序言

文/曾仕乾

序言

文/曾仕乾

描述自己設(shè)計(jì)建筑的過(guò)程總是很艱難。因?yàn)檫@個(gè)過(guò)程需要作者不斷反躬自省、開(kāi)誠(chéng)布公。設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程本身是不斷流動(dòng)和進(jìn)化的。穩(wěn)定不變的是循環(huán)出現(xiàn)的組織策略，雖其形式各異，但目的均是在特定場(chǎng)景中完成既定任務(wù)。寫(xiě)這篇序言的目的是尋找其中所涉及作品的共性思路。在分析十二幢房屋的過(guò)程中發(fā)現(xiàn)，經(jīng)驗(yàn)性的空間和組織策略體現(xiàn)在了所有的項(xiàng)目中。這些作品依據(jù)類型建造，其空間頗具古典精神氣質(zhì)。

想理解自己的建筑，需要先理解自己。我們都是自己過(guò)去經(jīng)驗(yàn)的總和，我的建筑亦是如此。我在二十世紀(jì)80年代早期接受的訓(xùn)練以及與對(duì)我影響至深的導(dǎo)師的交流，均對(duì)我的建筑職業(yè)生涯發(fā)展產(chǎn)生了巨大的影響。當(dāng)年在耶魯大學(xué)，羅伯·克里爾（Rob Krier）在校園酒吧里，一邊喝啤酒一邊歷數(shù)他未能獲勝的競(jìng)賽，這番對(duì)建筑的熱情令我印象深刻。羅伯特·文丘里 （Robert Venturi）曾說(shuō)，他總是被一些細(xì)枝末節(jié)弄得輾轉(zhuǎn)難眠。那時(shí)是80年代早期，建筑學(xué)的包容性極強(qiáng)。我記得當(dāng)時(shí)的學(xué)生自發(fā)歸組成各個(gè)“陣營(yíng)”：后現(xiàn)代歷史主義學(xué)派、新理性主義學(xué)派、正統(tǒng)古典主義學(xué)派等等，不一而足。在保羅·魯?shù)婪蛩囆g(shù)和建筑大樓的六樓自習(xí)區(qū)，許多即興討論一直持續(xù)到深夜。

還記得在我設(shè)計(jì)學(xué)習(xí)的基礎(chǔ)階段，華盛頓大學(xué)的萊斯利·拉斯科（Leslie Laskey）老師給了我很大的啟發(fā)，當(dāng)年他講授包豪斯建筑的設(shè)計(jì)模型。光頭，一身黑色著裝，我確定他是在效仿包豪斯學(xué)派的奧斯卡·施萊默（Oscar Schlemmer）。那時(shí)學(xué)到的知識(shí)——比如精簡(jiǎn)設(shè)計(jì)方法的實(shí)用主義本質(zhì)，以及對(duì)物質(zhì)性的重視，一直伴隨著我。后來(lái)在耶魯大學(xué)的進(jìn)階工作室，我參加了托馬斯·戈登·史密斯（Thomas Gordon Smith）組織的古典設(shè)計(jì)工作室，但很快意識(shí)到自己并不屬于那里。我認(rèn)為它的論述過(guò)于教條，整個(gè)學(xué)期也沒(méi)畫(huà)出一根古典柱子。陳述報(bào)告的形式又是乏味冗長(zhǎng)的水彩畫(huà)分析——將平面圖、立面圖、剖面圖和細(xì)節(jié)圖整合到一個(gè)展板上。總之，學(xué)習(xí)重點(diǎn)只在于死記硬背一些規(guī)則和古典主義句法。

盡管沒(méi)有深陷于所學(xué)的古典主義，我和一位同學(xué)蒂姆·斯蒂爾（Tim Steele）利用晚上的時(shí)間為一家法律事務(wù)所做改造設(shè)計(jì)。我們的設(shè)計(jì)是正統(tǒng)古典主義風(fēng)格，在入口門(mén)廊處布滿了托斯卡納柱，圖書(shū)館里也都是愛(ài)奧尼克柱。我和古典主義略為復(fù)雜的關(guān)系由此開(kāi)始。一方面我覺(jué)得古典主義限制過(guò)多，另一方面我又被其創(chuàng)造厚重宏偉空間的能力所震撼。在羅伯特·斯登 （Robert Stern）紐約工作室的最終審核中，菲利普·約翰遜（Philip Johnson） 以我沒(méi)有展示立面圖為由拒絕討論我的古鋼琴博物館擴(kuò)建項(xiàng)目。我將建筑的立面用空白墻壁的形式展現(xiàn)，緊靠博物館的羅馬式立面，因?yàn)槲覍?duì)討論該項(xiàng)目的設(shè)計(jì)概念和空間隱喻更有興趣。當(dāng)時(shí)，挪用他方資料、借用其他建筑立面加以重新闡釋，便可形成整個(gè)審核的根基，但是評(píng)論家們更熱衷討論風(fēng)格?？傊覐臎](méi)感覺(jué)自己歸屬于某個(gè)特定的建筑學(xué)派運(yùn)動(dòng)。畢業(yè)后，我找到了跟艾倫·格林伯格（Allan Greenberg）實(shí)習(xí)的機(jī)會(huì)，他是最為正統(tǒng)的建筑師之一，曾為白宮和美國(guó)國(guó)務(wù)院工作。畢業(yè)后的羅馬之旅令我更加堅(jiān)信古典空間擁有震撼人心的力量。

我在這里嘗試定義一下 SCDA 建筑設(shè)計(jì)事務(wù)所作品中的設(shè)計(jì)方法論。SCDA 設(shè)計(jì)的項(xiàng)目均涉及建筑的一些基本元素（光、空間、透明性、物質(zhì)性和秩序），也有志于融入一些人文品質(zhì)， 比如寧?kù)o感、美和秩序。空間編排決定了體驗(yàn)空間的順序，并重新定位規(guī)劃止于遠(yuǎn)景或開(kāi)放空間的感知“軸線”。這屬于現(xiàn)象學(xué)范疇，關(guān)乎用戶對(duì)空間的情感反應(yīng)。建筑形式的外觀多為一系列長(zhǎng)方形盒子，定義了同樣重要的庭院、花園和緊貼圍墻的其他外部空間。整片區(qū)域 傾向于是規(guī)整的長(zhǎng)方形；若不是，則常用灌木叢或景觀填補(bǔ)。這樣的組織策略讓“反轉(zhuǎn)”概 念成為可能。從建筑學(xué)角度闡釋，建筑物和戶外庭院空間（即空地）被給予同樣的重要性和權(quán)重，我們將該策略實(shí)踐到項(xiàng)目中，利用開(kāi)闊空間（即空地）的設(shè)計(jì)圖來(lái)輔助建筑的形成， 如馬六甲的 Heeren Street House、Emerald Hill House 以及 Sennett House 等等住宅。

建筑物與外圍邊界間的空間通常會(huì)由于分區(qū)規(guī)則而產(chǎn)生，因?yàn)榻ㄖ私缈臻g總被定型為景觀庭院；建筑內(nèi)房間的角落常被切割，以打破空間的穩(wěn)定感，使空間向外部花園或者庭院延伸；而在城鎮(zhèn)類型的項(xiàng)目中，這種做法也讓空間可以向內(nèi)部庭院進(jìn)行離心式的重聚；同時(shí)，大尺寸滑門(mén)可以藏到隱蔽處，模糊了內(nèi)外空間的界限，將其和外部區(qū)域融合。

在城鎮(zhèn)化愈演愈烈的亞洲郊區(qū)，為保證住戶隱私，可控景觀的需求日益增長(zhǎng)，于是小型庭院和采光天井被引入到設(shè)計(jì)中。早期項(xiàng)目中各種當(dāng)?shù)靥厣恼?，更多依賴于?duì)殖民風(fēng)格黑白色平房上懸坡屋頂?shù)囊庀蠡ｋS著時(shí)間的發(fā)展，這些項(xiàng)目逐漸根據(jù)抽象形式和亞洲住宅的循環(huán)模式而演變?yōu)楦游⒚畹目臻g構(gòu)圖。

通過(guò)設(shè)計(jì)筑造起的建筑語(yǔ)言為我們?cè)谀蟻喸O(shè)計(jì)的房子留下了類型學(xué)解釋的空間。我們的項(xiàng)目，尤其是位于熱帶的住宅開(kāi)發(fā)，把關(guān)注點(diǎn)放在室內(nèi)外之間的“中間地帶”或模糊地帶，以此作為對(duì)熱帶地區(qū)氣候的整體建筑學(xué)回應(yīng)。通過(guò)手工或機(jī)械操作裝置（穿孔表層、特制遮板和木質(zhì)、金屬質(zhì)或石質(zhì)格架），來(lái)控制熱帶氣候中太陽(yáng)光的照射和熱量。這種特制遮板是當(dāng)?shù)責(zé)釒Х课莸闹匾M成部分，充當(dāng)了不透明墻壁和透明玻璃門(mén)窗布局之間的緩沖元素。這層建筑面紗改變了光與影的質(zhì)量，虛化了建筑表層，在不同的燈光布置下顯示出不同透明度。

從具有代表性和民間的風(fēng)格中解放出來(lái)，將建筑設(shè)計(jì)的體量和立面建立在體積、光線和表面這樣的原型元素之上。墻面以獨(dú)立平面的方式被處理，使得墻與墻之間的實(shí)體材料能夠分隔開(kāi)來(lái)。這不僅為重新詮釋和轉(zhuǎn)化既定空間實(shí)質(zhì)提供可能，同時(shí)可以通過(guò)對(duì)當(dāng)?shù)厥止に嚒⑽幕蜌夂虻膶徤麝U釋來(lái)整合地域的基本元素。

通過(guò)死記硬背基本建筑模塊去理解建筑風(fēng)格其實(shí)和學(xué)院派的建筑學(xué)訓(xùn)練并無(wú)不同。熟悉的風(fēng)格和連貫的設(shè)計(jì)語(yǔ)言不容混淆。我必須強(qiáng)調(diào)，此設(shè)計(jì)方法不以任何形式削減設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)踐中針對(duì)過(guò)程和概念導(dǎo)向方法的分層能力；盡管空間的本質(zhì)是古典的，細(xì)節(jié)卻是普遍的現(xiàn)代風(fēng)格。

二十世紀(jì)90年代后期，事務(wù)所終于收到了高層公寓的設(shè)計(jì)委托，這讓我們有機(jī)會(huì)把典型的低層建筑空間元素融入當(dāng)代的高層多單元住宅之中。1999年的“Lincoln Modern”和“Ladyhill”這兩個(gè)關(guān)鍵項(xiàng)目，就為我們提供了驗(yàn)證這些設(shè)計(jì)概念的機(jī)會(huì)。兩個(gè)項(xiàng)目中的空間都被設(shè)置為可塑和相互聯(lián)動(dòng)的，進(jìn)而創(chuàng)造出一個(gè)個(gè)“天空庭院”?！癓incoln Modern”中的 L 形部分互相聯(lián)結(jié)，并通過(guò)立面?zhèn)鬟_(dá)出設(shè)計(jì)理念，以致敬柯布西耶（Corbusier）的別墅樓。每個(gè)連鎖模塊中都有一個(gè)三層高的空中大廳，這從立面中得到了直接體現(xiàn)。這些三層高的大廳亦被看作空中露臺(tái)，為高層建筑注入熱帶元素。

“Ladyhill”項(xiàng)目中的六個(gè)內(nèi)部庭院是具有組織性的象征空間，它們彼此相連形成一個(gè)長(zhǎng)方形體量，隨后公寓內(nèi)部的空間以此為核心展開(kāi)布局。內(nèi)部空間是建筑的延續(xù)，同時(shí)符合抽象派還原藝術(shù)美學(xué)?？臻g的形成是通過(guò)整合交錯(cuò)的體量、表面和平面繼而使結(jié)構(gòu)和施工清晰化來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)的。所用的調(diào)色板相當(dāng)自然，單片材料在表層彼此獨(dú)立，以清晰表達(dá)其正式結(jié)構(gòu)。遵照工程計(jì)劃，空間概念被精煉到它的最基本形式，這一方式讓材料的微妙細(xì)節(jié)和建筑構(gòu)造得以充分表達(dá)。為了突破項(xiàng)目的實(shí)用主義，內(nèi)部空間利用明確的空間、光線和布局設(shè)計(jì)來(lái)成就祥和的風(fēng)格。

隨著設(shè)計(jì)方法的日漸國(guó)際化，實(shí)際應(yīng)用的設(shè)計(jì)語(yǔ)匯更需要吸收氣候、文化和地域的細(xì)微精妙之 處，而清楚明了的建筑設(shè)計(jì)語(yǔ)言將有利于普世性和地區(qū)特性間的有效融合。

It is always a difficult proposition to begin to write about the process that goes on in the making of one’s own architecture. To do so requires sustained introspection and ability to be open. The process of design by its very nature is fluid and is always evolving. What is constant is the recurring organizational strategies that manifest themselves in different forms to address the given brief in a particular site. The objective in writing this essay is to discover the common threads fundamental to the works in this monograph. In the process, a dozen houses are analyzed and it becomes evident that there is an empirical spatial and organizational strategy behind all the projects. The works are typologically driven and the spaces are classical in spirit.

To understand one’s own architecture requires an understanding of self. We are a product of the sum of all our experiences and this is true of my architecture as well.The influence of my training in the early 1980s and coming into contact with my in fl uential mentors played a big part in my own development as an architect. At Yale,I remember Rob Krier’s passion for architecture as he recounted over beers at the campus pub the number of competitions he did not win. Robert Venturi talked about the fact that it was always the small things that kept him awake all night. It was the early 1980s, a time when architecture was very inclusive. I recall students aligning themselves with di ff erent camps: the Post Modern historist, the Neorationalist, the Orthodox classicist, etc. Many spontaneous discussions took place at the sixth fl oor review pit at Paul Rudolf’s Art and Architecture building late into the evenings.

I remember my early grounding in design under a particularly inspirational teacher by the name of Leslie Laskey at Washington University, who conducted the design modules in the curriculum of the Bauhaus. He was shaven bald, dressed in black and I was sure he was modeling himself after Oscar Schlemmer of the Bauhaus School. The lessons learnt of the utilitarian nature of design achieved through an economy of means, and a concern for materiality stayed with me. Later at the advance studios at Yale, I signed on to a Classical design studio under Thomas Gordon Smith but quickly realized that I did not belong in that studio. I found the treatises too dogmatic and never drew a single classical column in the semester.The presentations were to be in the form of the very tedious water colour analytiques,a composite of plans, elevations, sections and details composed on a single board.The emphasis was on learning by rote the rules and syntax of classicism.

Even though I did not indulge in classicism in studio, I was freelancing with another student, Tim Steele, on a law office conversion in the evenings. The project we designed was orthodox classical and was replete with the Tuscan columns at the portico entrance and ionic columns in the Library. It was the beginning of an uneasy relationship with classicism. While I found it restrictive, I was also moved by its ability to produce grounded monumental spaces. At the final studio review at Robert Stern’s New York office, Philip Johnson refused to discuss my project as I had not presented any elevations. The fa?ade was presented as a blank wall against the existing Romanesque fa?ade of the museum. I was interested in talking about concepts and spatial metaphors for the Harpiscord Museum addition. It was a time when appropriating a source and borrowing the fa?ade to reinterpret could form the basis of the entire review; but the critics were interested in discussing styles. So it was that I never felt aligned to any particular movement. Upon graduating I sought an internship with the most orthodox of architects, Allan Greenberg, who did work in the White House and State Departments. My visits to Rome after graduation con firmed my conviction in the ability of classical spaces to move the human spirit.I shall attempt to define a design methodology in the works of SCDA. The projects designed at SCDA refer to the fundamental elements of architecture(light, space, transparency, materiality and order) and aspire to humanist qualities such as serenity, beauty and order. The spaces are composed to be experienced sequentially through choreographed processions that recenter and realign the perceptual ‘a(chǎn)xis’, terminating in landscaped vistas or open spaces. The approach in phenomenological and is about the emotional response of the user to the space.The figure of architectural forms, which are often a series of rectangular boxes,defined equally important courts, gardens and other external spaces set against the wall boundaries of the lots. The lots tend to be fairly rectangular and when it is not the differences are usually taken up by shrubs or landscape as Poche. This organizational strategy allows for the concept of ‘inversion’. This can be interpreted architecturally as the building and outdoor court spaces (grounds) being given equal importance and weightage. This strategy has been applied to projects such as the Heeren Street House in Malacca, the Emerald Hill House and the Sennett House,among others, where the diagram of the expected open spaces (grounds) has been used to generate the building form.

The interstitial spaces between the building and its perimeter boundaries often created by zoning bylaws as setbacks are claimed to become defined view courts.Corners of rooms are often cut to destabilize the space propagating it outwards towards the garden or courts while allowing for possibilities of refocusing the spaces centrifugally towards internal courts in the more urban typologies. Large sliding doors that disappear into pockets blur the interior zone to the fully exterior surface.In the increasingly urbanized suburbs of Asia, there is a need for controlled views to ensure privacy of the occupants and this is manifested in the introduction of small courtyards and light wells within the plans. The incorporation of vernacular features in the early projects relied more on the imagery of the large overhanging hipped roofs of the colonial black and white bungalows. With time the projects began to evolve into more subtle compositions of spaces based on abstracted forms and on the circulation patterns of Asian dwellings.

The architectural language established in the design allows for typological interpretation for the houses we designed in South Asia. Projects, particularly the residential developments in the tropics, focused on the treatment of the ‘in between spaces’ or the ambiguous boundaries in between the inside and outside that are integral architectural response to the climate of the tropics. The device deployed (the perforated surface, the tectonic screen or lattice of timber, metal or masonry) is manually or mechanically operated to temper the heat and glare of the sun in the equatorial climate. This screen, which is the staple of vernacular tropical house, is the mediating element between the opaque walls and the transparent glass fenestrations. This architectural veil alters the quality of light and shadow.It dematerializes surfaces and allows for translucency or opaqueness when strategically lit.

Liberated from notions of representation and the vernacular, the massing and fa?ade is built on archetypal elements, of volume, light and surface. The walls are treated as separate planes allowing for physical material separation between walls. While this vocabulary provides possibilities to re-interpret and transform the spatial essence of a given vernacular, it is also able to incorporate the rudimentary elements of place making through considered interpretation of local craft, culture and climate.

This process of understanding by rote the basic building blocks of the architecture is not unlike the training in architecture in the Beaux. One must not confuse a consistent design language with a familiar style. I must stress that this approach has not in any way diminish the ability to layer a process and concept-oriented approach with the design practice; while the spirit of the spaces are classical, the details are universally modern.

In the late 1990s, new commissions of high-rise apartments that eventually came into the office provided opportunities to interpret typical low-rise spatial typologies into contemporary highrise multi-unit dwellings. The opportunity to test the ideas came with the commission of two pivotal projects in 1999, the Lincoln Modern and the Ladyhill. In both projects, the spaces are conceived to be plastic and con figured to interlock or slide by each other creating pockets of ‘court spaces in the sky’.In the Lincoln Modern, the L-shaped sections of the units interlock and express themselves in the fa?ade, an ode to Corbusier’s immeubles villas. The result is three storey sky lobbies at each interlocking module, which is in turn expressed directly in the elevation. These three storey lobbies are conceived as sky terraces, bringing tropicality to the high-rise typology.

In the Ladyhill, the six internal courtyards became the organizing figurative space and interlock to form a rectangular volume. The apartment spaces are then organized around this spatial core. The interior spaces within the projects are the continuation of the architecture and within a reductivist aesthetic. The process of space-making is through clarifying structure and construction by expressing them as a composition of intersecting volumes, surfaces and planes. The palette deployed is natural and monolithic materials that are kept separate to each surface to clarify its formal composition. The manner of distilling the spatial ideas to their very essence – as dictated by the program – allows the subtleties and tectonics of the materials to express themselves. To transcend utilitarian concerns of program, the interior spaces are designed to achieve tranquility defined by clear spaces, light and composition.

Increasingly, as practice becomes globalized, the applied design vocabulary has to absorb nuance of climate, culture and place. Working with a clean design language allows for the reconciliation of issues of universality versus regional specificity.

Introduction

By Soo Chan