访谈专辑第十五期 – 华黎/Interview Album No. 15-Hua Li
1.
Q:您现在的创作方向与最初创业时截然不同，为什么会出现这样的转变？
F:也不能说截然不同吧，只是在项目类型、尺度上有些变化，一开始时做过一些城市项目，大都未能实现。对建造、材料的兴趣使我转向小尺度，这样更切近建筑本体的问题，也相对更能够实现自己的想法。建筑师对项目的整体把控能力也是需要一点一滴积累的。
1.
Q: Your current creative direction is completely different from when you first started your business. Why is there such a change?
F: It can't be said that it is completely different. It's just that there are some changes in the type and scale of the project. At the beginning, some urban projects were done, but most of them were not realized. My interest in construction and materials made me turn to a small scale, so that it is closer to the problem of the building itself and is relatively more able to realize my ideas. The architect's overall ability to control the project also needs to be accumulated bit by bit.
▼ 高黎贡手工造纸博物馆 Gaoligong Handmade Paper Museum
2.
Q:您近几年因为侧重乡间地头和自然环境里的建造赢得了“在地建筑师”称号，您如何看待“在地建筑师”这一称号？
F:建筑只要与所在的场地、周边环境找到有机与内在的关系，其实都是在地的，并不一定非要在乡间或自然当中，在城市里一样可以在地。因此”地”不必狭义地理解成某一类环境，而是每一个项目所处环境的具体特征，例如场地的地理、地质特征、当地的气候、历史、生活方式等，而当建筑与这些因素产生千丝万缕的联系以后，就是在地的，就像植物与土壤的关系。
2.
Q: In recent years, you have won the title of "Local Architect" because of your emphasis on construction in rural areas and natural environments. What do you think of the title of "Local Architect"?
F: As long as the building finds an organic and internal relationship with the site and surrounding environment, it is actually on the ground. It does not have to be in the countryside or nature. It can be on the ground in the city. Therefore, “land” does not have to be interpreted as a certain type of environment in a narrow sense, but the specific characteristics of the environment in which each project is located, such as the site’s geography, geological features, local climate, history, lifestyle, etc., and when the building is related to these factors After inextricably linked, it is on the ground, just like the relationship between plants and soil.
3.
Q:您曾说过：“我第一次去场地，如果场地有东西可以打动我，我就做，不然就不做。”，现在大多数的城市场地缺乏灵性或者说乏味，您是以什么样的态度应对城市中的这些场地和设计机会呢？如果您被委任在缺失地景特征的城市用地中设计重要建筑，你会如何处理？
F:现在也的确会碰到比较乏味和中性的场地，就像白纸，场地本身没有带来具体的能触发设计的东西，这种情况下设计会更多关注建筑的内部秩序，寻找空间组织、结构、材料的意义，去营造一个自足的世界。
有不重要的建筑吗？ 建筑常常因为所谓的”重要”而被贴上附加的意义，超出了建筑本身。 ”重要”其实是个幻觉，容易诱使建筑师去”发明创造”，掉入光环中自我陶醉。对我来说不存在重要建筑，所有的建筑都重要，都需面对建筑本身的具体问题，场地关系、尺度、材料、与人的关系等等，建筑应该避免为了”重要”而空泛。
3.
Q: You once said: "The first time I go to the venue, if there is something in the venue that can impress me, I will do it, otherwise I will not do it." Nowadays, most urban venues lack spirituality or boring. What kind of attitude should we respond to these venues and design opportunities in the city? If you are commissioned to design important buildings on urban land that lacks geographic features, what will you do?
F: Now we will indeed encounter relatively boring and neutral sites, just like white paper. The site itself does not bring specific things that can trigger the design. In this case, the design will pay more attention to the internal order of the building and find space Organization, structure, and material meaning to create a self-sufficient world.
Are there any unimportant buildings? Buildings are often given additional meanings because they are so-called "important", beyond the building itself. "Important" is actually an illusion, which can easily induce architects to "invent and create" and fall into the aura of self-intoxication. For me, there are no important buildings. All buildings are important. They have to face the specific problems of the building itself, such as the relationship between the site, the scale, the material, and the relationship with people. Buildings should avoid being empty for the sake of "importance".
4.
Q:以Siza为代表的一系列注重场所文脉的建筑师所设计的建筑通常与场所特征紧密相连并能从某种角度升华环境，这样的作品通常很难让人联想到具体的物质类比，比如 “钱币”“树”。不少公共建筑在无个性特征的用地中设计建设出来，并被冠以概念化与象形的称呼，比如“鸟巢”“大裤衩”，“灯笼”。您是如何看待公共建筑以及与这些建筑被国民象形文化起名的情况？
F:象形起名是国民的权利，无可厚非。但建筑师不该把设计建立在简单的象形概念上当成一种习惯。倒不是说建筑不能象形，而是象形不应该简化、抑制对建筑更深入的思考。一旦象形成为一种取巧的表达和沟通方式，设计就变得廉价和缺乏深度。
4.
Q: The buildings designed by a series of architects who pay attention to place context, represented by Siza, are usually closely connected to the characteristics of the place and can sublimate the environment from a certain angle. Such works are usually difficult to associate with specific material analogies. For example, "coins" and "trees". Many public buildings have been designed and constructed on land with no individual characteristics, and they are called conceptual and pictographic titles, such as "Bird's Nest", "Large Pants", and "Lantern". What do you think about the public buildings and the naming of these buildings by the national pictographic culture?
F: The naming of pictograms is a national right, and it is understandable. But architects shouldn't take it as a habit to base their design on simple pictographic concepts. This is not to say that architecture cannot be pictographic, but pictograms should not be simplified and inhibited deeper thinking about architecture. Once the image is formed as a clever way of expression and communication, the design becomes cheap and lacks depth.