【作者】 宫宝龙；

【导师】 徐岱；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 美学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 查尔斯·詹克斯是二十世纪六十年代以来后现代建筑与文化的坚定鼓吹者,至今仍有持久而广泛的影响力。无论是受到批评还是肯定,能够产生这样让人绕不过去的学术与社会影响,跟他的全方位、长时段的努力有关,尤其来自他良好的政治美学出发点,即将建筑规定为一种公共艺术,以此区别于绘画、音乐等其他较为纯粹的形式。面对现代建筑逐渐沦落到单调、枯燥和缺乏交流性的窘境,通过符号学方法,詹克斯主张设计应回到强调建筑记号的惯例意义,把建筑从少数精英的秘传口诀中拯救出来,让普通人都能参与建筑的交流过程。但是,詹克斯既没能认识到建筑词汇学的粗浅,又没能建立起有足够说服力的建筑音位学。这种不稳固的理论基础,很难抵挡随后专业建筑理论家对此类“记号的迷思”的攻击。从勒·柯布西耶到克里斯蒂安·诺伯格-舒尔茨,詹克斯将这些现代建筑史学家的历史书写,视为根据不同价值取向塑形而成的“神话”,但这却无法阻止他自己建构一种基于复数、流动世界观的现代建筑史迷思。在崇拜英雄主义的同时,詹克斯又陷入消费民主和享乐主义的幻想。政治上过不过硬,是他衡量现代建筑师的核心标准之一。这和着重考察当代英美流行文化之伦理要素的做法一起,证明了詹克斯的公共知识分子底色。但事实证明,詹克斯对虚拟空间解放性的期待,又是一种幻想。继承导师雷纳·班纳姆“即时史”的理论特色和波普建筑群体“瞬间村”、“即时城市”的美感倾向,詹克斯擅长迅速捕捉现象并形成结论。遗憾的是,这导致他对晚期现代建筑、后现代建筑和新现代建筑本质特征把握的不确切,虽然他对这三者的区分极富启发性。这种急于求成的心态,也体现在他将其共和倾向的政治理想,简单平移到设计领域中,主张一种专案化设计方法的举动上。浓厚的政治色彩,迫使该方法自己最终驶离艺术的轨道。早年的英语文学训练经历,保证了詹克斯表面上的流畅文风,也致使他难以深入探讨上述三场建筑运动的初衷。用一种文化研究的方法,詹克斯企图用现代眼光重新审视中国古典园林的意义。但是,他终未能突破中国古典美学的固有思维,没能批判隐逸文化的内在难题。在对库尔哈斯新址大楼设计方案的鼓吹活动中,詹克斯展示了一种良好的而非邪恶的批评家寻租活动。不过,他未能深入发掘大都市匿名性与现代主体性建构之间的内在关联。复杂性科学,既是詹克斯重新解释新现代建筑的理论材料,又成为他给自己的苏格兰园林及雕塑设计作辩护的基础。然而,詹克斯不仅误解了复杂性科学,更坠入一种追随新兴科学假设的新宿命论之中。来自二十世纪六十年代的乌托邦政治热情,造成詹克斯建筑研究的一个重要悖论：他希望用替代建筑本身的、间接性的记号实现直接的革命。因此,有必要重新回到以建成环境为代表的建筑本身,注重建筑对人公共与民主意识的缓慢培养作用,用直接性的建筑本身实现间接的革命。更多还原

【Abstract】 Charles Jencks is a firm advocator of post-modern architecuture and culture since 1960s, and his influence is still lasting and widespread. Nomatter being criticised or approved, this academic and social significance which is sort of compulsory for contemporary schoolars has relationship with his omnibearing and long time efforts, especially with his good starting point of political aesthetics, that is, to formulate architecture as a public art, which is different from other purer forms, such as painting or music.Being Confronted with the plight of modern architecture gradually degrading into monotony, baldness and lacking of communication, by adopting semiotics, Jencks insists that design should come back to emphasizing the conventional meaning of architecture to rescure architecture from esoteric discourses of a minority of elite and make ordinary people could participate in the communicational process of architecture. Nevertheless, Jencks neither realizes the shallowness of architectural lexics, nor builds a convictive enough architectural phonology. So the slippery theoretical foundation can’t withstand subsequent attacks to the "myth of sign" of this kind from professional architectural theorists.From Le Corbusier to Christian Norberg-Schulz, Jencks treats historical writings of these historians of modern architecture as "myths" shaped according to diverse value orientations. But this can’t prevent himself from constructing a myth of the history of modern architecture based on pluralistic and flowing outlook. While adoring heroism, Jencks falls into the fancy of consumer democracy and hedonism as well. Whether or not one’s political caliber is qualified is one of his central standards for elvaluating modern architects. Along with emphasizing inspection of the moral elements of contemporary Anglo-American popular culture, this testifies Jencks’s true nature of public intellectual. However, it turns out that the anticipation of Jencks for the liberating potentials of virtual space is another fancy.Inheriting the theoretical character of his tutor Reyner Banham’s "instant history" and the aesthetic tendency of Pop architectural groups’s "moment village" or "instant city", Jencks is good at capturing phenomenons then forming conclusions. It is a pity that this leads to that his grasp of substantive characteristics of late-modern, post-modern and neo-modern architecture is not so exact, although his differentiation of these three is highly instructive. This kind of being anxious for success is also expressed in the simple translation of his political ideas of the republican tendency to design area in order to argue for a adhocism design method. Heavy with political overtones, it drives itself away from the orbit of art at last. The training experience of english literature in early years not only guarantees Jencks’s externally fluent style of writing, but also leads to that he has difficulty in going deep into original intentions of those movements above.With a cultural study method, Jencks attempts to examine meanings of Chinese gardens in modern attitude. But he fails in breaking through inherent thoughts of Chinese aesthetics and in criticizing inner problems of hermit culture. In the advocacy for Rem Koolhass’s plan for CCTV, Jencks shows a good, not evil, rent-seeking activity of critic. However, he can’t go deep into the internal relationship between the anonymity of metropolis and the constructing of modern subjectivity. Science of complexity is both Jencks’s theoretical materials of reinterpreting neo-modern architecture and the foundation of arguing for his Scottish garden and sculpture design works. Whereas, Jencks not only misunderstands science of complexity, but also falls into a new determinism of pursuiting the new scientific hypothesis.The Utopian political passion from 1960s leads to a significant paradox in Jencks’s architectural research:he hopes to realize the immediate revolution by means of indirect signs which substitute architecture itself. Therefore, it is necessary to come back to architecture itself represented by the built environment, emphasize the gradual cultivation of people’s public and democratic awareness from architecture, and realize the indirect revolution by way of immediate architecture.更多还原