悖論的方式，因此通過讓觀眾沉浸于其他的場景中的方法，這些悖論變得令人熟悉，而那些違反直覺的‘無限’特征則活生生地聳現(xiàn)在這些場景中?！保?］《諸多無限》以吉莉安娜·布魯諾稱之為“一種對時代政治的徹底重塑”［5］的方式喚醒和激起了觀眾的積極參與，我們現(xiàn)在通過自己身邊平淡無奇的建成環(huán)境中不均質(zhì)的空間獲得這種體驗——這些建成環(huán)境是一個不斷分解與瓦解的超鏈接世界，在這個世界里，有關附近、距離和歸屬的概念會經(jīng)常被重新定義。

"［…］ the action is the form."

—Keller Easterling， Extrastatecraft - The power of Infrastructure Space［1］21

An accelerating， metamorphosing effect radiates from the fields of contemporary design knowledge. It originates at a momentous temporal crossroad when the overlay between technological advancement and the ease of accessibility to design's end-products - be those objects， utilities or processes， is empowering individuals to a more personal， affective and quotidian rapport to their constitutive rules and structures. Information，the ultimate shape-shifting signifier of an ever expanding paradigm of world-wide participation，coalesces today into an entanglement of data，devices and spaces that we are seemingly offered to self-operate as active users， consumers and producers of the reality we inhabit. Keller Easterling's Extrastatecraft explores the shortcircuiting impact of this new apparent transparency in the emergence of an "infrastructural technology" that today "more than grids of pipes and wires，includes the shared standards and ideas that control everything from technical objects to management styles.［…］ Far from hidden， infrastructure is now the overt point of contact and access between us all - the rules governing the space of everyday life"［1］11. Easterling's investigations into the dematerialized mechanics of contemporary control unearth an immanent semantics of space that defines infrastructure as an "operating system for shaping the city"， that is the formulas and environments，from free zones to broadband networks， through which global governance is exercised as a proliferation of both tangible objects and immaterial protocols. Her findings substantiate a critical perimeter which presents curatorial perspectives interested in engaging the city and participatory practices of change and reflection， with productive theoretical implications.

Easterling's reading into infrastructure space build onto a genealogy of actor-network theory as developed by Latour［2］， focusing on "agency"， i.e. immaterial and social narratives， as an active form contributing to the shaping of our relation to space and spatial objects （from buildings， to neighbours，streets and vehicles） "as" active forms. The formulas of spatial and social conduct of the global city -zones， suburbs， resorts， malls - essentially embed a preconfigured "disposition"， or tendency， of potential activities to be performed wherein. The urban context can be therefore observed as a web of historical constructs， stratified over a spatial，behavioural and cultural vocabulary of relationality consumed， reproduced and embodied in the "host system" of the city. By way of a metaphor， if our electronic devices seemingly enable us with the tools and measures to freely customize this vocabulary across new avenues of "data-urbanism"， their atomizing， disaggregating effect is simultaneously calling for new strategies of intervention to upgrade the system's faculties towards a renewed ethics of engagement and collective participation.

Rethinking the city through-and-as infrastructure prompts us to reimagine the timesand-spaces where sociality and personhood are created alongside the past material conditions that contribute to their present and future definitions. The contemporary locus of urban（re）generation becomes therefore the interplay of these dispositional relations - the spaces， the organizations and the moral economy implicated in their preservation and reproduction. This form of ongoing reworking， that is the moderation of dialogical processes among political narratives，social constituencies and the consuming public，bridging visions from diversified fields of knowledge and human practice， is at the heart of contemporary culture's "doing"， one that can be looked upon as a recursive critique of spatial politics predicated on the ever expanding fields of artistic practice since the mid 20th century. From the demise of representational space with the emergence of minimalism and conceptual art， to the dematerialization exercised by the rhetoric of Relational Aesthetics and Institutional Critique， until the self-absorption of Objectoriented Ontology， these perambulations are intertwined with the transdisciplinary turn of studies addressing the disembodied geographies of the postmodern condition since the 1980s. These were paramount in the consequent formulations of "oppositional cultural practices" that responded to changing notions of place-bound identity and site-bound knowledge postulated in post-colonial discourse， as well as informed a variety of critical endeavours through which new paradigms of "community" and "sense of belonging" have been produced until nowadays1）［3］. The transformative nexus between space， place， and identity and its connection to the ongoing permutations between institutions and locations， is what eventually the creative industries of the 21th century have rationalized into an infrastructure space of consumerism， spectacle and play， epitomised by the rise of the mall as museum.

Critical curatorial endeavours can enter contemporary urban space in the guise of what Easterling calls "multipliers"， elements that can affect or retune the temperament or disposition of the systems in which they are suspended. They emplace forms of agency that can assess，reflect upon and readdress our awareness and simultaneously offer physical engagement with the experience of the changes traversing our living environments. The theatre piece Infinities offers to this extent a powerful exemplification. An awardwinning dramaturgical wonder staged originally in 2002， it is product of the collaborative efforts of visionary director Luca Ronconi and John D. Barrow， a cosmologist and mathematician from the University of Cambridge. With Barrow， the playwright， and Ronconi， the stage wizard， Infinities explores the mathematical concept of "infinity" through five separate scenarios， each of which functions as a performative tableau focusing on one of its singular aspects. The play was hosted in the vacant spaces of Magazzini della Scala， a large hangar-like complex that used to house the laboratories of La Scala Opera House and is located in Milan's once remote industrial zone of Bovisa. On arrival， the audience was let inside in groups of seventy， which would sequentially move up through the five different scenarios so that five different groups were simultaneously inhabiting the space. Infinities took the city as the theatre， creating within it a "moment" through which different forms of intellectual， physical， and social movement came to be lived and collectively performed. Barrow explained: "Story-telling seemed to be the way to penetrate its ［the concept of infinity］ paradoxes so that they became familiar by the device of immersing the audience into other realities where the counter-intuitive features of the infinite loomed as large as life."［4］Infinities evoked and provoked an active engagement with what Giuliana Bruno calls "a radical refashioning of a politics of time"［5］as we nowadays experience it through the uneven spaces of our ordinary， built environments: a hyperconnected world in endless solution and dissolution，where notions of proximity， distance and belonging are constantly reconfigured.

The spatio-temporal dynamic activated and engaged by the project encapsulates a strategic form of agency that simultaneously speaks to and challenges the various transformative registers as well as the "ongoing biographies" sedimented across the interiors and exteriors of the city［6，7］. Urban regeneration more than an artefactual rejuvenation of architectural forms must perform as an agent of relational transformation and act with punctuality and precision along the locational specificity of discarded social narratives and material histories - urban voids - that can substantiate what we otherwise often found labelled as an encounter between top-down regimentation and bottom-up experimentation. In this infra-dimensional space，designers can "code" moments of not-totallyplanned deviation from the status quo， working with the temperamental character of these latent forces， thus creating novel interactional scapes between spaces and communities， and so allowing for motives of change and resilience to mobilize extant relations of production， inheritance and place into new conformations.

4.5行動中的思想，上海西岸藝術中心，2016年1月10日-3月15日，展覽由reMIX工作室設計/Ideas in Action， exhibition views in West Bund Art Centre，Shanghai， January 10 - March 15， 2016， exhibition design by reMIX Studio

6.7管·白塔寺，2015北京設計周北京白塔寺歷史街區(qū)裝置，眾建筑設計/ Tubular Baitasi， installation in Baitasi historic district （Beijing）， Beijing Design Week 2015， by people Architecture Office

項目激發(fā)和吸引的時空動態(tài)，包含著中介的策略形式，它們在與各種變量以及沉淀在一座城市內(nèi)外的許多“形成中的自傳”進行對話的同時，也對它們提出挑戰(zhàn)［6，7］。城市復興的進程不僅僅是人工恢復建筑形式的過程，也必須成為相關變化過程的中介，并且在區(qū)位特性上與被遺棄的社會敘事與物質(zhì)歷史——城市的無用空間——保持精確的一致，后者也證明了我們平時經(jīng)常見到的所謂自上而下的制度化與自下而上的實驗之間的沖突。在這個亞維度空間里，設計者能夠通過“編寫代碼”形成許多并不完全在計劃中的、偏離現(xiàn)狀的瞬間，與這些隱藏力量的氣質(zhì)特征協(xié)作，在空間與社區(qū)之間創(chuàng)造出新的互動景觀，并允許變革力和活力將生產(chǎn)、遺產(chǎn)和場所之間的既有關系組織成新的構象。

在云計算與共享經(jīng)濟繁榮的支持下，對影響力的分析判斷與專業(yè)服務的傳遞得以 加速發(fā)展，推動了學科之間日益增長的相互滲透與開源技術穩(wěn)定持續(xù)的發(fā)展；盡管如此，最令人痛心的卻是，城市復興的時空在意識形態(tài)上與生產(chǎn)行為和對權力與資本的等級制度的回應相關聯(lián)，將城市作為全球渴望的對象進行崇拜。這些跨國現(xiàn)象共同產(chǎn)生的隱性前提是，認為今天表現(xiàn)出的設計是跨學科、物質(zhì)系統(tǒng)與非物質(zhì)系統(tǒng)的“元項目”，這些結(jié)構必須通過以專門技術為基礎的各種過程相互作用才能發(fā)揮作用，同樣重要的是，必須使區(qū)位特征里那些具有文化氣質(zhì)的機能獲得更大的力量，讓它們能通過中小尺度的集體參與方式重新獲取對城市應有的權利。盡管這些專項調(diào)查來源于不同的生產(chǎn)方式，從數(shù)碼知識、匠人思維到草根智慧等，它們的驅(qū)動力卻具備共同特征，即積極創(chuàng)造價值、共同實現(xiàn)理想以及道義上的志趣相投。讓這些創(chuàng)新企業(yè)吸引到共同價值的是它們在協(xié)同創(chuàng)造與知識整合的高效生產(chǎn)網(wǎng)絡中的動態(tài)布局；也是它們在可補救范圍內(nèi)的迂回行動，這種方式能重新激發(fā)在生產(chǎn)、遺產(chǎn)和場所之間已經(jīng)斷裂或陳舊的關聯(lián)，形成相互關聯(lián)和彼此依賴的創(chuàng)新過程。這也成為最近上海藝術設計雙年展2）上一個展覽的主題，展覽由上海西岸藝術中心舉辦，筆者就是策展人之一。題為“行動中的思想”的展覽表達了彼此相關的多學科設計實踐，驕傲地呈現(xiàn)了整體思想的形式，它們來源于并呼應了各種在中國發(fā)生變化的當代場景，跨越從物品到城市的制造，通過在許多社會、文化和空間條件的關系之間進行變化關聯(lián)形成展覽，這些條件來自于不均等或被忽視的各類發(fā)展框架。展覽分為4個核心部分——基礎設施模型、增長的協(xié)議、填充，以及物質(zhì)與客體——它們都被布置在一個“動態(tài)的總平面”上。展覽由總部設在北京的臨界工作室設計，這種方式鼓勵觀眾在各部分之間進行有機的橫向解讀，并允許他們將其作為視覺與空間景觀來體驗。

圍繞著這些當代設計實踐的道德經(jīng)濟，涌入了各類設計知識領域，它對重新評估拉圖爾和伊斯特林針對“社會”的本質(zhì)提出的問題和解決方法至關重要。在中國急迫的多元化現(xiàn)象、人口分化、流于形式的公眾聽證會和當前各類社會價值觀的背景下，這些質(zhì)問顯得比以往更為重要，并進一步被改變游戲規(guī)則的范式所擴大和加強，中國失控的私人企業(yè)也因此隨著勞工體系與生產(chǎn)體系變化而左右搖擺。這些都是公共文化機構與組織進行討論的必然前提，本文的作者也在努力獲得第一手資料的同時，擔任北京設計周2013年以來的創(chuàng)意總監(jiān)。盡管這種大規(guī)模公眾事件具有天然的曝光性質(zhì)，其臨時性的特點也能對行動與反思采用實用主義的姿態(tài)（空間與時間上的開放）——將城市作為生活實驗室，測試集體智慧形式在自身演進過程中自我淪陷的可能性。2011年以來在大柵欄歷史街區(qū)，在當?shù)亻_發(fā)商合作下建立起來的長期項目平臺，以及2015年在白塔寺進行的類似工作，試圖產(chǎn)生出這種類型的合作機構——即僅僅通過空間的操作，與目前生活中的動態(tài)要素共同作用，這些要素也構成了它們的背景。設計者被邀請來加入這些對話，他們對錯綜復雜的空間尺度、來源于街道、棋牌室和餐桌等的社交形式具有非常敏銳的感受，由此通過已有的實踐知識和有意將其服務于社會需求的興趣，重新編寫了它們目前的構成代碼。

通過這些可以到達且容易辨識的項目——無論是半臨時性的干預、長達幾個月之久的展覽或是為期一天的論壇，這些穿梭于城市肌理內(nèi)部的即興行為，是城市未來必不可少的要素。它們所提供的暫停、反思和開放對話的時間，在當今信息過度的城市中是一種稀有品。盡管在城市的時間碎片化維度中運行，它們也仍然成功地使機遇、理想和需求成為建筑實用主義的三大支柱，并通過一份集體想象將它們轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)椤皩嵤┬浴钡募稀?/p>

Most poignantly though， with a growing osmosis among disciplines and the steadfast development of open-source technologies augmented by an acceleration in diagnosing impacts and delivering specialized services thanks to cloud-computing and the proliferation of the sharing-economy， the space and time of urban regeneration becomes ideologically associated with productive actions and responsiveness to the hierarchies of power and capital that fetishize the city as an object of global desire. The implicit premise to this assembly of positions that are growing across a transnational expanse， is the recognition that design performs today as a "metaproject" across disciplinary and systemic structures of both intangible and material nature， which must labour at the interplay of processes grounded in practical know-hows as much as empower culturally dispositional faculties of locational character that can reclaim the right to the city by way of small to medium scale forms of collective engagement. While their specificity of investigation employs modalities of production sourcing from digital knowledge， craft-thinking as much as grassroots intelligence， a common denominator of positive value-making， co-actualization and a light-weight awareness of ethical like-mindedness， drives their motivations. What draws shared significance to these creative enterprises is their dynamic positioning within generative networks of co-doing and combining of knowledge， their detouring within the remedial scale of actions that can rekindle broken or obsolete relations of production，inheritance and place into novel processes of mutuality and co-dependency. This has also been the subject of a recent exhibition presented in the context of the biennial Art & Shanghai Exhibition2）organized at Shanghai West Bund Art Centre， of which the author was one of the curators. Titled "Ideas in Action"， this themed part of the show presented relevant multidisciplinary design practices， sporting forms of integrated thinking found， inspired by or echoing across contemporary scenarios of change in China， that spanned from object-to-city making by way of rerouting connections across the social， cultural and spatial givens of uneven or unattended frameworks of development. Divided in four core sections -Infrastructural Matrix， Growth protocols， Infill and Materiality & Objecthood - they were laid out in a "dynamic masterplan" designed by Beijing-based reMIX Studio as a way to encourage an organic cross-reading among them and allow audiences to inhabit as a visual and spatial landscape.

The moral economy registered around these kinds of contemporary design practices and effusing the fields of design knowledge is the key to reassessments of Latour's and Easterling's approach and questions around the nature of the "social". These interrogations prove ever more essential in the context of China's urgent diversities， segmented demographics， eroding public fora and civic values，further aggravated by the game-changing paradigms with which its rampant private enterprises are swaying the labour and productivity system. These are issues that public cultural institutions and organizations must take as discursive horizons， and the author of this text has strived to engage firsthand while acting as the creative director of Beijing Design Week since its 2013 edition. Albeit divulging in nature，the temporary character of this largescale public event allowed for the emplacement of pragmatic overtures（physical and temporal openings） of both action and reflection to engage the city as a living laboratory， testing the possibilities for a form of collective intelligence to become enmeshed in its evolvement. The long-termed event platforms established with the collaboration of local developers in the historic districts of Dashilar since 2011 and in Baitasi in 2015 have attempted at conjuring this type of collaborative agency over sheer spatial manoeuvring， working with the existing life dynamics producing their contexts. Designers were invited to enter these dialogues with sensitivity to their intricate scales， inherited forms of sociality consumed across the streets or in gambling parlours as much as at dining tables， thus re-coding their extant formations with practical knowledge at hand and an interest to put that at the service of social needs in mind.

The provisional acts threaded within the urban fabric by way of such accessible， legible projects - be those semi-temporary interventions， months-long exhibitions or daylong forums， are vital for urban futures. The time of pause， reflection and openended dialogue they offer is rare currency in today's information-overflown cities. And while they work within cities' temporally shredded dimensionality they succeed in making opportunity， ambition and necessity equal mainstays of architectural pragmatism， and with a little bit of collective imagination， turning them into a constellation of "operative manifestos".

注釋/Notes：

1）作為這種長達幾十年的藝術與建筑之間相互交流影響潮流的組成部分，2015年的透納獎由聚合建筑師事務所獲得——這是一支由20多位設計師合作組成的年輕團隊，以非正式、參與性的方式開展工作，他們的許多項目都是社會參與的公眾主導干預措施，為對當代文化語言背景下兩者發(fā)揮的作用與姿態(tài)提供了探討的延續(xù)性和挑戰(zhàn)。/As part of this decades-long intercourse between art and architecture，the 2015 Turner prize won by architecture practice Assemble - a young collective of more than 20 designers working along an informal， participatory model of mostly public-oriented interventions of social engagement - offers continuity of debate and a challenge to the role and positioning of both in contemporary cultural discourse.

2）2016上海藝術設計雙年展于2016年1月1日至3月15日在西外灘藝術中心舉辦。更多信息詳見www.artdesign-sh.co和《論行動的思想》，詳見http://www.thebao.com/shanghai-artdesign-biennale-2016-ideas-in-action/The 2016 Shanghai Art & Design Exhibition was held at West Bund Art Centre from January 10 until March 15， 2016. For more information see www.artdesign-sh.com and on Ideas in Action specifically http://www.thebao.com/shanghaiartdesign-biennale-2016-ideas-in-action/.

/

［1］ Keller Easterling. Extrastatecraft - The power of Infrastructure Space. London: Verso， 2014.

［2］ Bruno Latour. Reassembling the Social， an Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Clarendon， 2005.

［3］ Esther Choi. Sociable Realism， on Assemble. Artforum， 2015（11）: 133-134.

［4］ John D. Barrow. Where Things Happen That Don't: Staging the Infinite. paper on Infinities， last accessed at http://thalesandfriends.org/wp-content/ uploads/2012/03/barrow_paper.pdf （March 22， 2016）.

［5］Giuliana Bruno. public Intimacy: Architecture and The Visual Arts. Cambridge， Mass: The MIT press，2007: 213.

［6］ Victor Buchli. An Anthropology of Architecture. London: Bloomsbury Academic， 2014. Institutions and Community: 89-116； Consumption Studies and the Home: 117-135.

［7］ Georges Teyssot. A Typology of Everyday Constellation. Cambridge: The MIT press， 2013.

Temperamental Voids: Curatorial Notations Around the City as Disposition

作者介紹：北京設計周創(chuàng)意總監(jiān)

2016-03-15