皮波·喬拉，馬爾塔·阿采尼/Pippo Ciorra, Marta Atzeni

尚晉 譯/Translated by SHANG Jin

1 沼澤館草圖/Sketch of the Swamp Pavilion（圖片來源/Source: K?stutis Vaik?noras）

1 超越國家館

對于一個充滿朝氣和活力、立志在國際文化討論中發(fā)聲的國家，參加威尼斯雙年展是勢在必行又充滿挑戰(zhàn)的一步。作為1895年創(chuàng)立的首個全球國際性藝術(shù)展會，這家意大利機(jī)構(gòu)被普遍認(rèn)為是展示當(dāng)代藝術(shù)和建筑潮流的頂級展會，即便世界各地不乏對手和效仿者的批評和競爭。雙年展盛名不衰，其在綠城花園建造28個國家館的模式也大行其道。由于國家館數(shù)量固定并有各國特色，這種方式就否定了走向變化無常的地緣政治和民族國家霸權(quán)的全球大潮。此外，它迫使沒有常設(shè)館的國家殫精竭慮地在軍械庫1）或威尼斯尋找金砂般難得的空間，給威尼斯人創(chuàng)造了暴利的臨時地產(chǎn)市場。

因此，立陶宛恢復(fù)獨(dú)立100周年之際，在2018年建筑雙年展上首次單獨(dú)亮相。它的首個國家館成為考察展示一個國家的意義的絕好機(jī)會。

由藝術(shù)家和建筑師組成的國際團(tuán)隊2），以宏觀的視角回顧了雙年展的矛盾并作出應(yīng)對，在其構(gòu)思的策略中融合了地方性和全球性。一方面，它挑戰(zhàn)了威尼斯作為永恒古跡的典型展示方式——事實上每天它都面臨著破壞性旅游、商業(yè)開發(fā)、本體退化、洪水和下沉的威脅。另一方面，它探討了今天影響著人類方方面面的氣候變化、政治動蕩和經(jīng)濟(jì)不平等帶來的物質(zhì)和精神上的不確定性。

2 向沼澤學(xué)習(xí)

浮于海陸之間的威尼斯，在淺水的保護(hù)與威脅之下，因其沼澤般的特征而美，也因此而脆弱。沼澤危機(jī)四伏又魅力無窮，在變幻莫測的邊界和形狀中蘊(yùn)藏著獨(dú)特的、生機(jī)勃勃的稀有動植物生態(tài)系統(tǒng)。它是一個活態(tài)有機(jī)體，任何邊界在其中都將失去意義，并會被質(zhì)疑。沼澤模糊了人與自然的界線，揭示出我們內(nèi)在的混雜性。因此它成為一種后現(xiàn)代性戰(zhàn)場的象征，其中包含著自然的思想，關(guān)于人類與非人類存在物的問題、歷史的層次，甚至未來的可能性。

立陶宛策展團(tuán)隊借鑒了沼澤和它包羅萬象的特性，并嘗試為雙年展的發(fā)展創(chuàng)造一種替代模式。他們沒有占用愈發(fā)珍貴的城市土地和區(qū)劃，而是構(gòu)想出一種開放性和生成性的城市區(qū)域，創(chuàng)造出一種讓新老社區(qū)兼容并蓄的活態(tài)有機(jī)體。這是一個屬于所有人又不屬于任何人的“灰色區(qū)域”，正如一片沼澤。

最后，團(tuán)隊發(fā)現(xiàn)威尼斯唯一還能建設(shè)的地方其實不在陸上，而是一片三角形的水域。這片由公共花園大街的切角形成的空地緊鄰雙年展區(qū)。市政府文件將其列為“未開發(fā)土地”（terreno incolto），非常適于沼澤地建筑探索——不會再有比它更適合“沼澤館”的場地了。

3 邊緣上的沼澤

為了將設(shè)想變成項目，策展團(tuán)隊與充滿活力的立陶宛建筑師進(jìn)行了開放的對話。通過一系列別開生面的工作坊3），由15位公開選拔出來的青年設(shè)計師4）組成的團(tuán)隊提出了雄心勃勃的方案：一個處在三角地邊緣上的寄生沼澤5）[1]。

1 Beyond the national pavilion

For a young and lively country willing to have a voice in the international cultural debate, taking part to the Venice Biennale is a step as necessary as challenging.Established in 1895 as the first international art exhibition worldwide, the Italian institution, despite the criticism and competition of rivals and imitators around the world, is widely recognised as the most important showcase to display contemporary trends in art and architecture. As Biennale's reputation remains unaltered,so does its model based on the 28 national pavilions built in the Giardini. With pavilions fixed in number and nationally defined, this scheme denies the global trend towards mutating geo-politics and the uncertain nationstate hegemony. Moreover it forces nations without permanent pavilions into a desperate search for a space like gold dust in either the Arsenale1）or Venice, resulting in an extraordinarily lucrative temporary real estate market for Venetians.

Thus when Lithuania, on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of its restored independence, makes its debut as an individual country to the Biennale Architettura 2018, its first pavilion becomes an extraordinary occasion to question the relevance of a single country's representation.

Reflecting on and reacting to the Biennale's contradictions in a wider context, the strategy conceived by the international team2）of artists and architects combines the local with the global realm. On one hand it challenges the typical representation of Venice as unalterable monument, in fact everyday threatened by aggressive tourism, commercial exploitation, decay,floods, and sinking. On the other, it addresses the sense of material and immaterial uncertainty, due to climate change, political instability and economic inequality,nowadays affecting humankind on all levels.

2 Learning from the Swamp

Suspended between land and sea, protected and at the same time threatened by shallow waters, Venice owes its beauty and fragility to its swampy nature. The swamp is as dangerous as charming, hosting within its mutating boundaries and undefined shape a unique,incredibly vital ecosystem of rare animals and greenery. It is a living organism where any borders loose meaning and become questionable. Blurring the line between human and nature, the swamp reveals our intrinsic hybridity. It then becomes the metaphor of such battlefields of post modernity as the idea of nature, the issues concerning the human and the non-human, the strata of history, even the possibility of a future.

Drawing from the swamp and its inclusive nature,Lithuanian curatorial team tried to devise an alternative model of growth for the Biennale. Rather than claiming increasingly precious urban land and territorial divisions,they envisage an open and generative urbanism,giving rise to a living organism including both existing communities and new ones. A grey zone, belonging to all and to no one, just as a swamp.

Eventually, it turns out the only remaining area where construction would be possible in Venice is not actually a tract of land, but a triangular patch of water.An empty plot just outside the Biennale created by the cut corner of viale dei Giardini Pubblici listed in city documents as terreno incolto – uncultivated land, ripe for swampy inhabitation and discovery. It would have been impossible to choose a better site for The Swamp Pavilion.

3 The Swamp at the edge

To turn their vision into a project, the curatorial team engages in an open dialogue with the vibrant community of Lithuanian architects. Through a series of lively workshops3）the group of 15 young designers4）selected via an open call set the ambitious proposal of a parasitic5）[1]swamp inhabiting the edge of the triangle.

Along viale dei Giardini Pubblici, just where Venice's ground and water mingle, curators and architects propose a 60 metres long double deck structure supported by wooden pilings. From a ramp right on the public pathway,visitors would access the upper level of the pavilion.Conceived as a link between solid ground and wetlands,it would consist of a stable and heavily engineered metal grid platform from whose punctures and random hatches visitors would glimpse and glance the activities taking place on the lower level of the structure. Once downstairs, they would find themselves on a plastic pontoons platform, floating on the water, and oscillating according to waves and tides. On this unstable ground people could experience the swamp environment directly,moving from the smells of the olfactory space, through the wetlands plants of the herbarium up to the processes of the fermentation and filtration labs.

This temporary and changeable campo6）would act as a platform for sensorial experiences, workshops,performances, and screenings. A new kind of public space between air and water, free and accessible to anyone, for sensing and imagining alternative models of living for a possible future.

4 The Swamp School

Despite the efforts of the curatorial team and the extensive materials in support of the application, the municipality of Venice denied the building permission.Forced to leave the edge of the city, the Swamp moves into the heart of Castello, finding a new location at the intersection of Arsenale and Giardini. According to its parasitic nature, it temporarily occupies Giardino Bianco Art Space. Turning the gallery rooms into a pedagogical laboratory for exploring the imaginary of the wetlands through sensorial experiences and learning activities, the pavilion evolves into The Swamp School. Its structure unfolds in three workshops led by a community of international artists, architects, designers, sociologists and philosophers. The first one is Swamp Radio, a program of live broadcasts that drawing from Brecht's idea of radio as an "apparatus of communication"[2]will engage its audience in a variety of acoustic explorations in space. The second, Futurity Island, will focus on symbiopoetics as a means to investigate new forms of living in a world shaped by dramatic environmental changes. The third workshop, Commonism, will explore new forms of co-habitation between people and between human and non-human beings. Furthermore, taking advantage of its location within the city, the Swamp will accommodate the public realm of Castello with a number of pop-up activities, such as sound experiments with tailor-made speakers, social games to experience physical forces as well as mobile units broadcasting radio performances around the streets.

Immersed in the city of Venice and free from the temporal and spatial borders of Biennale's main venues the Swamp School will add to the Biennale, to Venice,and to the global arena a free space open for debate,experimentation and research on the emergent condition of post-nationalism.

Rather than a completed project, Lithuanian proposal will go on developing during the six-months of the Biennale, an open-ended and networked process unfolding in space and time. Instead of a single model for the Biennale, the city of Venice, and planet, an urban room for imagining possibilities of the future.□

沿著公共花園大街，在威尼斯水陸交界處，策展人和建筑師提出了一個60m長、由木樁支撐的雙層結(jié)構(gòu)。觀眾從公共路的坡道上可以到達(dá)立陶宛館的上層。作為硬地與濕地的連接體，它有一個堅固、整體設(shè)計的金屬格架。透過它的洞口和隨意排列的小窗，觀眾就能窺見建筑下層的活動。下樓后會來到一個漂在水面上的塑料浮臺，隨著浪潮上下起伏。在這個漂浮不定的底面上，人們能夠切身感到沼澤環(huán)境的特征——從嗅覺空間的氣味，到標(biāo)本區(qū)的濕地植物，再到發(fā)酵和過濾實驗室的各種工序。

這種臨時、靈活的廣場（campo）6）可以作為感官體驗、工作坊、表演和放映的平臺。這是天水之間的新公共空間，人人皆可自由享受，去感受和想象未來的替代生活模式。

2沼澤館示意圖/Diagram of the Swamp Pavilion（圖片來源/Source: Paulius Vaitiekūnas, Andrius Ropolas, Jautra Bernotait?）

4 沼澤學(xué)校

盡管策展團(tuán)隊付出了心血，并有大量材料支撐申請，威尼斯市政府還是沒有通過建筑許可。沼澤館被迫離開城市的邊緣，進(jìn)入城堡區(qū)中心，在軍械庫和綠城花園的交界處找到了一個新地點(diǎn)。按照其寄生特性，它臨時占用了賈爾迪諾·比安科藝術(shù)空間。該館將展廳改為以感官體驗和學(xué)習(xí)活動探索濕地想象的教學(xué)實驗室，并以此成為“沼澤學(xué)?！?。其結(jié)構(gòu)以國際藝術(shù)家、建筑師、設(shè)計師、社會學(xué)家和哲學(xué)家主持的三個工作坊展開。第一個是“沼澤電臺”。這個直播節(jié)目以布雷希特將廣播作為“溝通設(shè)備”的思想[2]為基礎(chǔ)，通過各種聲學(xué)空間的探索與聽眾互動。第二個是“未來之島”。它以“共生詩學(xué)”在由環(huán)境劇變形成的世界中探索新的生活方式。第3個工作坊“共存主義”將探討人與人、人類與非人類存在物之間共存的新形式。此外，沼澤館將利用其在城市中的位置優(yōu)勢，在城堡區(qū)的公共區(qū)域舉辦多種臨時性活動，比如定制喇叭的音響試驗、體會物理作用力的社交游戲，以及在街頭播放廣播節(jié)目的移動設(shè)備。

在威尼斯市的環(huán)抱中，不受雙年展主展場時空約束的“沼澤學(xué)校”將給雙年展、給威尼斯、給全球舞臺一個自由的空間，向著新興起的后民族主義狀態(tài)的討論、試驗和研究敞開。

立陶宛館方案并非一個完成的項目，而會在雙年展的6個月中持續(xù)發(fā)展，成為在時空中展開的開放式、網(wǎng)絡(luò)化過程。它不是雙年展、威尼斯市和地球上的單一模式，而是想象多種未來的城市大廳?！?/p>

項目信息/Credits and Data

委托人/Commissioner: Pippo Ciorra

策展人/Curators: Nomeda and Gediminas Urbonas

制作人/Producer: Sandra ?lepikait?, Architektūros Fondas策展助理/Assistant Curators: Jautra Bernotait?, Andrius Ropolas, Kristupas Sabolius, Indr? Umbrasait?, Paulius Vaitiekūnas

項目大使/Project Ambassador: Julija Reklait?

項目經(jīng)理/Project Manager: Mindaugas Reklaitis

制作協(xié)調(diào)人/Production Coordinators: Adel? Dovydavi?iūt?,Indr? Ruseckait?, Alessandro Zorzetto

出品/Presented by: 立陶宛文化委員會/The Lithuanian Council for Culture

參考文獻(xiàn)/References

[1]Marini, Sara, Architettura parassita. Strategie di riciclaggio per la città, Quodlibet, Macerata, 2008.

[2]Brecht, Bertolt, Der Rundfunk als Kommunikationsapparat, in Bjitter des Hessischen Landestheaters Darmstadt, No. 16, July 1932.

注釋/Notes

1）1980年起，軍械庫與綠城花園合為雙年展官方主展場/Since 1980 Arsenale is Biennale's main official venue in conjunction with Giardini.

2）見文末項目信息/See project credits at the end of the article.

3）設(shè)計工作坊在尼達(dá)藝術(shù)區(qū)舉行（2017年11月25-27日），隨后在維爾紐斯舉辦了多次會議/The design workshop was held at Nida Art Colony (25th -27th November 2017). It was then followed by several meetings in Vilnius.

4）Jautra Bernotait?, Rasa Chmieliauskait?, Aidas ?ergelis, Au?ra ?erniauskien?, Justinas Dūd?nas,Jurga Katakinait?-Jakubauskien?, Milda Kulvi?iūt?,Donatas Linkus, Andrius Ropolas, Antanas ?arkauskas

& Gabriel? ?arkauskien?, Indr? Umbrasait?, K?stas Vaik?noras, Paulius Vaitiekūnas, Reda Valentinavi?ien?.

5）關(guān)于寄生建筑的全面討論見參考文獻(xiàn)[1]。

6）Campo在威尼斯是“廣場”的特有名稱。