關(guān)飛

中國建筑設(shè)計研究院有限公司本土設(shè)計研究中心副主任、副總建筑師

WA中國建筑獎由《世界建筑》雜志社在2002年設(shè)立之后逐漸成為最受關(guān)注的中國非官方建筑獎項之一，走到2018年，WA中國建筑獎無論從獎項設(shè)置還是從評審嘉賓的組成來說，無不體現(xiàn)出了多元價值觀的取向，逐漸從“小眾”走向“大眾”。

作為代表“大眾”的國企或央企的設(shè)計院是國家主導(dǎo)的市場經(jīng)濟(jì)體系中的設(shè)計機(jī)構(gòu)，總體而言，依然和其他設(shè)計組織，尤其是強(qiáng)調(diào)設(shè)計創(chuàng)意的國內(nèi)工作室和國外事務(wù)所明顯不同。國家設(shè)計院的技術(shù)力量強(qiáng)勁、編制規(guī)模宏大、組織結(jié)構(gòu)完備，可以應(yīng)對各種建筑類型的設(shè)計；但在設(shè)計理念、設(shè)計敘述、設(shè)計原創(chuàng)方面，在學(xué)術(shù)性、學(xué)術(shù)批評性和文化藝術(shù)思想的活躍氛圍方面，仍然需要反思自身。從這個維度上看，WA中國建筑獎的批判性對于設(shè)計院的“日?！惫ぷ魇怯幸娴?。

王亦知

北京市建筑設(shè)計研究院有限公司第四建筑設(shè)計院副院長

很榮幸能夠作為青年觀察員參加WA中國建筑獎的評審。參評的項目類型豐富，從城市尺度的更新到個人尺度的裝置，無不涵蓋，使我能夠暫時擺脫“大院”里相對單一的工作，體驗更為廣泛的建筑領(lǐng)域；同時，我也欣喜地看到，“體制”之外，設(shè)計以更為多元的形式滲入人們生活的方方面面。參觀評審的一個更大紅利，就是能夠現(xiàn)場聆聽評委們對這些項目的評議。能夠在同一時間接觸如此多的大咖，看到他們思想的火花與碰撞，讓人受益匪淺。

然而，出于大院工作的思維慣性，我不得不進(jìn)一步思考涉及建筑品質(zhì)的諸多要素，如經(jīng)濟(jì)性、維護(hù)性、可持續(xù)性等等，這又把諸多的參評項目壓縮成了一個薄片——兩塊展板所能承載的似乎更多的只有“視覺化”一個維度，這也是現(xiàn)場困擾很多評委的一個問題。

希望WA中國建筑獎堅持現(xiàn)有的廣度，同時突破維度的限制，越辦越好！

楊旭

深圳市建筑設(shè)計研究總院有限公司副總經(jīng)理、副總建筑師

作為一個非官方的建筑獎，WA中國建筑獎一貫堅持獨(dú)立的學(xué)術(shù)判斷，試圖發(fā)現(xiàn)、引導(dǎo)某種清晰的專業(yè)價值認(rèn)同，這與很多官方的獎項不太一樣。隨著獎項的擴(kuò)充，WA中國建筑獎也從較為單一的價值取向，轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)閷Ξ?dāng)下中國建筑界多元共存生態(tài)的尊重。

作為觀察員，我不斷地在不同獎項場景中切換，可直面不同獎項參評作品的價值共識、對立甚至沖突；也可聆聽評委們禮貌而真誠的溝通、交流甚至辯論。略感遺憾的是，由于缺乏實(shí)地考察環(huán)節(jié)，評委們無法準(zhǔn)確判斷出參評作品表述的價值取向與現(xiàn)實(shí)之間的差距，這可能成為評委們做出判斷時的一種無奈。當(dāng)我們給一座建筑頒一個獎時，是嘗試去支持、夯實(shí)某種價值認(rèn)同，并使之在更廣泛的領(lǐng)域傳播，問題在于對此我們真的有把握嗎？

張?zhí)焘x

華建集團(tuán)華東建筑設(shè)計研究總院建筑創(chuàng)作所設(shè)計總監(jiān)

傳統(tǒng)設(shè)計院的建筑師，對于WA中國建筑獎的兩難態(tài)度可能也是“大院”建筑師本身對其社會意義定位的一種狀態(tài)：既需要在一定規(guī)模的功能性建筑的設(shè)計中滿足社會主流群體的需求，又希望能在建筑學(xué)、美學(xué)、甚至哲學(xué)這些學(xué)術(shù)領(lǐng)域內(nèi)進(jìn)行有意義的探索。很榮幸能以這樣的一類建筑師身份參觀2018WA中國建筑獎的評審，我也很欣喜地看到傳統(tǒng)設(shè)計院的一些作品在城市貢獻(xiàn)、社會公平方面的努力與熱情。無疑，隨著城市社會的發(fā)展，人們對于公共設(shè)施、公共建筑有了更多的關(guān)注與需求，而這類項目也越來越多地成為復(fù)雜的、牽涉多方的、社會性的設(shè)計項目，傳統(tǒng)設(shè)計院在與政府部門以及其他多方協(xié)調(diào)這一方面顯然具有優(yōu)勢。能夠在此類項目中貢獻(xiàn)更多的力量，也許是設(shè)計院建筑師與WA中國建筑獎共通的價值取向之一。

最后感謝WA編輯部各位的努力與付出，謝謝。

GUAN Fei

Vice Director and Vice President, China Architecture Design and Research Group

The WA Awards for Chinese Architecture(WAACA), established by World Architecture in 2002, has gradually become one of the most attention-grabbing non-official architectural awards in China. As in 2018, the WAACA fully reflects the"orientation of a pluralistic value system" in terms of the award categories and the composition of the judging panel, as well as an evolution from being"niche" to targeting "the masses".

China Architecture Design and Research Group(CAG), a design institute in a state-led market economy, represents "the masses" in terms of being a state-owned/national enterprise. Overall, it differs significantly from other design organisations,especially local studios and foreign firms that emphasise design creativity. With its formidable technical strength, large-scale establishment and complete organisational structure, the design institute can design various types of buildings.Nevertheless, there is still the need for self-reflection in areas, such as design concepts, narratives and originality, and creating a vibrant atmosphere for academic, academically critical and cultural and artistic thoughts. In these dimensions, the criticality of the WAACA is beneficial to the "daily" work of the design institute.

WANG Yizhi

Vice Director, 4th Institute, Beijing Institute of Architectural Design

I was fortunate to participate as a youth observer in the judging sessions of the WAACA. A wide variety of projects were being evaluated there, ranging from urban renewal at a city scale to installations at an individual scale. These sessions temporarily freed me from the relatively single-focus work at the"large institution" and provided me the opportunity to experience the architectural field with a broader perspective. I was delighted to see that outside the"system", design has infiltrated different aspects of people's lives in a more pluralistic form. An even bigger benefit of attending the judging sessions was the opportunity to listen to judges' comments on the participating projects. It was an invaluable experience to be in the presence of several important architectural dignitaries at the same time and to witness them share their thoughts and see passions ignite as they interacted with one another.

However, the habitual mode of working at the large institution led me to think further about the many factors related to building quality,such as economic efficiency, ease of maintenance and sustainability. Doing so reduced the various competing projects into thin boards. After all, the two exhibition panels seemed to mostly portray only a single dimension of "visualisation". This was also a problem that plagued many judges on site.

Hopefully, the WAACA can retain the existing scope of the awards while simultaneously break through the dimensional limitations to achieve greater success!

YANG Xu

Vice General Manager and Deputy Chief Architect,Shenzhen General Institnte of Architectural Design and Research Co., Ltd.

As a non-official architectural award, the WAACA has consistently insisted upon independent academic judgements while attempting to discover and provide guidance for some clear identification of professional values. This characteristic makes it different from many other official awards. With the extension in the scope of the awards, the WAACA has evolved from a relatively single-value orientation to being respectful of the multi-dimensional and co-existing ecology of the present architectural community in China.

As an observer, I was constantly switching between the judging scenarios of the different awards. I witnessed the consensus, opposition, and even conflicts in values during the judgement of the participating projects for the various awards. I was also able to listen in on the courteous and sincere communication, exchanges and occasional debates between the judges. The only slight shortcoming was the lack of a site visit component, such that the judges could not accurately determine the gap between the value orientation expressed by the participating works and the reality. This was a constraint that the judges had to deal with when making their evaluations. When a building is being presented with an award, are we trying to support and consolidate a particular value orientation so that it is propagated to wider fields? Can we be really confident of achieving that?

ZHANG Tianjun

Director, Architectural Creation Department, East China Architectural Design & Research Institnte

Being a traditional design institute, the WAACA quandary that it faces may also be a state in which the large institution's architects align and position themselves with social significance:on the one hand, they must meet the needs of the mainstream groups to a certain extent when designing functional buildings; on the other hand, they also wish to engage in meaningful explorations within the academic fields of architecture, aesthetics and even philosophy. Being in this category of architects, I am honoured to participate in the judging sessions of the 2018 WAACA. At the same time, I am delighted to see the effort and enthusiasm of traditional design institutes toward urban contribution and social equity. Without doubt, people's concerns and demands regarding public facilities and buildings increase as urban society develops. Such design projects have become increasingly complex, make significant social impact and involve multiple parties. Traditional design institutes enjoy some obvious advantages when co-ordinating with government departments and other parties, and they are able to contribute substantially to this type of project. This may perhaps be one of the shared value orientations between architects from design institutes and the WAACA.

Finally, I would like to commend the editorial staff at World Architecture for their hard work and dedication. Thank you.