維尼·馬斯與進(jìn)化城市—一切都是城市主義

和馬町 采訪/Interviewed by Martijn de Geus

尚晉/Translated by SHANG Jin

1 作為手段的城市主義；超越內(nèi)向物

和馬町：您為今天訪談選擇的題目是“一切都是城市主義”。我想從您對主題選擇的理解開始，理解您現(xiàn)在的關(guān)注點(diǎn)。建筑是城市主義嗎，您是城市主義嗎？一切指什么？

維尼·馬斯：所謂一切是指建筑的創(chuàng)作，從城市一直到桌子或者淋浴器，再到各種材料。我們越來越發(fā)現(xiàn)在小尺度和各種要素中也存在一種城市主義的處理手法或特征。比如在材料的小尺度上，你可以運(yùn)用和大尺度相同的原則；你可以調(diào)整比例后再創(chuàng)作。就像我們在阿姆斯特丹香奈兒水晶宮上的玻璃磚，人們利用了這種材料的概念，這樣它就成了城市主義的。對于中等尺度，工作的方式是相似的。比如，要建一所住宅，我就會讓它在設(shè)計(jì)中表達(dá)某些鄰里的東西，這樣它立即就成了城市主義。和馬町：所以它是一種手段。

維尼·馬斯：是的，一種手段?；蛟S是我的手段，但我的確認(rèn)為它在建筑設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)踐中運(yùn)用得越來越多，包括對那種尺度和文脈的處理。超越單一，超越內(nèi)向物。那就是在我看來“一切都是城市主義”這個題目所包含的意義。

和馬町：它是關(guān)于各要素之間關(guān)系的；您把它定義為城市主義的特征？

維尼·馬斯：是的，通過各種尺度、各要素之間的關(guān)系。和馬町：那么讓我們來談一談某些建筑尺度的可能性以及它們在城市中的可能性。在過去的幾年中，您的事務(wù)所在一些“過度擁擠的城市”中實(shí)現(xiàn)了不少大型的建筑或構(gòu)筑物[3]。例如鹿特丹的市場大廳、天津圖書館或者首爾鐵道項(xiàng)目。它們之所以特別，是因?yàn)榉浅Ｖ?，這并不一定是指功能，而是空間……那是不是城市主義？建筑在密集城市中的可能性是創(chuàng)造空間，而不是占據(jù)空間？

維尼·馬斯：是的，在這些建筑上我們把它稱作“開放行為”——物體向周圍環(huán)境開放。它們不是圍合起來的，而是在說“歡迎，請進(jìn)”。這是一種擺脫在大型構(gòu)筑物和建筑中常見的內(nèi)向性的方式。

1 天津?yàn)I海圖書館（攝影：奧西普·范杜伊芬博德）/Tianjin Binhai Library (Photo: Ossip van Duivenbode)

而且，這些建筑還表明，如果有這么大的尺度，就也有一種責(zé)任、任務(wù)或義務(wù)，要比單純的內(nèi)向建筑發(fā)揮更多作用，還要回饋城市。比如市場大廳，建筑就是城市主義。它只是創(chuàng)造了一個拱頂，然后人們就能在里面開集市。我甚至不關(guān)心他們?nèi)绾稳ダ?，若是把里面搞得一團(tuán)糟，或許會更好！

和馬町：您就是說，用建筑可以真正地回饋城市，而不是從中攫取。

維尼·馬斯：是的，可以。或許你必須這樣做。這個界線很微妙，因?yàn)樵谀阒揽梢缘倪@個時刻，真的很難去說你不應(yīng)該做。

2 城市主義的科學(xué)性

和馬町：在中國，目前學(xué)界討論的一個話題是“城市設(shè)計(jì)的科學(xué)性”。不是用數(shù)據(jù)來確定造型，而是用能夠具體化的數(shù)據(jù)/計(jì)算機(jī)模型，“對構(gòu)思的各種方案進(jìn)行檢驗(yàn)和可視化。當(dāng)我們改變某些東西時，立刻就會知道給整個方案帶來的效果是什么?！盵4]您在這方面以及《FarMax》《KM3》和大巴黎方案“市長工具”或“中國山”項(xiàng)目中是一位先行者。您如何有效地將數(shù)據(jù)作為設(shè)計(jì)過程的一部分？

維尼·馬斯：對，我覺得自己是這種科學(xué)城市主義在當(dāng)代的一位教父。當(dāng)然我這么說的時候，不得不立刻承認(rèn)還有更多的人也是。比如荷蘭的范埃斯特倫，他早在1950年代就用統(tǒng)計(jì)作為城市規(guī)劃的基礎(chǔ)，那有一段完整的歷史。而我那時還不了解這個趨勢，但我喜歡那種“科學(xué)化”的想法。我認(rèn)為這很可能會有幫助并且會成功，是有幾個原因的。第一，因?yàn)樗鼮闆Q策給出了一種短暫的證明。統(tǒng)計(jì)幫助我們看到什么是共同特征，什么是住宅曲線的頂點(diǎn)，它在哪里出現(xiàn)，而且很容易將它與其他方法和發(fā)現(xiàn)結(jié)合在一起。最近我還發(fā)現(xiàn)，對于進(jìn)化城市的工具組，我們希望能在有大數(shù)據(jù)可用并且更加開放的時候使用它。歐洲現(xiàn)在正通過臉書對它進(jìn)行批判性討論，我們在這里也可以用騰訊（微信）展開討論。然后就能讀取數(shù)據(jù)，通過鄰居和其中的數(shù)據(jù)就能表達(dá)你的意愿。而且我確實(shí)知道可以用很多途徑問人們“你想要什么”，當(dāng)然也會有矛盾。

2 鹿特丹市集住宅（攝影：沃嫩·溫克倫）/Martkhal,Rotterdam (Photo: Wonen Winkelen)

1 Urbanism as an approach; beyond the introverted object.

Martijn de Geus: Your chosen title for today's talk is "Everything is Urbanism", I'd like to start with understanding your choice of topic, to understand your current pre-occupation; are buildings urbanism,are you urbanism? What is Everything ?

Winy Maas: By "Everything" I mean the build production, from a city, of course, down to a table or a shower, down to the materials. More and more we fi nd, also in the smaller scales and elements an urbanistic touch or contribution. For instance on the smaller scale, such as in materials, you can apply the same principle toward the larger scale; you can scale it and reproduce it. Like the glass bricks for our Chanel Crystal Houses in Amsterdam, people appropriate the concept of the material, and then it becomes urbanism. For the medium scale, it works in similar aspects. For instance, if I make a house,and I design it in such a way that it says something about the neighbours, immediately it's urbanism.

MG: So it's an approach.

WM: It's an approach yes, maybe it's my approach,but I do think that it's happening more and more in the architectural and design practice, to deal with that scale and context. To go beyond the singular,beyond the introverted object. That's for me what's enclosed within this title "Everything is Urbanism."

MG: It's about the relationship between elements;which you de fi ne as an urbanistic quality?

WM: Yes, and through scales. A relationship between elements, through scales.

MG: Then, let's talk about the potential of the scale of certain buildings and their potential within a city. In the past few years your firm has realised some very large buildings or structures inside some"overcrowded cities"[3]. For example, the Markthal in Rotterdam, the Tianjin Library or the Seollo project in Seoul. They are special because they are very big,not necessarily in programme, but in space… is that urbanism? Is the potential of buildings in a dense city to create space, instead of occupying space?

WM: Well, yes, in these buildings we call this "the opening act", objects that open themselves towards their surroundings. They're not enclosing, they say "welcome, come in". It's a way to get rid of the introversion that is happening so much with big structures and buildings.

And, these buildings also say, that if you have such a big scale, you also have a responsibility, if not a task, or obligation, to do more than only an introvert structure. To also give something back to the city. Yes, like the Markthal, the building becomes urbanism. It's just making an arch and then people can make a market inside. I don't even care how they appropriate it, if they make a mess in there, it's maybe even better!

MG: Thus you say, with buildings you can actually give back to the city, rather than take from it.

WM: You can, yes. And maybe you have to. That's a delicate line, because at the moment that you know that you can, then it becomes really hard to deny that you should not do it.

2 The scienti fi city of urbanism

MG: In China, a current topic in academic discussion is the "scienti fi city of urban design", Not using data to de fi ne shapes, but a data/computer model which allows to objectify, "to test and visualise various schemes of an idea. When we change something, we instantly know what the effects will be throughout the whole scheme.[4]" You were one of the pioneers in this, FarMax, KM3, and in the "Mayor Tool" for the Grand Paris scheme or The China Hills project,how can you use data effectively as part of your design process?

WM: Yes, I feel I'm one of the contemporary godfathers of this scientific urbanism, of course when I state that, I am immediately compelled to acknowledge that there are more people, such as Van Eesteren in The Netherlands, already in the 1950's working with statistics as a base for urban planning, there is a whole history to that. But yes,I didn't know about this trend, but I love that idea of "scienti fi cation", there are a couple of reasons of why I think this is probably helpful and successful.First, because it gives a kind of temporary proof for decisions. The statistics help us to see what is the common denominator, and what is the top of the house-curve, and where does it occur, and easily combine this with other methods and findings.Recently also I fi nd, coming to the toolbox for the evolutionary city, hopefully we can tap into Big Data, when it's accessible, and when in it is getting more open. That's being critically reviewed now in Europe with Facebook, we can also discuss that here with Tencent. And then that creates access to data, and then with your neighbourhood, with your data in it you can express your desire. And I do know that with many processes, I ask people "what do you want", and then there are contradictions of course.

For example, in Holland we have a problem with earthquakes in the North of Holland now because of gas leaks that occur after extracting natural gas. And about 200,000 houses have to be removed or replaced by new houses. These homes are all based in villages of around 400 houses. And then you ask the people what they want, and some say "I want to have a new house", or "I want to have my old house". And “where would you want to put your house"; "well I wouldn't mind living next to the lake". But others think almost polar opposite,so how to organise that process? So I think it's very exemplary to see what will come out of that, we are now doing this for the fi rst village. And we can do it better, we can have more data to show it in real-time, backed by environmental or economic data for instance, we can script that. Because there is more knowledge in this field than ever before,in the data, in the data development, in the data usage and in the way to bring them together into spatial compositions, if not architecture. And what we invest now in the office, and in the Why Factory (T?F, at TU Delft) is enormous; half of it is about scripting. And then you delve into these relationships, because scripting is only about relationships. About correlation, “if you want that,I have to go to the left". And complex elements need more correlations, more algorithms to bring them together. And then to show that very clearly helps the understanding of that complexity, and that helps to give meaning to bigger data, and also activates action groups and other Private/Public/Partnerships, so that they can respond to a suggestion of an authority, because they have the data to back it up. And they can live with the paradoxes. So I do think it's a very interesting moment with this scienti fi cation, and we should be very active on that. More than ever.

3 城市主義的科學(xué)性：大巴黎項(xiàng)目，建議功能/Scienti fi city of urbanism: Grand Paris project, proposed programme

4 城市主義的科學(xué)性：大巴黎項(xiàng)目，功能分布/Scienti fi city of urbanism: Grand Paris project, programme distribution (3.4?MVRDV)

例如，我們今天在荷蘭北部遇到了地震的問題，因?yàn)椴杉烊粴庵髸l(fā)生氣體泄漏。約有200,000座住宅不得不拆除或換為新房。這些住宅都在約400戶的村子里。那么你去問這些人想要什么，有些人會說“我想要一個新家”，或者“我想要我的老房子”。然后再問“你想把家安在哪里”；“我不會介意住在湖畔的”。但其他人幾乎會想到另一個極端，所以怎么組織這個過程？我認(rèn)為這個工作的結(jié)果會很有示范性，現(xiàn)在我們正在第一個村子里開展這項(xiàng)工作。而且我們能做得更好，我們可以有更多數(shù)據(jù)來實(shí)時體現(xiàn)，并以環(huán)境或經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù)等作為支撐——我們可以寫這樣的腳本。因?yàn)樵谶@個領(lǐng)域的知識要比過去多，包括數(shù)據(jù)、數(shù)據(jù)開發(fā)、數(shù)據(jù)使用以及將它們整合到建筑或者空間構(gòu)成中的方式。我們今天在事務(wù)所和“為什么工廠”（T?F，代爾夫特理工大學(xué)）上投入的精力是巨大的；其中有一半在寫腳本上。然后你就可以鉆研這些關(guān)系，因?yàn)閷懩_本只涉及關(guān)系。至于關(guān)聯(lián)，“如果你需要它，就必須出其不意。”而復(fù)雜的要素需要更多的關(guān)聯(lián)、更多的算法來整合它們。然后證明它明顯有助于理解那種復(fù)雜性，有助于給更大的數(shù)據(jù)賦予意義，并激發(fā)行動團(tuán)體和其他政府與社會的合作。這樣他們就能對一種提出的權(quán)威作出回應(yīng)，因?yàn)樗麄冇兄蔚臄?shù)據(jù)。他們可以允許矛盾。所以我真的認(rèn)為這種科學(xué)化帶來了非常有趣的時刻，而我們在這一點(diǎn)上應(yīng)該非常積極，比以往任何時候都積極。

我在這次威尼斯雙年展上完全沒看到這一點(diǎn)；只是“弗蘭姆普敦、弗蘭姆普敦、弗蘭姆普敦”，毫無關(guān)于“未來”的東西。這根本就是在嘲笑我們應(yīng)該處理的各種問題。事實(shí)上，你現(xiàn)在讓我發(fā)覺剛剛意識到上周末在威尼斯看到的東西，這讓我非常生氣，謝謝你讓我意識到這一點(diǎn)。你幫我用某種語言表達(dá)了這種氣憤。

和馬町：讓我來這么看，您是以這種方式將科學(xué)數(shù)據(jù)處理用于城市主義的開拓者之一。另一位喜歡寫腳本并將它更多地用在形式上的人是扎哈·哈迪德建筑事務(wù)所的帕特里克·舒馬赫。用這種數(shù)據(jù)驅(qū)動的過程來造型的人有一大群。

維尼·馬斯：對，沒錯。從我對他們在過去某屆雙年展上展示作品和研究的方式的理解看，他們的作品是參數(shù)驅(qū)動的。但并不總是清楚這些數(shù)據(jù)是關(guān)于什么的，比如北京的“舞動大廈”（望京SOHO）。是的，它們在舞動，而且是參數(shù)化的，但這種舞動是為了什么？這對我而言并不清楚。由此看來，我們的確來自兩個不同的背景。我的理念是要非常清楚，沒有任何神秘的東西；而扎哈和帕特里克在某種意義上打的是“新花樣”的牌，神神秘秘的。而他們玩得很成功?；蛟S我們是相互借鑒的，或者說兩家事務(wù)所是相反相成的，做的是相反的事。比如，我和帕特里克一起從AA開始教了20年的書，所以很可能我們兩家事務(wù)所之間一直在這樣共舞。

和馬町：您在手法上大體是相反相成的。關(guān)于神秘的造型我們可以問帕特里克，關(guān)于城市決策的客觀證明，我們可以問您嗎？

維尼·馬斯：哈，可以。我們的客戶對此也是接受的，有些客戶想要某種神秘的參數(shù)化，其他的想要清楚的參數(shù)化。這基本上可以體現(xiàn)出那種區(qū)別。但是，讓我們請帕特里克加入這個討論吧。這需要一個直接的對話，我想邀請他參加那種討論。

3 從自我到大我

和馬町：看上去您至今對亞洲建筑密度的研究，比如與T?F合作的《垂直村莊》，考察的是相當(dāng)小的尺度，比如住宅單元、大廈綜合體或是街區(qū)。而在歐洲您通常會做相對大尺度的城市項(xiàng)目，比如大巴黎方案或阿爾默勒城。

維尼·馬斯：是的，有一種有趣的矛盾，這不假。雖然歐洲的小尺度項(xiàng)目很可能比亞洲更多，但歐洲有更長的開放規(guī)劃的傳統(tǒng)。它需要在公共法律的驅(qū)動下由民主帶來的溝通，并經(jīng)過投票和公決實(shí)現(xiàn)，所以這個過程需要多得多的可視化和外部批評。尤其是像荷蘭這樣的國家，從16、17世紀(jì)開始一直在用這種方法，并且需要這種方法來弘揚(yáng)這種集體式的城市規(guī)劃。而且存在著龐大的中產(chǎn)階級，這就意味著他們可以承擔(dān)起這種研究。他們可以借助集體的資源，并以此創(chuàng)造集體的愿望，然后真的付諸實(shí)踐。比如我們剛剛在瑞士實(shí)現(xiàn)的集裝箱碼頭。那是一個巨大的投入，并由國家支付和建造。但對于這座城市，我們在7年前給過他們建議，為什么把這個集裝箱碼頭從巴塞爾移過來，并將它經(jīng)過瑞士、再經(jīng)過意大利與另一種基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施結(jié)合在一起更好。這樣會激活國家層面的預(yù)算，并創(chuàng)造出更好的巴塞爾和更好的水質(zhì)。

你可以看到先是發(fā)起一種集體行動，然后付諸實(shí)施，一段時間后資金就會到位。這是一種特定的機(jī)制。

我發(fā)現(xiàn)在中國也可以同規(guī)劃局進(jìn)行討論。但作為“非規(guī)劃局的人”，或許我們還要更多地去推動。所以我很高興現(xiàn)在有這些政府/社會合作，而且為此刻能以這種方式設(shè)計(jì)深圳CBD感到自豪。在這個項(xiàng)目上，中央政府與私人開發(fā)商合作改善道路，提出新的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施方案，并讓私人市場提供部分資金，形成我們的CBD“新路網(wǎng)”——未來幾年將建造30～40座立交橋。目睹這種新的規(guī)劃如今正在實(shí)現(xiàn)是令人激動的。那不只是自上而下的。

和馬町：這基本上是一種參與式設(shè)計(jì)過程，但不一定只是同客戶，還有各相關(guān)方。

維尼·馬斯：我想這也是新的現(xiàn)實(shí)，因?yàn)檫@種CBD還有更多的業(yè)主。那么如何來組織呢？它可以用一種集體的方式來實(shí)現(xiàn)。以那種方式工作也是越來越必要的，還要加入不斷增長的中產(chǎn)階級，以及形成的各種相應(yīng)價值觀。我認(rèn)為這是一個非常積極的過程。

和馬町：我們能不能將這定義為一種從大眾向市民空間的轉(zhuǎn)變：不是一種彼此之間非黑即白的分工，而是一種集體的市民責(zé)任？

維尼·馬斯：是的，我把它稱作從“自我”向“大我”的轉(zhuǎn)變，培養(yǎng)尊重的方式。有幾個要素支撐著“市民空間”這個詞。一方面你尊重別人，但你也想保護(hù)自己，所有會形成一種自尊的文化。做到這一點(diǎn)要費(fèi)一番工夫，如今談?wù)摮鞘兄髁x等的利益相關(guān)方管理已蔚然成風(fēng)，這是很好的。歐洲現(xiàn)在甚至還有專門做這項(xiàng)工作的事務(wù)所，他們會對各種過程中的利益相關(guān)方進(jìn)行管理。我也同他們密切合作，一方面解決各種需求，并從中建立一種集體的自尊。但最終這些都需要持之以恒，即項(xiàng)目的“長時段”。這也是需要的，但不是關(guān)于建筑，而是在其間的東西。

維尼·馬斯：這讓我想起您不久前在“自由家園”中探討的這個問題。那是一個自下而上的城市設(shè)計(jì)項(xiàng)目，利益相關(guān)方在里面通過有機(jī)的方式解決社區(qū)中的各個需求。其中您與他人行為之間的關(guān)系是關(guān)鍵。

維尼·馬斯：是的，這種“大我”與自由家園項(xiàng)目之間的關(guān)系涉及到一種“自由”，即具有雙重含義的自由。因?yàn)闊o疑自由是好的，但在傷害到鄰居時就不好了。所以看起來自由是有界限的，而且我知道這個界限越遠(yuǎn)越好。有些人把自由的這個界限稱為“文明”，而其他人叫它“獨(dú)裁”。這取決于停留在這兩個極端之間的什么位置上。所以這個自由之家就是我們檢驗(yàn)這些極端的嘗試，去看它是否可行。事實(shí)上，我很高興現(xiàn)在能看到，當(dāng)個體行為不涉及傷害鄰居時，你就要馬上協(xié)商，然后這就成了城市主義；因?yàn)槟阋嗷f(xié)調(diào)，那就不再只是關(guān)于個體的了。這就是我所謂的從“自我”到“大我”的含義。它的發(fā)生有一條耐人尋味的界線，而在更高的建筑密度下會更有趣。還很有趣的是，這個自由家園的概念實(shí)際上是為10年前深圳的一個城市規(guī)劃項(xiàng)目提出的。也許那時還太早，因?yàn)樗c規(guī)劃局的設(shè)想背道而馳，而今天它正在荷蘭實(shí)施。這很有意思；“創(chuàng)于中國，建于荷蘭”，與“建于中國，創(chuàng)于歐洲”正相反——?dú)v史上多么耐人尋味的時刻?。?/p>

4 下一步如何？星球建造者

和馬町：如果我們再回顧一下您大概5年前的作品，《建筑素描》第173期MVRDV專輯中的“進(jìn)化城市”。您用這個概念來描述自己的作品，“一座希望隨時間形成、提高和發(fā)展的城市”。您從自己的大量作品中看，今天正在形成什么樣的城市性？如果說一切都是城市主義，您的城市此刻已進(jìn)化成了什么？

And I miss that in the current Venice Biennale completely; it's only "Frampton, Frampton,Frampton", and it's nothing about “future". Which is basically mocking the issues that we should be touching on. In fact, you make me very angry now about this discovery about what I've just realised about what I saw in Venice last weekend, thank you very much for this insight. You helped me give this anger a certain kind of words.

MG: Let's see it in this way; you are one of the founders of using scientific data processing in urbanism in this way. One of other fond users of scripting processes, who is using it more for form,would be Patrick Schumacher, with Zaha Hadid Architects, there is a whole group of people who use these data-drive processes for form-making.

WM: Yes, that's true, their work, as I understood it from how they displayed their work and research at one of the previous Biennales for instance, their work is parametric driven. But it's not always clear what the data is about; for instance the Beijing dancing towers (Wangjing Soho ed.), ok they're dancing, and it's parametric, but what is the dance about? That's not quite clear to me. In that way indeed we come from two different backgrounds,my culture is about being very transparent, no mystics at all, while somehow Zaha and Patrick played the card of something "new", something mythical. And they do that in a very successful way.And maybe we use each other, or the two oきces use each other, to do the opposite. For instance, I've been teaching with Patrick for about 20 years, we've started that together at the AA, and so probably this dance between our two offices has somehow been happening all along.

MG: You kind of complement each other in your approach, for mystic shapes we can ask Patrick, for objective legitimation of urban decisions, we can ask you?

WM: Ha, yes. And that also works for our clients,some clients want to have a certain mythical parametrisation, and others want to have clear parametrisation. That could somehow frame that distinction. But then, let's get Patrick involved in this discussion, this would need to be a direct conversation, I want to invite him for that type of discussion.

3 From Ego to WEgo

MG: It seems that so far your research on density in Asia, like in the Vertical Village book with T?F,has looked at quite a small scale, such as a housing unit, a tower complex, or a neighbourhood. Whereas in Europe you're often working on relatively large scale urban projects, like the Grand Paris project or Almere City.

WM: Yes, there's a funny contradiction, that's true, while in Europe there's probably more small scale projects than in Asia. There is of course a longer open planning tradition in Europe, that needs communication, driven by public law,generated by democracy and generated by voting and referendums and therefore this process needs much more visualisation and outside criticism.Especially in a country like the Netherlands, which has been using that approach since the 16th/17th Centuries onwards, it needs this approach to celebrate this collective urban planning. And there's a big middle class, which means they can afford these kind of studies. They can tap into collective resources and therefore also create collective desires,and truly apply that. Like we just made it possible in Switzerland for instance to have a container terminal, a giant investment, but that's paid by the county, and build by the country. But with the city we have suggested to them, 7 years ago why it's better to move this container port up from Basel and combine it with another type of infrastructure through Switzerland and then through Italy in order to active the national level budget and allow for a better Basel of better water quality.

You can see there's a collective initiative first undertaken and then carried out, and after a while the fi nance is there. And that's a speci fi c mechanism.

And I find in China that you can also discuss things with the planning bureau's. But maybe as"non-planning bureau people" maybe we have to activate that even more. Therefore I'm quite happy with these public/private partnerships that are happening now. And also proud to work in this way on the Shenzhen CBD at the moment, where the central government works with private developers to make better pavement, to make new kinds of infrastructural solutions and to have these be partly fi nanced by the private market, so that you can have what we call a "new web" in the CBD, about 30 to 40 bridges that will be build in the coming years.And it's fascinating to witness that this kind of new planning is happening now. That it's not top down only.

MG: It's kind of a participatory design process, not necessarily just with the client, but with various parties involved.

WM: I think it's also the new reality, because there are also more owners in such a CBD for instance.So, how to organise that? And that can be done in a collective way. And there's also more necessity to working like that, also with the growing middle class, and the corresponding values that are developed. Which I think is a very positive process.

MG: Could we define this as a move from public to civic space, not with a black/white division of tasks between us and them, but a collective civic responsibility?

WM: Yes, I call it from "Ego" to "WEgo", how to somehow create respect. And there are a couple of elements that maybe drive this word of "civic spaces". On the one hand that you respect others,but also that you want to defend, that you develop a culture of pride. It's quite a game how to do that,it's quite the trend now to talk about stakeholder management for instance, in urbanism. Which is fine; there are now even offices in Europe who specialise just in that, the managing of stakeholders in processes, whom I also work closely with, that address desires on one hand and also identify a collective pride in that. But in the end that all relates to the durability, or the long duree of a project, and that's what also needed, it's not about the building,it's the in between.

5 “自由家園”概念，應(yīng)用于阿爾默勒的奧斯特沃爾德，第一步：組件/Freeland concept, as applied in Almere Oosterwolde, step 1: components.

6 “自由家園”概念，應(yīng)用于阿爾默勒的奧斯特沃爾德，進(jìn)化的總體規(guī)劃/Freeland concept,as applied in Almere Oosterwolde, evolutionary master plan proposal (5.6 ?MVRDV)

7 “大我”概念，定制住宅/WEgo concept, tailor made housing(?MVRDV)

維尼·馬斯：嗯，現(xiàn)在我從一種意向清單出發(fā)，列出未來城市的各種需求——它能夠和應(yīng)該包含的內(nèi)容，以及任何人都不能反對的東西。比如，誰反對綠色或是反對氧氣，誰反對美、便利或自由？未來城市能夠或應(yīng)該包含的內(nèi)容可以列出一個大清單。這些看起來是非政治性的，但我覺得很耐人尋味，它對我至今合作過的每種政府都是有效的。當(dāng)然，讓這些要素中的每一個都使城市更有效，實(shí)現(xiàn)更高的綠色效率，使城市真的綠色、真的開放，或者真的便利、有歷史或有文脈，甚至使城市真的自由，還有很長的路。這就是為什么我想談?wù)撍?，說明那就是進(jìn)化今天給我們帶來的結(jié)果。這種進(jìn)化城市現(xiàn)在分成了許多愿望，當(dāng)然它們是可以重疊的。我們可以將它們整合起來，或許稱之為“生態(tài)城市”。這就會成為從今往后幾年的結(jié)論。所以，從5年前辨析進(jìn)化城市這一概念來看，如果問我們在那之后做

8 “大我”原型，建于荷蘭埃因霍芬（攝影：奧西普·范杜伊芬博德）/WEgo prototype, as built in Eindhoven, the Netherlands(Photo: Ossip van Duivenbode)

9 首個“大我”原型，雙宅，烏得勒支，1997/First "WEgo prototype"? Double House, Utrecht, 1997 (?MVRDV)

了什么，未來的步驟就是：深化和傳播。

和馬町：您曾寫道，“要做的事太多，我們需要吸收很多東西才能創(chuàng)造美好的未來?！?那么下一步是什么？

維尼·馬斯：嗯，我還缺少關(guān)于地球、城市與環(huán)境、生物圈、資源之間關(guān)系的大視野。比如，小設(shè)計(jì)事務(wù)所有很多創(chuàng)意、極有關(guān)懷的要素。但我們必須要給它更引人注目的舞臺，將這個宏圖展開。所以，從短期來看，這是下一步首先要做的。從長遠(yuǎn)看，還有更多要探索的。比如，我們只有這個星球嗎？我們也會生活在其他星球上嗎？那將是另一個話題。

和馬町：好，那么建筑師接下來要做什么呢？我們應(yīng)該明確這些計(jì)劃，啟動這項(xiàng)工作，還是應(yīng)該等待委托項(xiàng)目讓我們給出答案？

維尼·馬斯：問題一般是怎樣出現(xiàn)的？在出現(xiàn)危機(jī)時，要么你把危機(jī)擴(kuò)大，有時能幫助推動；要么你去討論它。而“避免危機(jī)”的機(jī)制通常是有幫助的。北京的空氣污染就是這樣，似乎現(xiàn)在有可能采取行動改善空氣質(zhì)量；因?yàn)橛腥颂岢鲈谶^去5年中有大的改觀，而這很耐人尋味。

和馬町：所以，危機(jī)和討論？

維尼·馬斯：是的，而意識是另一個問題。建筑師可以幫上忙，他們可以把可能的情況可視化出來。他們還能通過創(chuàng)造原型、發(fā)明材料、尋求新的合作提出解決方案。

和馬町：現(xiàn)在以您在過去幾年中完成的所有研究、著作、文章和項(xiàng)目，您是不是覺得現(xiàn)在自己了解得越多，別人就越會誤解您？

維尼·馬斯：啊，說的好！我還沒這么覺得，但的確如此，是有風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的。

目前我正在嘗試用100個星球做一個裝置。我在達(dá)沃斯世界經(jīng)濟(jì)論壇上設(shè)想出一個場景，把直徑2～3m的巨大橡皮球全都掛在一起。然后想象特朗普總統(tǒng)從這些球中穿過，這時突然看到世界上的其他領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人在中間。他們都擠在這些球展現(xiàn)出來的各種可能性之間。比如，一個球可以展示開放所有邊境的結(jié)果，人們會去哪里？假如消除地球上的某些生產(chǎn)區(qū)，會讓所有空氣清潔一新嗎？我想把這些假設(shè)展現(xiàn)出來，所以把它稱作“你有做某事的球（雙關(guān)語：勇氣）嗎”。展示的效果會非常奇妙。我們正在制作這些東西，并將它與我們所謂的這種“星球建造者”結(jié)合起來?，F(xiàn)在我們已經(jīng)制作了第一批展示這些變化的3D視頻，它們很精彩。如果改變某些參數(shù)，它就可以讓人看到地球如何像一個迪斯科球那樣旋轉(zhuǎn)、舞動。它會根據(jù)節(jié)奏隨時間變幻。回頭看我們的書《KM3》，那時人們覺得我們是瘋子，因?yàn)槲覀冊谒伎际澜?，但現(xiàn)在這比10年前容易接受多了。

和馬町：的確如此，因?yàn)楝F(xiàn)在有更明顯的需求？

維尼·馬斯：是的，因?yàn)榻裉焖伎际澜缰皇且患∈隆，F(xiàn)在我很高興能參與到我們的“地球2.0”的過程中，想象地球可以變成什么樣。當(dāng)然它還沒有完成，而我還不覺得這是誤解。要進(jìn)入達(dá)沃斯很難，他們很強(qiáng)硬。

我真的希望用我們的平臺以那種方式向更多的人展示未來的可能，并對各種可能性和極端情況進(jìn)行可視化和嘗試。所以我希望他們也會讀到這篇文章。□

10 整合城市功能的首爾空中廊道（攝影：奧西普·范杜伊芬博德）/Seoullo Skywalk integrated with urban programme,in Seoul, South Korea (Photo: Ossip van Duivenbode)

11 整合城市功能的首爾空中廊道/Seoullo Skywalk integrated with urban programme, in Seoul, South Korea (?MVRDV)

參考文獻(xiàn)/References

[1] MVRDV. The Evolutionary City. El Croquis 173:MVRDV (2003-2014), 2014.

[2] MVRDV's Winy Maas on future cities. [2018-06-10].https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoC6e87-vfk.

[3] Winy Maas. MVRDV. Interviewed by Jan Klerks.[2018-06-10]. http://www.ctbuh.org/Publications/Journal/TalkingTall/WinyMaasMVRDV/tabid/1542/language/en-GB/Default.aspx.

[4] "What's next" by Winy Maas. [2018-06-10]. http://thewhyfactory.com/news/whats-next-by-winy-maas/.

MG: That reminds me of this issue you explored in "Freeland", from a while ago, which is a project for a bottom-up urban design process, letting stakeholders organically address their individual needs within a community, in which the relationship between what you do and what others' do is key.

WM: Yes, this relation of "WEgo" and the Freeland project, is about a "freedom", or liberty that has a double meaning. Because sure, liberty is fine, but when you hurt your neighbour then it's not fi ne. So,there's seemingly an end to liberty, and I'm aware that this end should be as far as possible. And, some people call that limit of liberty "civilisation", and others call it “dictatorship". That depends on where the slider between those two extremes is stopping.So, with this Freeland exercise we're testing those extremes, to see whether that is doable. And in fact, I'm happy to now be able to show that at the moment when individual tasks are about not hurting your neighbour, then immediately you have to negotiate and it becomes urbanism;because you deal with each other, it's no longer just individual. That's what I mean when saying,from "Ego" to "WEgo". And there's an interesting line at where that occurs, and under conditions of higher density this becomes more interesting.What's also interesting, this Freeland concept was actually invented for a project in Shenzhen about ten years ago, for an urban plan. And maybe it was too early then, because it was the opposite of what the planning bureau was imagining, while it's now being implemented in the Netherlands. It's funny;“invented in China, made in the Netherlands".It's the inverse from "made in China, invented in Europe", a very interesting moment in time!

4 What's next? Planet maker.

MG: And, if we re fl ect back a bit more at your own work, about 5 years ago, the EL Croquis #173 about MVRDV, you titled the "Evolutionary city", a concept you used to describe your work", as a city that wants to describe, enhance and develop over time." What kind of projection of urbanity do you see emerging now from your mass of work? To what has your city evolved to at the moment? If everything is urbanism,

WM: Well, now I start with a kind of bucket list,to list down the needs of the future city, what it can and should be about, and what nobody can be opposed to. Like, who's against green, or against oxygen, who's against beauty, or access, or freedom?There's quite a list of what the future city could or should include, which seemingly becomes almost a-political, which I find intriguing, it is working for every type of government I've worked with so far. And sure, there's still a long way to go to for each of these components to make the city more effective, to achieve a higher eきciency in greenness for instance, to make a city really green, or to make it really open, or really accessible or really historic even, or contextual. Or to make a city really free.And that's why I want to talk about it, to say that's what the evolutionary is now bringing to us, this evolutionary city now kind of splits up in many desires, and of course they can overlap, and we can try to bring them together, and maybe it's called a "Biocity". That could be the conclusion in several years from now. So, from this notion of identifying the Evolutionary city 5 years ago, if you ask what we have done since then, these are the next steps on it:deepening and spreading.

MG: And you've written, "There is so much to do, we need so much input to make our future good." Then,what's next?

WM: Well, I miss the larger perspectives on our planet; on the relation between cities and the environment, the biosphere, resources. There are a lot of inventions by smaller designers for instance,very sympathetic components, but yea, we have to stage that more dramatically and to unfold that agenda. So, on the short term that's first what's next. And on the longer term, there is a lot more to explore. For instance, do we only have this planet,or do we also colonise other planets? That will be another subject.

MG: Ok, and then what is next to do for architects?Should we de fi ne these agendas, should we initialise this, should we wait for commissions to be given for us to give these kind of answers?

WM: How do questions arise normally? When there's a crisis, so or you enlarge crisis, that helps sometimes to push it, or you discuss it. And the mechanism of "avoiding crisis" normally helps. That counts for the dirty air in Beijing, as somehow it seems that it has been possible now to take actions to make the air quality better; because it has been suggested that there has been a big change in the past 5 years, which is intriguing.

MG: So, crisis and discussion?

WM: Yes, and awareness is another one. And architects can help, they can visualise possible situations. And they can suggest solutions, by making prototypes, by inventing materials, by fi nding new collaborations.

MG: Now with all these research you have done in the past years, all the books, the writings, the projects Do you feel that now you understand more,that you are more misunderstood by others?

WM: Wow, good point. I don't feel that yet, but it's true, there is a risk.

Right at this moment, I'm trying to make a hundred planets, as an installation. I dream of this moment in Davos, at the World Economic Forum, that you have these giant rubber balls with a diametre of 2 to 3 metres, all hung next to each other, and I dream then that president Trump has to go in between those balls, and suddenly sees other world leaders amongst them. And they are squeezed between the different potentials of those balls, for instance, one ball could show what would happen if you open up all the borders, where would people go? If you would get rid of certain production zones on the planet, can I clean the air completely? I want to show these hypotheses, and I therefore call it"do you have the balls", to do something. It would be fantastic to present that, we are now making them, and we are combining it with what we call the "planet maker" for this, and it's very beautiful to see now that we have the fi rst 3D videos of these changes, to see how the planet can move, dance,like a disco ball if you change certain parametres. It changes according to a rhythm, over time. Because,looking back, with our book KM3, people thought we were lunatics, because we were thinking about the world, but now, somehow this is much more acceptable than ten years ago.

MG: Very true, because now there is a more obvious need?

WM: Yes, and because it's only a small thing now this enterprise, to think about the world. So I'm happy to be part now of this process, of our Planet 2.0, and to imagine what the planet could be like.So, it's certainly not fi nished yet, and I don't feel this misunderstanding yet. And it's hard to enter Davos,they're tough.

And I actually hope to use our platforms to show more people these possible future situations in that way. Show what's possible, visualise the potential. The extremes, and to experiment on that.So I hope they will also read this article for that.□