【正文】 爭議的紀(jì)念碑，抑或是奢華難測的公寓樓， 建筑學(xué)的根本宗旨是給人以永恒的印象。建筑支出一直較低。引人注意的建筑工程進(jìn)展快、費時短：例如時尚潮店、食品小車、集貿(mào)市場、表演場所等等。恰如諸多廣為流行的時尚一樣， “集體消費”（又稱“共享”）、“社區(qū)花園”、“易貨市場”等如雨后春筍一般。 In November, I had the pleasure of moderating Motopia, a panel at University of Southern California’s School of Architecture, with Robert Kronenburg, an architect, professor at University of Liverpool and portable/temporary/mobile guru. Author of a shelf full of books on the topic, including “Flexible: Architecture that Responds to Change,” “Portable Architecture: Design and Technology” and “Houses in Motion: The Genesis,” Kronenburg is a man obsessed. 十一月時，鄙人有幸與建筑學(xué)家、利物浦大學(xué)教授、便攜式、臨時性、移動式建筑宗師羅伯特 .克農(nóng)伯格一起主持了“城托邦” —— “城托邦”是南加州大學(xué)建筑學(xué)院的一個專家委員會。 Mobility has an innate potency, Kronenburg believes. Movable environments are more dynamic than static ones, so why should architecture be so static? The idea that perhaps all buildings shouldn’t aspire to permanence represents a huge shift for architecture. Without that burden, architects, designers, builders and developers can take advantage of and implement current technologies faster. Architecture could be reusable, recyclable and sustainable. Recast in this way, it could better solve seemingly unsolvable problems. And still succeed in creating a sense of place. 克農(nóng)伯格認(rèn)為，“流動性”是一種固有的力量。沒有了這一桎梏，建筑師、設(shè)計師、建筑商和開發(fā)商可以更快遞充分利用并實施現(xiàn)有技術(shù)。以這種理念重新塑造的建筑，會更好地解決貌似不可解決的問題，并仍然可以成功地創(chuàng)造一種建筑區(qū)域感。me brulees.) 在其報告中，克農(nóng)伯格列舉了很多例子，涉及到便攜式臨時建筑是如何被廣泛地利用在人類生活的方方面面的。南丁格爾 重新設(shè)計的醫(yī)院，到肯尼迪當(dāng)局執(zhí)政期間用作移動診所的“清風(fēng)房車”）、住房（從圓頂帳篷到帳篷再到阪茂設(shè)計的震后紙質(zhì)房屋）、文化和商業(yè)（舞臺及萬國工業(yè)博覽會建筑、塞納河兩岸存在了幾百年之久的舊書販子、提供從口述故事錄音到可口的法式焦糖奶酪等應(yīng)有盡有服務(wù)的移動式食品攤、藝術(shù)和音樂場地）等設(shè)施。他解釋道：“臨時性”的戰(zhàn)略“適宜于滿足不可預(yù)知的需求、以較少的成本提供更多的服務(wù)，并鼓勵創(chuàng)新。 This is as true for development and city planning as it is for architecture. Citymaking may have happened all at once at the desks of master planners like Daniel Burnham or Robert Moses, but that’s really not the way things happen today. No single master plan can anticipate the evolving and varied needs of an increasingly diverse population or achieve the resiliency, responsiveness and flexibility that shorterterm, experimental endeavors can. Which is not to say longterm planning doesn’t have its place. The two work well hand in hand. Mike Lydon, founding principal of The Street Plans Collaborative, argues for injecting spontaneity into urban development, and sees these temporary interventions (what he calls “tactical urbanism”) as shortterm actions to effect longterm change. 建筑如此，開發(fā)與城市規(guī)劃也是同樣道理。但是，而今，情 況已迥然不同了。這并不是說長期性的規(guī)劃失去了其應(yīng)有的地位。 “街道協(xié)同規(guī)劃委員會”的創(chuàng)始會長麥克 .賴登贊同為城市開發(fā)注入自發(fā)因素，并視一些臨時性干預(yù)措施（他稱之為“戰(zhàn)術(shù)上的城市主義”）為“影響長期變革的短期行為”。盡管如此，賴登對風(fēng)格的選擇有其獨到的慧眼。“這不是零敲碎打工程，不是“自己動手”的城市主義，而是用于各種工程規(guī)模的理念、技術(shù)和策略的連續(xù)統(tǒng)一體?！暗谝唬墙?jīng)濟因素。第二， 就是互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的因素。達(dá)拉斯無奇不有，我們也常有耳聞。 第三，人口的遷徙因素。這些城區(qū)招引了很多渴望改善居住區(qū)域的人。但是他們有足夠多的業(yè)余時間參與其中，這看上去很自然。雖然這樣做并不能直接改變現(xiàn)有的法規(guī)或地區(qū)法規(guī)，但是，問題不大。 The Dallas group Build a Better Block — which quickly leapt from a tiny grassroots collective to an active partner in city endeavors — has demonstrated that when you expose weaknesses, change happens. If their temporary interventions violate existing codes, Build a Better Block just paints a sign informing passersby of that fact. They have altered regulations in this fashion. Sometimes — not always — bureaucracy gets out of the way and allows for real change to happen. 達(dá)拉斯“建設(shè)更好街道”小組從原本是一個草根小組，一躍成為城市工程的積極參與者。如果他們臨時性的干預(yù)違措施反了現(xiàn)有的法規(guī)，“建設(shè)更好街道”小組就會出一幅告示，將事實告知路人。有時 —— 不一直是，當(dāng)局不掣肘，并允許發(fā)生改變。賴登說：“開發(fā)商可以從市場的角度了解到：居民區(qū)里什么建筑效果好，好的建筑真地可以給他們以啟迪或改變他們的規(guī)劃。如果開發(fā)商真地要這樣做，潛力的確不小。例如，布魯克林區(qū)的德 .卡爾波市場原本計劃只存在三年，但是后來卻成了街區(qū)中心；過去可不是這樣子?！按蠹叶枷矚g去哪里。 開發(fā)商如果能夠像社區(qū)公園那樣把建筑融合起來并給居民就地種菜的機會，那就太聰明了。啤酒廣場也可以保留下來。 the developers will now be able to create it in a neighborhood that has bee increasingly vibrant and pedestrianfriendly. 舊金山的“普洛克西”工程是一個類似的例子。相比之下，開發(fā)商則在經(jīng)濟蕭條時期則按兵不動。 On an even larger scale, the major developer Forest City has been testing these ideas of trial and error in the 5M Project in downtown San Francisco. While waiting out the downturn, the folks behind 5M have been betatesting tenants and uses at their 5th amp。在等待經(jīng)濟衰退結(jié)束的同時， M5 工程后邊的百姓一直在其“第五項目”區(qū)測驗住戶和用途，入住該區(qū)的過去和現(xiàn)在有《舊金山紀(jì)事報》、還有一些機構(gòu)例如“技術(shù)工作室”、“集創(chuàng)館”、藝術(shù)交流藝術(shù)館、“正方”技術(shù)公司和為數(shù)不多的幾輛向辛勤勞作的住戶們送餐的食品車。我們還任重道遠(yuǎn)。 人們不必費神去找一些不僅僅失敗而且慘敗的臨時性工程的例子（例如“卡特里娜颶風(fēng)房車）。正如一個實踐者指出的那樣：“我們搞這些臨時性建筑，是為了對抗政府的拖拖拉拉。 at its best