From Construction to Ideal Architecture 从建筑理想到理想建筑
an introduction to the architecture works of Get It Louder 2007
07大声展建筑部分导言（English version inside）
Liang Jingyu 梁井宇(translated by Qing Qing)
如果用经济发展状况与其他国家横向比较，当代中国建筑处在一个产生理想的年代，类似上个世纪六十年代的“建筑电讯”（Archigram）小组，或随后日 本的“新陈代谢”派出现时的社会和经济背景。怀揣不同目的的中外建筑师竞相登场，建筑师个人梦想可以迅速实现，成为他所服务的某个集体身份认同所急缺的荣 耀花环。建筑师的理想是主动还是被动地被这些不同的集体收买已经不再重要，重要的是建筑师的理想是什么，以及是否可以实现。如同人类学家Ian Buruma对Rem Koolhaas承接CCTV工程的批判已经过时一样，判断一个建筑师的伦理取向如果还停留在与某类型客户是否应该合作的话，很可能会忽略一个更大的伦理 问题，就是如何直截了当地判断他的理想本身对社会的作用力。当理想穿越了漫长的建造过程，是否最终抵达彼岸？
审视我们周围的建筑物，答案 大多是否定的。这本应是英雄主义的、建筑宣言四起的时代，但是取而代之的是德里达式的，有关设计方法的策略性言说，和为平庸的结果所作的粉饰。人人都似乎 相信这是个大有作为的建筑年代，但是除了个人的经济收益，我们的城市收获甚少。需要“绞死”的也许不仅仅是建筑师，建筑师能效受阻的各个环节也应受到批 评。而作为建筑师，躲开能效受阻的现实，其建筑理想就能变得更加清晰易辨么？作为几乎是唯一可洞察城市建设各个技术层面、管理环节、规划愿景及经济关系的 知识分子，建筑师最清楚问题所在。虽然不具备宏观控制的权力，但是却可以透过表达这些问题，帮助城市塑造理想。
07大声展参展建筑师有一 个共同背景，那就是在他们独立开设事务所之前，大多有在国内外重要而有影响力的事务所工作的经历。他们都有极大的勇气和信心，努力实现他们的建筑理想。他 们并没有因为困难而放弃，去选择更容易的商业运营模式。他们的自我约束的执业态度有的时候比作品本身更有说服力。大声展提供给他们的是一个展示理想主义的 机会。也正因为如此，大声展的参展建筑作品，不是建筑模型和效果图，而是综合了参展建筑师丰富而各异的经历，运用非常规的手段，针对上述问题的思考表达。 探索的是面临理想的不能付诸实现，还可以怎样把它们传递出来。
建筑，作为动词，是一门历史久远的职业，涉及范围很宽。上个世纪八、九十年 代美国建筑业持续萧条时，许多建筑系毕业生无法找到对口的工作。但他们只要愿意，都几乎没有经过再培训就可以转行。建筑师的职业训练使他们具备了盖房子以 外的许多能力。当这些能力和其他行业对接时，经常可以产生出独特的成就。这次建筑师们被要求提交的都是非传统建筑作品，从装置、影像到日常物品的设计；采 用儿童玩具、废弃物品、城市广告、商品到工业材料等建构样板房屋，等等。目的是通过和其他行业的互动，探寻理想生活的方方面面。
理想建筑 应该是对人类理想生活方式的容纳。而对于二十一世纪的人类理想生活方式，因为不同的体验和不同的认识，人们最终会肯定差异的价值。也许我们所想象的理想建 筑因为这种差异化的价值观而并不存在，但从这些建筑师的作品中，我们将可以看到为了这种新的生活方式的到来，他们所做的积极准备。
When compared to other countries in economic terms, architecture in day China presently enjoy an era of dream productivity, recalling the social and economic conditions that prodded the birth of the Archigram group of the 1960s or the subsequent Metabolism group in Japan. With different goals in mind, foreign and domestic architecture step up the competition to rapidly realize their individual ambitions and garnering much needed garlands for the firm collective he serves. Whether the ambitions of these architects are swayed actively or passively by different firms is no longer important.What’s important is exactly what the architect’s visions are, and whether they can be achieved. Just as anthropologist Ian Buruma’s critique of Rem Koolhaas’s decision to undertake the CCTV project has become obsolete, if we are stuck at judging an architect’s ethical orientation by what clients he chooses to collaborate with, then we are likely to overlook a bigger ethical point, and that is how to direct judgments of his vision to greater social interaction. Put under a long process of construction, what vision ultimately reaches the other side?
Looking at the buildings around us, we draw mostly negative conclusions. This is supposed to be an era for heroism, for manifestos all abound, but instead Derrida type statements for design methods coupled with conventional results are used as plasters. Many seem to believe that this is a promising era for visionary construction, but other than architect income gains, our cities have harvested little. It’s might not only be the architects who need to be “hung,” but at every step that blocks the process also needs to be examined. As for architects, if more restrictions are lifted for efficacy, will their ideals necessarily become more clearly identified? As one the few given insight into the various technical layer, management level, location planning and economic relations for a project, architects know the issues faced in construction, and though they may lack total authority, they may still be able to help create the “ideal” city by expressing their views on issues at hand.
Architects participating in the 2007 Get It Louder share the background of having worked at influential firms both at home and abroad before setting up their own design firms. They share great courage and confidence, striving to achieve their own unique visions. They have not given up choosing an easier business model, which is simply feeding their clients with what the market ask for. Their practice of self-restraint and dedication sometimes can be more convincing than their works. Get It Louder is an idealistic opportunity for them. For this reason, architectural exhibits at GIL will not be models and boards, but a synthesis of the exhibitor’s unique experience, utilizing unconventional methods to address the issues faced in architectural design. The exhibition will set to explore the “impossible” in architecture, as well as how they can be communicated, and perhaps realized.
As a verb, “to construct” has had a long history as a wide scope occupation. When America underwent a construction depression in the 1990s, many graduates out of architecture schools were unable to find suitable work. As long as they were willing, however, most could easily switch to other careers with virtually no additional training. In addition to skills of “how to build a house,” architects are equipped with many capabilities. When these abilities are stirred in professions, they will be met with unique achievements. This time, GIL architects are required to submit non-traditional works from video, to installation, to everyday designs using toys, discarded items, urban advertising, and industrial materials etc. The goal is to interact with other artistic venues and exploring all aspects of the “ideal” life.
Ideal architecture should accommodate the ideal lifestyle. As for the 21st century’s definition of ideal lifestyle, differences in experience and perception will eventually lead to different values. Perhaps our vision of ideal architecture doesn’t actually exist because of the diversity of values, but in the works of these architects, we will be able to see the preparations made for the arrival of this new way of life.