哈爾沃·魏德·埃勒夫森，米爾扎·穆葉齊諾維奇/Halvor Weider Ellefsen, Mirza Mujezinovic王冰 譯/Translated by WANG Bing

延森與斯科溫建筑師事務(wù)所：挪威建筑的定制主義者

jensen & Skodvin Arkitekter: Tailorists of Norwegian Architecture

哈爾沃·魏德·埃勒夫森，米爾扎·穆葉齊諾維奇/Halvor Weider Ellefsen, Mirza Mujezinovic王冰 譯/Translated by WANG Bing

延森與斯科溫建筑師事務(wù)所的兩位主持設(shè)計師楊·奧拉夫·延森和博瑞·斯科溫已經(jīng)在挪威建筑界的前沿奮斗了超過10個年頭。他們就讀于奧斯陸建筑與設(shè)計學(xué)院，曾經(jīng)師從挪威戰(zhàn)后最重要的3位建筑師：斯韋勒·費(fèi)恩、克里斯蒂安·諾貝格-舒爾茨和文克·塞爾默。他們的設(shè)計語匯簡單直接，創(chuàng)造出一些獨(dú)特而富于前瞻性的建筑作品，在這些項目中，自然環(huán)境往往扮演著重要角色。哈爾沃·魏德·埃勒夫森和米爾扎·穆葉齊諾維奇對此展開了挪威建筑物質(zhì)與非物質(zhì)限制性的討論。

哈爾沃·魏德·埃勒夫森和米爾扎·穆葉齊諾維奇（E&M）:讓我們從頭開始吧。在你們開始合作時都做了哪些類型的項目？

博瑞·斯科溫（BS）:還是在1990年代中期，當(dāng)時新奧斯陸機(jī)場正在建設(shè)中。我們早期的許多項目都是些小型的建筑設(shè)計委托，如噪音屏和一些低成本的小型基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施建筑，這些建筑往往有著較高的科技復(fù)雜性，其中一些還是機(jī)場技術(shù)設(shè)備的一部分。雖然這些都是理性化的設(shè)計，技術(shù)性能才是側(cè)重點(diǎn)，而我們還是希望賦予其一些建筑學(xué)上的趣味性。這些項目的業(yè)主通常對建筑設(shè)計品質(zhì)的期許不高，但任何事情都還是會帶給我們意外之喜的。這些早期的項目，包括國家級旅游路線項目利亞桑登觀景臺都成為我們后期項目的試驗床。

E&M:國家級旅游路線項目為挪威建筑的探索打開了一個怎樣全新的局面呢？

楊·奧拉夫·延森（JOJ）:不論是旅游路線項目還是博瑞·斯科溫剛才提到的一些項目都沒有與建筑當(dāng)局的政策相違背，所以并沒有受到太多的關(guān)注。因此，在這些項目上我們往往有機(jī)會進(jìn)行一些特殊的嘗試?，F(xiàn)在，許多挪威建筑師希望可以制定一個統(tǒng)一的國家建筑政策，讓大家走在一條路上，我不知道建筑界的這種思潮是否會演變成一場大規(guī)模的建筑運(yùn)動。

E&M:您經(jīng)常會提到在挪威建筑生產(chǎn)的困難條件，那么，在你們最近備受贊譽(yù)的斯圖爾峽灣的夏屋項目中是否也存在同樣的情況呢？

JOJ:現(xiàn)如今挪威的建筑生產(chǎn)和30年前東歐的藝術(shù)品生產(chǎn)情形差不多。在當(dāng)時，一些特別的藝術(shù)品是在未被關(guān)注的情況下生產(chǎn)出來的。較之于大量由政府批準(zhǔn)生產(chǎn)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)件，這些優(yōu)秀的藝術(shù)品令人耳目一新。我想挪威現(xiàn)在的建筑生產(chǎn)情況可以說就和那時差不多：部分挪威建筑已經(jīng)被預(yù)先認(rèn)定的條條框框所控制，尤其是住宅項目，都多少有點(diǎn)演變成一個生態(tài)災(zāi)難了，其建造往往受限于眾多的法律條文和那些虛構(gòu)卻不容置疑的邏輯。當(dāng)然，建筑生產(chǎn)的一些領(lǐng)域還處于可管可不管的重疊區(qū)域，有些領(lǐng)域幾乎還是未知的。國家級旅游路線項目就屬于后者，一些像小木屋和夏屋這樣的極小型的委托項目是附帶其中的。然而，在官僚主義的傾向也在這里逐漸顯現(xiàn)的情況下，這個項目會何去何從，還是讓我們靜觀其變吧。

E&M:在設(shè)計中，除了嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)母拍钤O(shè)計方法外,你們所掌握的在專業(yè)建筑領(lǐng)域以建筑功能為導(dǎo)向的知識體系起到怎樣的作用呢?

BS:我們曾經(jīng)就讀于奧斯陸建筑與設(shè)計學(xué)院,現(xiàn)在也在這里執(zhí)教。學(xué)院一直專注于以概念和構(gòu)思作為建筑設(shè)計的主要創(chuàng)作源。如果想要建造一座建筑，那么也要掌握如何將抽象概念變成具體實物的發(fā)展過程。在好奇心的驅(qū)使下，我們會一直探尋什么是可能的以及如何實現(xiàn)。至于建造的知識則可以讓我們對無趣的復(fù)制生產(chǎn)免疫。

JOJ:這也與地域的建筑實踐大環(huán)境有關(guān)。以我們在奧地利的格萊興伯格溫泉療養(yǎng)院項目為例，與我們在挪威的那些較大型的項目相比較，在這里，項目的參與方更關(guān)注設(shè)計本身和建造的過程。在奧地利，設(shè)計小組會與業(yè)主方一起熱情地工作，不受合同的束縛，只為了創(chuàng)造出更好更棒的設(shè)計項目。這是出于人文的美好意愿，不幸的是，這種情況在挪威的建筑業(yè)并不常見。挪威缺乏精神追求和開放合作，法律法規(guī)永遠(yuǎn)要擺在第一位。因此，如果你想要在某種情況下修改設(shè)計，如何正確理解設(shè)計條件和修改可能帶來的后果是非常必要的。眾所周知，如何讓設(shè)計變得更好是需要工匠、工廠和建筑師三方配合的，但同時我們也知道，在挪威所采用的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)合同格式是由法律嚴(yán)格規(guī)定的，設(shè)計變更和項目后期的方案改良都幾乎是不可能的。因此，在編制挪威建筑合同標(biāo)準(zhǔn)時,那些大型的建筑承包商就設(shè)法在某些規(guī)定中加入對他們有利的條款。他們認(rèn)為，對每個設(shè)計階段的任務(wù)都做出明確定義才是最好的，這樣每個階段都有質(zhì)量保證，從而確保項目進(jìn)程的順利推進(jìn)。然而事實上，總是會在設(shè)計中出現(xiàn)許多懸而未決的問題，這往往是導(dǎo)致法律糾紛的潛在因素。

BS:我們最大的擔(dān)心是，挪威社會正在朝著越來越不愿承擔(dān)風(fēng)險的方向發(fā)展，就要成為一個自閉、缺乏創(chuàng)新的非生產(chǎn)性社會了。100年前，挪威投入了大筆金錢用于國家建設(shè)升級，在當(dāng)時的國家國民生產(chǎn)總值中占了很大比例，那是一個真正雄心勃勃的開發(fā)計劃。同樣，還有挪威的石油產(chǎn)業(yè)，其發(fā)展也受到了政府程序和民主原則的雙重支持。我們可以贏得很多，輸?shù)暮苌?，并抓住機(jī)會。今天，我們將失去所有，換來相對較少的財富和安全。我們都害怕失敗，然而在這樣的社會環(huán)境中，沒人能夠發(fā)展出一個創(chuàng)新型社會，更不用說創(chuàng)新的建筑了。

E&M:從這個角度看，挪威好像是一個不怎么適合建筑師發(fā)展的國家，但從外界看，似乎挪威的建筑很有意思，并且設(shè)計傭金豐厚。

JOJ:我記得在奧地利，我們與當(dāng)?shù)氐暮献髡叩谝淮螘鏁r，他們就表示：挪威建筑師的地位要高于奧地利建筑師。我告訴他們，情況正好相反。同樣的答案，我也曾經(jīng)告訴過瑞士的馬塞爾·梅里，當(dāng)時，瑞士或奧地利的建筑報導(dǎo)給我們留下了深刻的印象。所有國家都會宣傳他們排名前10的建筑。如果你說挪威建筑的國際形象與實際的建筑生產(chǎn)不匹配，這是真的，可能在挪威也會有非常糟糕的建筑，和其他國家一樣。幾年前，我買了一本關(guān)于圣保羅大教堂的書。書中就描述了大教堂的建筑師克里斯托弗·雷恩與教堂的神職人員由于工程期限和項目成本問題產(chǎn)生了一些矛盾。幸運(yùn)的是，王室出面調(diào)解，并為建筑的竣工提供了必要的資金支持。那些最有趣的建筑的誕生都不會是一帆風(fēng)順的，在某些階段或某個節(jié)點(diǎn)上總會有些不幸的事情發(fā)生。引人注目的建筑注定不能中庸，也不可能讓每個人都支持?？磥?，傳統(tǒng)的前提是沒有沖突。

BS:有些人認(rèn)為建筑必須是顛覆性的，要突破其限制。然而在挪威，建筑都是根據(jù)其實際的用途量身打造的。挪威的戰(zhàn)后建筑產(chǎn)業(yè)告訴我們，建筑是受嚴(yán)格法規(guī)和有限資源限定的。今天，這意味著單單出于喜好而去做的事情會被認(rèn)為是不道德的，從我們在斯圖爾峽灣夏屋項目的一些反饋中就體現(xiàn)了這一點(diǎn)。一些人只是片面地關(guān)注建筑的實用價值，而不相信真正奇妙的空間體驗。在做格萊興伯格溫泉療養(yǎng)院項目時，我們?nèi)ゲ歼_(dá)佩斯參觀了蓋勒特浴場。這個建筑最突出的特點(diǎn)是在它的挑高空間中設(shè)置了許多無功能空間，其主要目的是為了加深和增強(qiáng)游客的體驗印象。設(shè)置多余的無功能空間，這在當(dāng)代的建筑界幾乎聞所未聞，這幫助我們思考應(yīng)該如何設(shè)置和組織格萊興伯格溫泉療養(yǎng)院的功能空間。事實上，基本不可能建造如此“慷慨”的空間，我們嘗試用一種替代性的方式去組織功能區(qū)域，創(chuàng)造出一種“空間富余”的錯覺體驗。在現(xiàn)如今的挪威建筑業(yè)，除了那些被賦予非物質(zhì)性或精神價值的建筑

jan Olav jensen and B?rre Skodvin from jensen & Skodvin Arkitekter have been in the forefront of Norwegian architecture for over a decade. Educated at the Oslo School of Architecture and Design, they were students of three of Norway's most important post-war architects; Sverre Fehn, Christian Norberg Schulz and Wenche Selmer. eir outspoken disciplinary integrity has led to a handful of unique and advanced architectural projects, where the landscape-context plays a central role. Halvor Weider Ellefsen and Mirza Mujezinovic discussed both the material and immaterial constraints of Norwegian Architecture.

Halvor Weider Ellefsen & Mirza Mujezinovic (E&M):Let us start from the very beginning? What kind of projects did you have when you started your collaboration?

B?rre Skodvin (BS):This was in the mid 1990s and the new Oslo airport was under construction. Many of our early projects were minor building commissions, such as noise screens and small lowcost infrastructural buildings with high technical complexity, some of them a part of the airport technical facilities. It was an unsentimental context, where technical performance was the primary focus. Still we had the ambition to make something architecturally interesting: Since the clients of these project usually had very modest expectations with regards to architectural quality, anything that could be baked in came as pure bonus. These early commissions, including the "National Tourist Routes" project "Liasanden lay-by," became the test bed for many of our later projects.

E&M:To which degree have the Tourist Route commissions opened up of a new space for architectural exploration in Norway?

Jan Olav Jensen (JOJ):Both the tourist routecommissions and the projects B?rre Skodvin refers to were made on the outside of the politically correct architecture bureaucracy, and did not receive much attention. Therefore, these projects had a greater chance of developing into something special. Today there are many architects in Norway that want外（例如教堂或圖書館），極少有項目會像蓋勒特浴場這樣被允許建造這種無功能空間。但是，在其他類型的建筑設(shè)計中，這些方面一般是不會論及的，盡管事實上，所有的建筑都會是我們生存環(huán)境的構(gòu)成部分，從而影響我們的生活和幸福。大部分的結(jié)果只是平庸無奇。

E&M:在你們對斯圖爾峽灣夏屋的項目描述中，使用了像“幾何改造”和“獨(dú)立復(fù)合體系”這樣的建筑術(shù)語。在我們看來，這個項目整合、連接并且發(fā)展了你們早期項目的主題和思考。

JOJ:我覺得這個項目在挪威的建筑評論家中間是評價比較低的：根本分歧在于注重創(chuàng)作本身的建筑構(gòu)成還是基于地塊無法改變的實際條件而形成的建筑構(gòu)成。這并不是新的主題，在一些建筑師的項目中早已有所體現(xiàn)。例如，路易斯·康的幾個廣場項目，以及斯韋勒·費(fèi)恩的諾爾雪平別墅，更不用說約翰·海杜克和他的德克薩斯7住宅項目，皆是研究我們所謂的理想建筑形式。當(dāng)然，還有帕拉第奧的圓廳別墅。更近期的建筑師還有像彼得·馬克里、彼得·卒姆托、克里斯蒂安·克雷茲和瓦勒里歐·奧加提。他們的作品兼顧識別性和功能性，富于表現(xiàn)力，在所有不朽的優(yōu)秀建筑作品中是一個主要的組成部分。這一類型的建筑通常包含一些不同類型間清晰并且先進(jìn)的對稱性，能夠吸納附隨的偏差。幾何沖擊，就像藍(lán)天組的作品所表現(xiàn)的，則是另外一種完全不同的類型。斯圖爾峽灣的夏屋并不屬于上述的兩種類型，它不是一個隨意開發(fā)的產(chǎn)物，其最終的建筑構(gòu)成是必然的，但并不是一個嚴(yán)格的對稱體系。更確切地說，它是一個現(xiàn)實的項目，是有著幾何嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)性的一種不同的建筑形態(tài)。我們有一個知道該如何工作的建造系統(tǒng)，但我們無法確切地知道最終會呈現(xiàn)什么。在建造的同時我們必須勘測基地，比如，挖掘后石塊是否松動，還要應(yīng)對其他意想不到的新狀況，這些往往會在建造期間改變建筑的體量和它們相互間的關(guān)系。

E&M:那么，如何處理對基地進(jìn)行的改造，而無需將其徹底破壞？

JOJ:基地改造都是屬于幾何層面的范疇，可以根據(jù)其構(gòu)造靈活處理。這種方法就無法應(yīng)用在像安德列·帕拉第奧的圓廳別墅這類的幾何形狀的項目中。這是一個被許多挪威建筑師熱議的話題。一個典型的例子是斯韋勒·費(fèi)恩的北歐館—— 一個與當(dāng)?shù)丨h(huán)境相融的豐碑式的建筑。斯圖爾峽灣夏屋就延續(xù)了這個思路。

2 居德布蘭河谷項目細(xì)部/Detail from Gudbrandsjuvet（圖片來源/Courtesy of the architect）to define a common national architecture policy. They want to make everyone march together. I do not know where this idea of architecture as a mass movement comes from.

E&M:You often mention the difficult conditions for architecture production in Norway. But your recent much-acclaimed summerhouse in Storfjord is conceived and realized within the very same conditions that you criticize?

JOJ:Today's architecture production in Norway may be compared to art production in Eastern Europe thirty years ago, where a particular segment was produced "below the radar" so to speak. ese were good and refreshing projects, contrasted by the large body of governmental approved standard projects. I think this may be said about the architecture production in Norway as well: Some segments of Norwegian architecture production have been colonized by predefined truths. This especially applies to housing, which have become somewhat of an ecological disaster, defned by abundant laws and fictive, yet unquestionable logics. There are some areas within the architecture production that are in the overlap between being just-enough predefined, and there are areas which are almost uncharted territory. The National Tourist Routes Program belongs to the latter ones, along with micro commissions like cabins and summerhouses. Let us see how the National Tourist Routes Program evolves, as there are bureaucratic tendencies that slowly emerge also here.

E&M:To which degree does your obtained knowledge of building function as a navigation tool within a professionalized architecture industry, compared to a strictly conceptual approach?

BS:The Oslo School of Architecture and Design, where we studied and where we also teach, has always had a focus on conceptual and idea-based thinking as the main source of the architectural design. If one wants to build, then one needs also to master the process of developing the conceptual into physical objects in the world. It is where my curiosity has been – questioning what it is possible and how it may be achieved. Knowledge of how to build is an effective vaccine against producing uninteresting imitations.

JOJ:It is also about the context where one practices. My experience from the Gleichenberg ermal Bath project that we did in Austria, compared to the larger projects that we have done in Norway, is that there are certain contexts where involved parties are more engaged in the design and building process. In Austria we experienced that the project team together with the clients were eager to go outside the contract in order to create better and nicer design solutions. There was a cultural good will, which unfortunately is difcult to fnd in the construction industry in Norway. ere is a lack of spirit and open collaboration, where juridical aspects always come first. Therefore it has become a necessity to really understand conditions and consequences of what may happen if one wants to alter the design at some point. We all know that a design can get better in a collaborative dialogue between the craftsman, the building industry and the architect. Simultaneously as we know that the standard contract forms being used in Norway, are so juridically rigid that it is almost impossible to alter and subsequently improve the project later. The cause for this is the fact that the large building contractors have managed to lobby certain provisions that favor their part in the Norwegian standard for contracting. ey state that it is optimal to do the design in well-defned stages, where each stage is quality assured and thereby an irreversible milestone in the process, despite the fact that there are always many unresolved issues within the design itself, something that may potentially be a subject of legal dispute.

BS:Our biggest concern is that the Norwegian society is being developed in a direction where one is increasingly more hesitant to take risks. We are about to become an introspective and unproductive society that lacks innovation. A hundred years ago, the amount of money spent on upgrading Norwegian lighthouses was immense compared to the country's GNP at the time. It was a truly ambitious project. The same applies to the development of the Norwegian oil sector, where one went outside both bureaucratic procedures and democratic principles in the process. We could win a lot and lose very little, and took the chance. Today we have everything to lose and relatively little to win in terms of wealth and security. We are afraid of failure. One cannot develop an innovative society, much less an innovative architecture, from such a context.

E&M:Seen from this perspective, Norway seems to be a difficult place to be an architect. But from the outside, Norway appears like a country of both interesting architecture and lucrative commissions.

JOJ:I remember the frst meeting in Austria where our local collaborators meant that architects in Norway had a much higher status than what they had in Austria. I've been told the same from Marcel Meili in Switzerland, while we, impressed by Swiss or Austrian published architecture, claim the opposite. All countries broadcast their top-ten architecture list. When you say that the international image of architecture production in Norway is unbalanced, it is true, but there is probably as much bad architecture in Norway as in other countries. Some years ago I bought a book about St. Pauls Cathedral. Christopher Wren, the Cathedral's architect, was in confict with the clergy due to deadlines and project costs. Luckily, the Royal family intervened and provided the funding necessary for the building's completion. The point is that most interesting architecture have on some level and at some point been in misfortune. Always! Interesting architecture cannot be in the middle; everyone cannot support it. It seems that the premise for the conventional is lack of confict.

BS:Some claim architecture must be subversive, and brought to its limits. In Norway, however, architecture is habitually measured by its practical uses alone. The Norwegian postwar building industry taught us that architecture was defned by strict discipline and limited resources. Today, this means that making something solely meant to be pleasant is considered outright immoral, something reflected in parts of the feedback we have got on Summer house Storfjord. The unilateral focus on a building's utilitarian value discredits the experience of truly fantastic spaces. While we worked on the Gleichenberg Thermal Bath project we went toBudapest to see the Gellert bath. One of the most striking features of this building is the amount of un-programmed areas that are found within its high lofted spaces. The main purpose of these spaces was to enhance and intensify the experience of the visitors. is excess of unprogrammed space is almost unheard of in contemporary architecture, and it raised our awareness of how we arranged and organized the programmed areas of the Gleichenberg spa. Lacking the possibility to actually build such generous spaces, we tried to organize the programmed areas in a way that instead could provide an "illusion of excess". In the Norwegian building-industry of today, there are few programs that allow for building the type of "non-utilitarian" space that we found in the Gellert bath. Exceptions are buildings where there is consensus around the significance of embedding immaterial or spritual values, like churches or libraries. But when working with other building-programs these perspectives are generally not discussed, despite the fact that all architecture will constitute a part of our physical environment, and thus affect our lives and wellbeing. The result is mediocrity.

BS:就像奧加提所宣稱的一個建筑理念——建筑的構(gòu)想或多或少會獨(dú)立于其環(huán)境關(guān)系,而一個關(guān)聯(lián)性的建筑往往是植根于環(huán)境的，二者有著很大區(qū)別。奧加提認(rèn)為，這種關(guān)聯(lián)建筑是比較差的，其產(chǎn)生幾乎是偶然的，我們并不贊成這種說法。建筑的演變是一個持續(xù)的與環(huán)境相協(xié)商的過程，每一個決定都會產(chǎn)生其后果：過去的選擇構(gòu)成未來的框架。斯圖爾峽灣夏屋就是很實際的，它是一個根據(jù)基地環(huán)境不斷修改、不斷變化的最終產(chǎn)物。

E&M:我們用了“低調(diào)的張揚(yáng)”這樣的詞去形容某些挪威建筑師看似輕描淡寫的高品質(zhì)作品。在他們的作品中，是如何論述關(guān)于建筑、環(huán)境和工藝之間的相互關(guān)系呢？對于這類“環(huán)境決定建筑”的項目，我們鮮有聽到“偉大”、“不朽”這類的描述。

JOJ:我絕對認(rèn)為斯圖爾峽灣夏屋是意義非常的項目。這是一個在特定條件下完成的建設(shè)任務(wù)，由于環(huán)境與景觀的影響，最終的結(jié)果已經(jīng)大大偏離了我們預(yù)定的設(shè)計。不怎么謙虛地說，它是一座不顯眼的豐碑式建筑！

BS:那些被強(qiáng)調(diào)的“低調(diào)”在我看來是更具吸引力的，例如，怎樣用簡單的線條將一塊巖壁從室外引入室內(nèi)。這是發(fā)生在兩個沖突的領(lǐng)域間的一種博弈：受約束的項目環(huán)境和將之改變的不受控制、無法預(yù)知的自然。

E&M:利亞桑登休息站項目展示了一個很強(qiáng)烈的“應(yīng)和自然”的設(shè)計概念。該項目是一個設(shè)計策略，詳細(xì)設(shè)計是其發(fā)展的結(jié)果，并直接反應(yīng)在策略中。莫滕斯魯?shù)陆烫庙椖渴沁@一主題的延展：室內(nèi)保留的自然元素，還有橫跨在裸露基巖之上的鋼構(gòu)架……

而斯圖爾峽灣夏屋項目則是參照前例，不過所采用的形式更為精妙，而且“應(yīng)和自然”的設(shè)計概念仍然保留著。是否可以認(rèn)為斯圖爾峽灣夏屋就是“約翰·勞特納”版的利亞桑登休息站？

JOJ:我并不相信真的有什么特別的專為男人或女人而造的建筑，但你應(yīng)該了解客戶。就像夏屋項目的業(yè)主，我們已經(jīng)和他接觸了多年，這個項目非常適合他，也是他喜歡的。雖然我們有作為建筑師的特質(zhì)，但客戶的需求在我們所有的作品中也是無處不體現(xiàn)的?？傊?，我們就是裁縫，為客戶量身打造適合他們的建筑，我們也會不斷調(diào)整設(shè)計以迎合客戶的需求。我們的建筑是它的使用者定義的，我們只是將它表達(dá)出來?！?/p>

E&M:In your descriptions of Summer house Storford, you use terms like "geometric disruptions" and "independent overlapping systems" to describe the building. In our eyes, this project collects, connects and evolve themes and discussions from your earlier projects?

JOJ:is is something I feel is undervalued among Norwegian architectural critics: The fundamental difference between self-referential ideal architectural compositions and compositions that are conditioned by for instance a site that cannot be altered. The thematic is not new, it is found among architects like Louis Kahn exemplified by several of his square projects, as well as Sverre Fehn and his Norrk?ping house, not to mention john Hejduk and his Seven Texas houses and studies on what one can call ideal architectural form. And of course there is Palladio and Villa Rotunada. More recently, we have architects like Peter M?rkli, Peter zumthor, Christian Kerez and Valerio Olgiati. Their work is about identifying and manipulating complex systems and giving these systems presence, a main ingredient in all monumental architecture. is type of architecture is one that often contains a number of clear and advanced symmetries of different types, capable of absorbing subsequent deviations. Geometric collision, like in the work of Coop Himmelb(l)au is something totally different. Summer house Storfjord is neither of these; it is not an art-piece of random explorations that result in a final composition and definitely not a strict symmetrical system. Rather, it is a pragmatic project with a different form of geometric rigor. We had a construction system we knew would work – what we did not know was exactly how it would turn out. We had to do surveys on site while building, after uncovering for instance loose stones and other unexpected new conditions, something that altered the building volumes and their reciprocal relations during the construction period.

E&M:So, how to handle disruptions without risking dismantlement?

JOJ:The disruptions are strictly on a geometrical level, a defined compositional flexibility. This approach would not work in the types of geometries found in i.e. Andrea Palladio's Villa Rotunda. It is a thematic discussed by many Norwegian architects. A classic example is Sverre Fehn's Nordic Pavilion that links a monumental architecture with a vernacular one. Summerhouse Storford continues this path of thought.

BS:It is like Olgiati's distinction between what he calls an architecture of ideas, which is conceived more or less independently of its context relation, and a relational architecture that is informed by its environment. While Olgiati tends to speak of this relational architecture as something inferior and almost accidental, we rather favour this approach.The architecture evolves in a continuous negotiation with its context where each decision that is made will have consequences: The choices of the past constitute the framework of the future. at is what makes Storfjord pragmatic; it is a consequence of constantly changing terms.

E&M:We've used the term "humble arrogance" to describe the ambiguity of the downplayed, but upscale architecture of certain Norwegian architects, and how they discuss the relation between architecture, landscape and craftsmanship in their work. We seldom hear the term monumentality used to describe this type of context-driven projects?

JOJ:I would definitely claim that Summerhouse Storfjord is monumental. It is a consequence of specific conditions embedded in the building assignment, something that allowed us to diverge from the predefined norms for landscape interventions. How swaggering can you allow yourself to be? It is a form of camouflaged monumentality!

BS:What some emphasize as humbleness is for my own part more a fascination for e.g. how a rock cliff is brought from the exterior to the interior with a simple line. It's a kind of game taking place between two colliding worlds: The controlled project environment and the unrestrained and unpredictable nature that alters it.

E&M:Liasanden rest stop exposes a strong conceptual approach to the landscape. The project is a strategy, while the detailing becomes a consequence and direct reaction to this strategy. Mortensrud Church is more of a motif-collage: A staging of nature inn-doors, where we fnd the steel construction straddling over exposed bedrock…

Storfjord, however, is self-referential, where the use of motifs is subtler, while the conceptual approach to landscape is maintained. Could Summerhouse Storfjord be described as a "john Lautner" version of Liasanden?

JOJ:Well, I don't really believe in the existence of a particular masculine architecture, but you should have met the client! We have been close to him for years, and the project suited him very well – it is a project that he loves. Although we have our particularities as architects, the client is omnipresent in all our work. All in all, we are tailors, continuously adapting our projects to benefit the needs of our clients. Our buildings become as much defned by them, as they are articulated by us.□

哈爾沃·魏德·埃勒夫森，建筑師，2005年畢業(yè)于丹麥皇家藝術(shù)學(xué)院。米爾扎·穆葉齊諾維奇，建筑師，MALARCHITECTURE事務(wù)所主持人，2001年畢業(yè)于挪威科技大學(xué)，2004年獲哥倫比亞大學(xué)研究生學(xué)位。他們二人目前均為奧斯陸建筑與藝術(shù)學(xué)院在讀博士生及助理教授，奧斯陸“定制”建筑展策展人，同時也是本期《世界建筑》專輯的客座編輯。/Halvor Weider Ellefsen, architect, graduated as an architect from the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts in Copenhagen (2005). Mirza Mujezinovic, architect, principal ofMALARCHITECTURE. He graduated at NTNU in Trondheim (2001). As a Fulbright Fellow he was awarded postgraduate degree at the GSAPP at Columbia University in New York (2004). They are both Ph.D research fellows and assistant professors at The Oslo School of Architecture and Design (AHO), curators of "Custom made" exhibition in Oslo (2013), and guest editors of this issue of World Architecture.

2014-03-22