建筑书评是建筑评论的评论——《建筑书评与文化随笔》序

正吴宇江先生的书评内容丰富、很有见地。如本书开头的几篇建筑书评,包括现代主义建筑旗手勒·柯布西耶、现代西方建筑、建筑与城市艺术哲学、交叉学科——生态建筑学、地下建筑学等,他认为这类书确实值得向广大读者推荐,因此,尽管书写这类书评,作者需要花大功夫,需要啃透这些大部头专著才能原汁原味地介绍给读者,他还是乐此不疲地去完成。     

现代建筑的毕业生——柯林·罗的遗产(四)

文章通过梳理柯林·罗从20世纪50年代末到90年代的著述,分析了他对现代建筑认识的转变过程。其中详细探讨了柯林·罗为希区柯克著作《建筑:19世纪与20世纪》撰写的书评中所阐述的观点,他所受到的二战后自由主义政治哲学的影响,以及在《良好意愿的建筑:面向一种可能的回顾》一书中对现代建筑进行的深度反思。     

六年风雨路,万千读者情

<正>最早接触《城市建筑》是在2005年,那时候我还在英国谢菲尔德大学读博,我的一位学姐武昕博士在研究之余担当UA书评栏目的客座主持,写下了不少极具思想性的文字。初读《城市建筑》,除了感觉版式别致、印刷精美,有些文章有点意思之外,倒也没有特别的印象。     

后现代建筑理论的历史蜕变——查尔斯·詹克斯《后现代主义的故事》书评

以查尔斯·詹克斯的《后现代主义的故事》中文版为主要文本,结合该书作者之前的其他"后现代"建筑论著,以书评的方式对詹克斯的建筑"后现代主义"理论的历史演变进行梳理,对其中的主要观点提出质疑。进一步提出,作为一种以"宏大叙事"为基础的理论,詹克斯的"后现代主义"本质上并非他自己声称的"多元主义"。     

贴近历史真实的解读——《营造法式解读》书评

《营造法式解读》是由潘谷西和何建中著,2005年11月出版的一本关于《营造法式》研究的专著。作者以书评的方式,从“突破建筑学本体认识的历史观,反映原书体例的真实观、注重探讨营造特点的建筑观,还原历史面貌和特点的科学观”这四个方面,介绍了该专著的特点和价值,同时对书中一些有创意的研究观点和成果进行了分析和评价。书评的结论是：专著是贴近历史真实的解读,由此对宋代《营造法式》赋予了更加永久存在的意义。     

近代建筑革命——外国近现代建筑史札记之一

西方建筑界现在正处于错综复杂、动荡不定的局面之中。建筑师中间,流派林立,“主义”奇多,建筑“价值观”混乱。长时间以来,既缺少共同的评价建筑的准则,也没有公认的权威和中心。每一座重要的建筑物落成,或每一种新的学说出现,都是既有人赞赏,又有人批判,众说纷纭,莫衷一是。对于多数建筑师说来,方向不清,前景不明,正象《纽约书评》不久前刊登     

建筑书评是建筑评论的评论——《建筑书评与文化随笔》序

正2015年,《建筑书评与建筑文化随笔》问世,值得向书友们推荐。书的作者系建筑书刊资深编辑吴宇江编审,这本书展示了他研究建筑发展历程的广阔视野和极高的专业水平。吴宇江先生从事编辑工作25年,经他手出版的书100余种,参与编写与个人编著(译)的图书6册,其中多种书籍获新闻出版署的优秀图书奖。     

历史学书评概况及存在问题探析——基于2000~2012年CSSCI历史学核心期刊

利用计量分析方法分析2000²012年CSSCI收录的历史学专业20种核心期刊收录书评的概况,对书评信息进行定量分析,从书评作者和被评图书两个视角探寻历史学界书评的特点及存在的问题。     

本于自然,高于自然--《世界园林发展概论--走向自然的世界园林史图说》评介

作为建筑出版人,我十分关注精彩纷呈的建筑书刊市场。应该说涉及建筑类的中外图书颇多,竞争也最激烈,尤其近几年园林景观的书更令建筑师、规划师们瞩目。然而,当我读罢由中国建筑学会副理事长张祖刚教授送来的《世界园林发展概论——走向自然的世界园林史图说》(中国建筑工业出版社 2003年2月第一版)一书后,深深为它的前瞻性强、视角新颖和理论文献价值所打动,不揣冒昧,作一书评,权作为一篇读书笔记。该书之所以打动我,是基于如下几个不寻常之处: 第一,作者的编著经历、阅历不寻常。张祖刚先生1956年毕业于清华大学建筑系,从事了达10年之…     

装配式建筑的连接方法

新建建筑的装配率远远达不到国家的预期,这一问题由很多原因导致,包括装配式建筑的信任度不高,装配式建筑这一新型建造方式的受力性能达不到理想的状态,装配式建筑建造过程中有很多限制导致达不到目标的装配性能,比如预制构件建造工厂产品的精密度达不到装配的,施工人员的工作质量达不到装配式建筑的要求。装配式建筑的受力性能受很多条件的影响,其中最主要的一个原因是梁、柱节点的连接方式,存在一些连接方式使装配式剪力墙结构满足建筑使用要求的结论,这一结论可以为装配式建筑的大力推广提供理论支持,并且增强民众和企业对装配式建筑的信心。     

"主题创作"启思录--评《建筑创作中的立意与构思》

本文通过对卢济威著作及其建筑设计作品的评价,论述了"主题创作"的实践意义,并着重从理论上揭示了建筑创作活动中的立意、构思、技巧及其和创新之间的辩证统一关系.     

本质与形式——简评《承传与交融——探中国近现代建筑的本质与形式》及其他

该文对彼得·罗与关晟合著的《承传与交融》一书的组织框架、内容组成、研究方法以及书籍形式等进行详细评析,认为《承传与交融》是研究中国近现代建筑的一本有价值的书,但因为缺乏更广空间范围的建筑认识而存在严重缺陷,指出研究中国的城市与建筑问题十分需要宽广的视野看待地域辽阔、区域发展不平衡的中国,不能以若干发达城市或地区来代表整体中国的状况。     

The Death of the Beaux Arts

Four years have passed since the publication of Christopher Alexander's Notes on the Synthesis of Form. And already the book has gone through two printings and been translated into Italian and Japanese. In its most basic form, it presents a method for aiding the designer in systematically structuring physical design problems. Interestingly enough, it has been criticized both by what might be called the “traditional right” and the “new left” of architectural education. The former accuses the method of being partial in that it addresses itself primarily to the functional side of the problem and neglects the esthetic and culturally symbolic aspects of architectural solutions—an aspect to which the traditional right gives primary emphasis. From the other side, the “new left” attacks the method as systematically unreliable since it does not contain the rigor of scientific method. In fact, it is said that Alexander's method cannot deal objectively with the “true” complexity of design problems. Subjective judgments still must be made in the face of uncertain or incomplete information.     

秩序的回归——简评小林克弘的《建筑构成手法》

日本建筑学家小林克弘（Katsuhiro Kobayashi）所著的《建筑构成手法》是研究建筑形态和空间构成手法的一本书,该文对其进行了简要解读,认为此书把古典美学与现代美学以及哲学思想相结合来讨论建筑构成,它把我们通常所认为的构成从形体与视觉领域扩大到了空间与哲学的领域,在理论家热衷于追寻意义与挖掘理念的时代,冷静地召唤秩序的回归。另一方面,该文也提出了几点不足和自身体会。     

《清式大木作操作工艺》评析

《清式大木作操作工艺》一书,已由文物出版社出版发行。原该书被定义为“古建筑保护修缮工程”和“研究古代建筑史”的“基本资料”。但本书存在根本性的错误,大致可归结为以下三种类型：1.照搬照抄前人的东西,不加消化验证而使错误继续流传;2.对清式建筑的构造做法不了解而造成的概念性或做法上的错误;3.插图质量低,错漏严重。本着对我国古建保护维修事业尽责的精神和求真求实的科学态度,对目前发现的《工艺》一书中的错误,分不同类型各举几例略加分析,以期引起有关方面重视。     

“随季应变”的绿色生态幼儿园设计

文章以招商地产2010绿色建筑设计大赛获奖设计"随季应变———苏州小石城社区全日制幼儿园设计"为例,重点介绍了方案中多种生态节能技术的运用,和其对建筑环境性能的影响分析,从而探讨绿色生态技术指导下的建筑设计方法以及我们在绿色生态教育建筑设计中得到的启示。     

Illusory objects and fairground architecture

The fairground has long been overlooked as a site of architectural interest. This has slowly begun to change in the last fifty years, when a few architects have been drawn to various aspects of the fair—its history, its visual or technical appeal, its accommodation of multiple programmes, or its nomadic, temporal, event-based nature—as a source of inspiration, and championing it as an example of ‘other’ architecture that can provide a refreshing alternative to traditional architectural production. Yet there are many aspects of the fairground that do not fit this story: in fact, the fairground shares much with static, permanent and hierarchical architecture. While the form and appearance of fairground rides are constantly reinvented to offer novelty, the fair itself is underwritten by strong traditions and provides visitors with a certain reassuring predictability.

These characteristics make it difficult to define precisely what the fairground is, and this difficulty haunts various attempts to pay it serious attention. This article provides a broad survey of work that has taken the travelling street fair as its object of study, directly or indirectly. Part I of the article is organised around a number of awkward—contested, missing, or unstable—objects that mean such work is rarely straightforward, compared to the writing of other architectural histories. Part II pursues the challenges of writing about the fair in more detail: borrowing the notion of ‘illusory objectification’ from anthropology, it traces what such a notion can reveal about the ways we see the fair, and how we might look at it differently in order to develop a clearer understanding or appreciation of the fair's architectural complexity.     

Architecture is the pattern of human mind in space: Claude F. Bragdon and the spatial concept of architecture

‘Space’ has held a central position within the architectural discourse throughout the twentieth century and a number of twenty-first-century publications suggest interest in this notion is not to be diminished any time soon. Seen from our contemporary perspective, the association between architecture and space could therefore seem ordinary and self-evident. However, existing scholarship has dated the adoption of the term ‘space’ in architectural vocabulary—as a fundamental category of architecture—no earlier than the 1890s. This early phase has been strongly associated with the German language and nineteenth-century German aesthetic philosophy, whereas, by contrast, the adoption of the term in architectural discourse in the English language is considered to have followed several decades later. This paper discusses the largely unknown case of the American Claude Fayette Bragdon (1866–1946), an English-speaking architect who adopted the notion of ‘space’ as early as the 1890s: concurrently with his German contemporaries. Through analysis of existing scholarship, archival material and Bragdon's published writings mainly up to the appearance of his book The Beautiful Necessity in 1910, it throws light on the main sources of Bragdon's ‘spatial’ concept of architecture and demonstrates connections to transcendental aesthetics and ground-breaking advances in nineteenth-century mathematics.     

《人文主义时期的建筑法则》与现代主义

艺术史学家威特克沃出版于1949年的文艺复兴研究专著《人文主义时期的建筑法则》是一本对当代建筑批评与实践影响重大的著作。本文将分析威特克沃在该书中所发展出来的建筑研究方法．探讨其如何被吸纳进当代建筑批评及实践．如何奠定了当代建筑形式理论的基础，以及如何被其后辈所发展．而成为对20世纪30年代现代主义的反思和修正。     

History as Drawing

This essay examines the assimilation and progressive devaluation of typological theory into American post-modern historicism between the late seventies and early eighties, when theory was transformed from a critical means of resistance to the commodified architecture and urbanism of multinational capitalism into an affirmative instrument of the forces it was initially intended to oppose. This episode raises issues that are central to a critical understanding of the production and consumption of ideas and images within the contemporary architectural “culture industry” and illuminates some of the broader conditions of contemporary culture that have profoundly affected the role of architecture within it. Most significantly, perhaps, it exemplifies the unwillingness or inability of most recent “avant-garde” positions within architecture to address substantially the role of architecture and the city as economic and cultural commodities. This essay addresses two points along the brief trajectory of type theory in the United States that underscore its significance—its initial mode of reception within architectural academia and its selective assimilation into post-modernist architectural practice—and concludes with an examination of its defenselessness against the broader realities of architecture's role as an instrumentalized symbol within a mass-mediated, market-driven culture.