[瑞士]沃納·奧克斯林 文 Written by Werner Oechslin

汪弢 譯 Translated by Wang Tao 江嘉瑋 李鴿 校 Proofread by Jiang Jiawei & Li Ge

瑞士建筑的成功故事遠比現(xiàn)代瑞士聯(lián)邦的成立來得更早且深遠。這種成功堪稱當今這片不同文化圈滋養(yǎng)出的土地上最矚目的成績，也形成了后來舉世聞名的瑞士文化多樣性的基石。這包括位于穆斯塔（Müstair）的加洛林王朝遺址(圖1)和位于圣加侖（St.Gallen）的修道院建筑布局，它們都與位于埃辛瑙（Reichenau）的修道院（圖2）及修道院院長海托（Abbot Haito）存在一定關系；反過來，后者又與巴塞爾（Basel）的第一座大教堂的建造有關。這與庫爾（Chur）及洛桑（Lausanne）的主教座堂（圖3、圖4）都有關聯(lián)，而洛桑主教座堂更是在19世紀由維奧萊-勒-迪克（Viollet-le-Duc）以“勃艮第”哥特為藍本修復完成的重要作品。多年之后，這種多樣性在民用建筑中得到了延續(xù)，例如：蘇黎世（Zürich）的市政廳，人們總會將它與建筑師弗特巴赫（Furttenbach）的形式語言聯(lián)系在一起；納沙泰爾（現(xiàn)名Neuchatel，當時尚處于普魯士王國的控制下）的市政廳，勒杜（Ledoux）曾參加過它的建筑競賽。最后，對于瑞士這種多樣性“傳統(tǒng)”還可以舉出一個例子，來自格勞賓登州（Graubünden）、福拉爾貝格州（Vorarlberg）和提契諾州（Ticino）的匠人從阿爾卑斯山區(qū)一直遷徙至俄羅斯以及像羅馬這樣的大文化中心。這種建造傳統(tǒng)可以回溯至中世紀。

這一切恰好契合了現(xiàn)代瑞士文化意識。從亨茨克（J.Hunziker）等人的研究開始，人們就認識到建造于阿爾卑斯山南北兩麓各種各樣的農(nóng)舍的意義，將這類研究歸為“瑞士房子”（ Schweizerhaus）。即便如此，這類農(nóng)舍也不過只是觸及了現(xiàn)代瑞士文化意識的邊緣。然而，因為政府的不作為，”威廉 ·泰爾傳奇“時期（也就是14世紀）的老房子在今天仍舊會遭到破壞。人們只有從外部來看事物，才能注意到它們與現(xiàn)代性之間明顯的文化關聯(lián)；美國建筑作家史密斯（G.E.Kidder Smith）在1950年的《瑞士建造》（Switzerland Builds）中，描述了瑞士地域性與其“本土建筑”（Native Architecture）的相生相伴，并且分析了它們與現(xiàn)代瑞士建筑的直接關系。

1815年，國家建筑走向一個現(xiàn)代、瑞士本土化的進程才開始真正啟動。之前，像在埃辛頓（Einsiedeln）或圣加侖等地方具有廣泛影響力的“巴洛克”時期建筑，與德國藝術史學家古力特（Cornelius Gurlitt）等人的德國巴洛克研究更為吻合；古力特等人大唱民族主義 （v?lkisch）的贊歌，稱贊“各個地方居民的建造保證了重要的德國身份”。在古力特等人看來，提契諾州的大師們首先就是關于提契諾地方研究與國際巴洛克學術研究的最重要對象。波洛米尼（Borromini）出生于提契諾州南部的畢索涅（Bissone），他的頭像后來也被印到了瑞士貨幣上。

近年來，許多這樣的重要傳統(tǒng)和作品都經(jīng)常得不到體現(xiàn)。在這個現(xiàn)代聯(lián)邦國家中，似乎只有民用建筑才能顯現(xiàn)“自治的瑞士建筑傳統(tǒng)（Helvetic）”，它們都因地制宜、簡約樸素。出于對造價的擔憂，當森佩爾設計蘇黎世應用技術學院（現(xiàn)蘇黎世聯(lián)邦理工學院，即ETH Zürich）（圖5）主樓時，甚至還為其配了一位瑞士本地建筑師當副手。

這座頗具代表性的主樓如同“城市之冠”（Stadtkrone）一般統(tǒng)領整個蘇黎世。一所建筑院

The success story of Swiss architecture goes back much farther than the formation of the modern nation state.It measures itself against the outstanding achievements generated in its present-day territory that originated in different cultural spheres, and which practically form a cornerstone of the later renowned cultural variety of Switzerland.To these belong the Carolingian monuments in Müstair as well as the plan of the abbey of St.Gall, which stands in relation to the abbey of Reichenau and Abbot Haito; the latter, in turn, is connected with the construction of the first minster in Basel.It concerns the cathedral in Chur as well as the one in Lausanne, which was renovated by Viollet-le-Duc in the nineteenth century as a significant work of “Burgundian” Gothic.Much later, civic buildings continued this variety, such as the Zurich city hall, which has always been linked to Furttenbach’s formal language, or the H?tel de Ville in Neuchatel — then still under Prussian rule — where Ledoux participated in the competition.The phenomenon of itinerant master builders, who went from the alpine regions all the way to Russia and the great cultural centers like Rome, furnishes a final example of this “traditional” variety: builders from Graubünden, Vorarlberg, and Ticino — this too in a building tradition reaching far back into the medieval period.

All this fits with the modern Swiss cultural attitude less rather than more.Even farm houses, which in their variety on both sides of the Alps have been recognized in their significance ever since the research of people like J.Hunziker, and have been studied as “the Swiss house,” have generally only reached the edge of modern Swiss cultural awareness.Old houses dating to the period of the Legend of William Tell are still destroyed today with the acquiescence of the state.One needs to view things from the outside in order to note an evident cultural connection with modernity; in Switzerland Builds (1950), G.E.Kidder Smith placed regional and “native architecture”in harmony and in direct connection with modern Swiss architecture.

Only after 1815 did the process of nation-building toward a modern,independent Switzerland really gain momentum.What had been created previously, in the “baroque” period, with widely influential works in Einsiedeln or St.Gallen, however, fit in better with the German baroque research of someone like Cornelius Gurlitt, who in nationalistic (“v?lkisch”)tones sang the praises of the “l(fā)ocal inhabitants who build” and the preservation of a “vital German identity.” The Ticinese masters for their part were first and foremost the subject of local research in Ticino or,indeed, of international baroque scholarship.The image of Borromini, born in Bissone, on the southern edge of Ticino, made it onto a Swiss banknote only late.

Many of these significant traditions and works have frequently been concealed in recent years.In the modern federal state it seemed only civic architecture was appropriate — and this in a suitable, rather frugal variant - for an “autonomous Helvetic architectural tradition.” From the beginning,a local architect was assigned to assist Gottfried Semper during the construction of the Polytechnikum in Zurich for fear of cost overruns.

This representative building dominates Zurich like a civic crown (“Stadtkrone”).Before an architectural school was founded in it, thus creating the basis for a continual architectural development, a discussion about the significance and function of architecture for the state and the public had already taken place in Switzerland, too, early in the nineteenth century.Topics such as the “Nutzen der allgemeinen Bildung für das Sch?ne in Formen” (“Utility of General Education for Beauty in Forms,” Melchior Berri) played a role in this.And even before the establishment of the Polytechnikum, the later ETH, Carl Ferdinand von Ehrenberg had founded a school in Zurich that examined questions like“Republikanische Einfachheit im Bauwesen”(“Republican Simplicity in Architecture”)entirely in the sense of ancient Vitruvian concepts of appropriateness in the selection of means and forms for various buildings and their purposes.Residential architecture,later housing estates, public facilities and,afterwards, industrial architecture are the tasks of architecture in the tradition of “Civil Architecture.” An architectural morphology校在此成立，后來成為連續(xù)推動建筑發(fā)展的基石。而在此之前，瑞士早在19世紀就已經(jīng)開始討論建筑在國家和公眾間的意義和使命。例如“通識教育在形式美中的應用”（“Nutzen der Allgemeinen Bildung für das Sch?ne Form”，Melchior Berri）等話題在這方面發(fā)揮過作用。甚至在蘇黎世應用技術學院成立之前，艾倫伯格( Carl Ferdinand von Ehrenberg)已經(jīng)在蘇黎世創(chuàng)立了一所學校，研究類似“建筑里的共和集約性”（“Republikanische Einfachheit im Bauwesen”）這樣的問題，它完全是在古代維特魯威式的“制宜”思想上為不同的建筑和功能選擇合適的方法和形式。住宅建筑和后來的住宅區(qū)，還有公共設施以及后來的工業(yè)建筑在“民用建筑藝術”（Zivilbaukunst）的傳統(tǒng)中都是建筑設計的任務。因此建筑形態(tài)學（Formenlehre）必須與之一致，并由此發(fā)展出培養(yǎng)建筑師的整套系統(tǒng)。倍受贊譽的瑞士建筑品質(zhì)歸功于與之相適配的連續(xù)性和學科準則。

圖1：穆斯塔修道院

圖2：埃辛瑙修道院

圖3：庫爾大教堂

圖4：洛桑大教堂

盡管勒 · 柯布西耶（Le Corbusier）的國聯(lián)大樓方案（Palais des Nations）“差一點”就變成現(xiàn)實，但從住宅建筑發(fā)展起來的現(xiàn)代瑞士建筑，在因循現(xiàn)代理念來設計傳統(tǒng)意義上的代表性建筑時還是遇到了困難。現(xiàn)代瑞士建筑還是傾向于沿用住宅建筑這條既定的道路來發(fā)展，而且時至今日一直有聲有色。住宅被視為試驗田，尤其是像混凝土這樣的新材料的試驗田。在1957年的某次展覽上，阿爾弗萊德 · 羅特（Alfred Roth）認為教堂建筑與學校建筑是兩種特別適合瑞士的建筑類型。當涉及這兩種類型時，無論使用混凝土、鋼還是玻璃作為建造材料，瑞士建筑都能設計出比其他地區(qū)更豐富的內(nèi)容。沃特 · 費德勒（Walter F?rderer）、恩斯特 · 吉斯勒（Ernst Gisel）以及從“粗野混凝土”出發(fā)創(chuàng)造新可能的建筑師們，他們特有的表現(xiàn)方式（圖6）和建筑師的藝術性一面（圖7）一并構成了現(xiàn)代瑞士建筑的成功史。這些建筑作品讓勞倫特 · 斯塔德勒（Laurent Stalder）這樣的評論家干脆就將混凝土說成是瑞士非常出色的標志。

盡管國際現(xiàn)代建筑協(xié)會（CIAM）誕生于瑞士拉薩拉茲（La Sarraz），它與國際主義有密切的聯(lián)系，而且它的辦公室、聲望卓著的秘書吉迪翁（Sigfried Giedion）也都居于蘇黎世的多德塔爾（Doldertal），然而絕不是國際現(xiàn)代建筑協(xié)會就決定了一切。漢斯·梅耶（Hannes Meyer）與漢斯·施密特（Hans Schmidt）是廣受關注但曇花一現(xiàn)的雜志《ABC:建筑文集》（ABC Beitr?ge zum Bauen）的主編，這本雜志很早就形成了一個以應對社會及政治挑戰(zhàn)為核心的觀點，它更多地源自材料和建造問題而非風格問題，尤其吸收了荷蘭的經(jīng)驗（梅耶在他擔任德紹包豪斯的校長時將這本雜志帶入了包豪斯）。同樣植根于瑞士傳統(tǒng)的HMS建筑師團隊（HMS，即Haefeli，Moser，Steiger）也獨創(chuàng)了自己的實用性建筑。這一切都贏得了好評，在第二次世界大戰(zhàn)結束后不久的1948年，魯?shù)婪?· 斯瓦茨（Rudolf Schwarz）甚至用了“瑞士派”（Helvetia docet）這樣的詞來稱贊這個小國為“富有創(chuàng)造力的邊緣地帶”。瑞士人為自己的小國感到驕傲，但也關心它能否保持自我。因此，諸如斯瓦茨所謂的“呈現(xiàn)于建筑中的人性禮節(jié)”的判斷顯得更為重要。對于馬克斯 · 弗里施（Max Frisch）而言，瑞士建筑的特色是“適度”。早在二戰(zhàn)期間，1939年于蘇黎世舉辦的國家展上，建筑師漢斯 · 霍夫曼（Hans Hoffmann）談到了“我們建筑中的親切細節(jié)”。此后，也許是蘇黎世聯(lián)邦理工學院建筑系在那些年里最具影響力的教師——伯納德 · 霍斯利（Bernhard Hoesli）以批判的語氣描述了瑞士人的性格：“我們很少原創(chuàng)，但擅長應用; 我們不愿推動，寧愿等待；我們不喜歡放棄熟悉之物，我們對新事物持審慎態(tài)度。不信奉差異，不喜歡另類，不看重天分。”

圖5：蘇黎世應用技術學院 （現(xiàn)ETH）主樓立面

圖6：沃特 · 費德勒作品

圖7：恩斯特 · 吉斯勒作品

霍斯利與奧斯汀(Austin)的“德州騎警”(Texas must come to terms with them and from this the architect’s repertoire develops.The renowned quality of Swiss architecture is owed to the corresponding continuity and discipline.

That modern architecture again proceeded from residential building and,despite the “only almost” winning project by Le Corbusier for the Palais des Nations, tended to have difficulty tackling the traditional representative building tasks according to modern concepts, favored this chosen path, which has remained successful to the present day.The house also has served as an experimental ground, quite particularly for new materials such as concrete.When it concerned building churches or schoolhouses,which were represented by Alfred Roth as a building type especially fitting for Switzerland in a 1957 exhibition, these materials —whether concrete, iron, or glass — determined the design to a greater extent than elsewhere.In a particularly expressive manner, Walter F?rderer created works here that practically form the backbone of the success story of modern Swiss architecture, but also all the others who, like Ernst Gisel, emphasized the artistic side of the architect and who took the new possibilities of béton brut as a point of departure.These works allow a critic like Laurent Stalder to speak of concrete as the Swiss trademark par excellence.

However it was by no means the program of “CIAM,” a sibling of the International Style, that dominated everything,although the CIAM was founded at La Sarraz in Switzerland and had its “office” and its extremely influential and internationally networked secretary, Sigfried Giedion, in the Doldertal in Zurich.Inasmuch, Hans Schmidt and Hannes Meyer, the editors of the widely noted, but short-lived periodical ABC Beitr?ge zum Bauen, early on developed a position at the center of which stood the societal and political challenges, derived more from questions of material and construction rather than “style,” and in particular proceeding also from Dutch experiences.(Hannes Meyer brought these issues into the Dessau Bauhaus during his directorship.) HMS (Haefeli, Moser,Steiger), similarly well anchored in Swiss tradition, also pursued their own pragmatic architecture.All this led to the praise,subsumed in the motto “Helvetia docet,”with which Rudolf Schwarz paid tribute to the small country from the “creative periphery”in 1948, shortly after the war.People were very proud of their little country, but also concerned about its ability to hold its own.All the more important, therefore, seemed judgments such as that of the “human decency of the displayed building” (Schwarz).For Max Frisch it was “moderation” that distinguished Swiss architecture.Earlier,during the war, the architect of the “Landi”(Landesausstellung Zürich 1939), Hans Hoffmann, spoke of the “l(fā)oving detailing of our buildings.” Still later, Bernhard Hoesli,perhaps the most influential teacher of architecture at the ETH in recent years,described the Swiss character with critical tones, “we rarely originate, but we are skillful at adapting; we are reluctant to push ahead and prefer to wait, we dislike to abandon the familiar and we are skeptical of the new.The different is suspect, the exceptional is not welcome and genius is ignored.”

Proceeding from the common experience in Austin with the “Texas Rangers,” particularly with Colin Rowe, Hoesli developed a practical method of teaching which strictly limited itself to a few of Le Corbusier’s houses and drawings by Mondrian and van Doesburg.This formal discipline fit very well with Swiss frugality and also with contemporary discussions about typology, and led further to the rediscovery of the city — strongly influenced by Aldo Rossi (who taught at the ETH for only a short time).Overall, it formed fertile soil for development of the success story of architecture in Switzerland.This must also be supplemented by noting the variety that Jul Bachmann and Stanislaus von Moos once again displayed in their presentation New Directions in Swiss Architecture (1969).

In Switzerland, too, after 1945 people gladly oriented themselves toward the “great masters,” not just Le Corbusier, but also F.L.Wright and especially Mies van der Rohe.Fritz Haller and also Franz Füeg can hardly be understood outside of these more general developments.But it also reminds us that of course entirely different influences from Italy as well as Finland were taken up in Switzerland.

With architecture in Ticino, a phenomenon arose that restricted the predominance of Swiss-German architecture and found an extraordinary talent in Mario Botta.But it is not just the stars — as later Herzog & de Meuron and Zumthor — who carried the fame of Swiss architecture into the world.In Switzerland, a dense network of outstanding architects emerged, who combine the virtues owed to “Helvetia docet” with ingenuity and inventiveness.To this also belongs the in some sense often underestimated native tradition.Finally, this was all supported by outstanding teachers such as Luigi Snozzi or the gentle, constant companion and inspirator of younger colleagues, Martin Steinmann.

Long ago the variety also created its multiplicity of forms and architectural solutions;long ago the context was reestablished, the insertion of the new into the existing as a permanent task has been discovered and has led to extraordinary and widely noted results by architects such as Roger Diener, Andrea Deplazes, or the inventive Valerio Olgiati.A younger generation continues the relevant conversations.Rangers)尤其是和柯林 · 羅（Colin Rowe）有很多共通之處，他在這些共性基礎上發(fā)展出一種有效的教學法，嚴格限定在勒 · 柯布西耶（Le Corbusier）的幾個房子以及蒙德里安（Mondrian）和杜斯伯格（van Doesburg）的畫作之中。這種形式化的學科非常適合瑞士式的“簡約樸素”，也適合關于類型學的當代討論。受到阿爾多 · 羅西（Aldo Rossi）深遠影響（羅西在蘇黎世聯(lián)邦理工學院的教書時間很短暫），這進一步推動了對城市的重新認識。總體而言，它為瑞士建筑的成功史創(chuàng)造了肥沃土壤。有必要補充一下，尤里 · 巴赫曼（Jul Bachmann）和斯坦尼斯勞斯 · 馮 · 穆思（Stanislaus von Moos）在他們的著作《瑞士建筑新方向》（New Directions in Swiss Architecture,1969）里再次展現(xiàn)了瑞士建筑的多樣性。

圖8：弗里茨 · 哈勒作品

圖9：弗朗茨 · 富格作品

在1945年后，瑞士人同樣樂于向“偉大的大師”學習，不僅是勒 · 柯布西耶，還有弗蘭克 ·勞埃德 · 賴特（F.L.Wright），尤其是密斯·凡·德·羅（Mies van der Rohe）。若忽略這個大環(huán)境，就很難理解像弗里茨 · 哈勒（Fritz Haller）(圖8)和弗朗茨 · 富格（Franz Füeg）的設計 (圖9)。當然，我們也必須注意到，意大利和芬蘭對瑞士的影響與以上的歷史是截然有別的。

隨著提契諾建筑作為一種現(xiàn)象而出現(xiàn)，并且涌現(xiàn)了像馬里奧 · 博塔（Mario Botta）這樣的非凡天才，原本占主導的瑞士德系建筑受到了沖擊。也就是說，瑞士建筑師其實不僅僅只有像赫爾佐格和德 · 梅隆（Herzog & de Meuron）、彼得 · 卒姆托（Peter Zumthor）這些令其蜚聲世界的明星。瑞士出現(xiàn)了一個由優(yōu)秀建筑師組成的密集網(wǎng)絡，他們將“瑞士派”的美德與獨創(chuàng)性和創(chuàng)造力相結合。這其中也包含了常被低估的瑞士本土價值。最后，這一切成就均得益于杰出教師的支持，比如路易吉 · 斯諾茲（Luigi Snozzi）或者像馬丁 · 斯坦曼（Martin Steinmann）這些風度翩翩的而且是年輕人的良師益友。

長久以來，瑞士建筑的多樣性同樣創(chuàng)造出了形式及建筑設計的多樣性；瑞士人重建了文脈，他們知道將新事物放入老環(huán)境中是一項長久的使命，像羅杰 · 迪納（Roger Diener）、安德里亞 · 德普拉澤斯（Andrea Deplazes）或者富于原創(chuàng)的瓦勒里歐 · 奧加提（Valerio Olgiati）這樣的建筑師在這方面已經(jīng)取得了令人矚目的成就。更年輕一代的瑞士建筑師將延續(xù)著相關話題。

[本文由沃納 · 奧克斯林教授用德語成文，由哥倫比亞大學博士、哥倫比亞大學藝術史與考古學院藝術人文學導師蘇珊 · 克萊伯（Susan Klabier）翻譯成英語，由建筑師汪弢翻譯成中文]

圖片來源

圖1：來自網(wǎng)站https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCstair#/media/File:Benediktinerkloster_St._Johann_retouched.jpg

圖2：來自網(wǎng)站https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kloster_Reichenau#/media/File:Kloster_Reichenau_(Foto_Hilarmont).jpg圖3：來自網(wǎng)站https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral_of_Saint_Mary_of_the_Assumption_(Chur)#/media/File:Chur_Kathedrale_1.jpg

圖4：來自網(wǎng)站https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lausanne-cathe7.JPG

圖5：來自網(wǎng)站https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Z%C3%BCrich_-_ETH_Z%C3%BCrich_-_Urania_Sternwarte_IMG_7447_ShiftN.jpg

圖6：來自網(wǎng)站https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_F%C3%B6rderer#/media/File:Toggenburg_Lichtensteig_Katholische_Kirche_StGallus_tower_view_from_the_south.jpg

圖7：來自網(wǎng)站https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Gisel#/media/File:Reformierte_Kirche_Effretikon,_Rebbuckstras se_2011-09-07_18-22-00_ShiftN.jpg

圖8：來自網(wǎng)站https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Haller_(Architekt)#/media/File:Kantonsschule_Baden_Fritz_Haller_01.JPG

圖9：來自網(wǎng)站https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_F%C3%BCeg#/media/File:Luzern_Meggen_Katholische_Piuskirche_inside.jpg