地缘政治世界的建筑批判3.0

CRITICAL ARCHITECTURE INA GEOPOLITICAL WORLDPeter Eisenman地缘政治世界的建筑批判彼得·埃森曼There is a new condition of ideological politics today, onewhich no longer deals with the class struggle of communismversus capitalism, of First World versus Third World, butwith an ideological condition based on geopolitics. Geopoliticsinvolves two conditions: one, that despite the increasingmediation of the globe as a single entity, location has becomean important political factor; and two, since western capitalfinds itself unable to continue to provide for the economic,social and political infrastructure that evolved in the nineteenthcentury, the emerging Pacific Rim and Muslim worldcountries, and their geopolitical positions, are no longernecessarily dependent on the western world for capital.当今思想政治有一个新的状况，一个不再涉及共产主义和资本主义的阶级斗争，不再涉及第一世界与第三世界的阶级斗争，而是以地缘政治为基础的思想状况。

地缘政治涉及两个方面：一、尽管强调全球作为一个单一的实体，地理位置却已成为一个重要的政治因素；二、西方资本发现自己无法继续像在十九世纪那样为经济、社会和政治提供基础，新兴的太平洋沿岸和穆斯林世界的国家，他们的地缘政治不再需要依赖西方世界的资本。

The idea of western capital evolved gradually over 200 years: it grew out of the revolutionary and ideological politics of the class struggle against the ancient regime. Most manifestations of western colonialism were grounded in this ideology. When colonialism is no longer a dominant ideology, class politics is replaced by a politics of location. Indonesia, Malaysia，Singapore and Hong Kong are examples where a politics of place is evident. An aspect of this concerns the survival of a secularism which is no longer dependent on a western colonial condition. Since western capital is no longer able in its economic framework to provide for its own infrastructure, it can hardly support an iconic structure. That is, a critical structure for architecture. In such a context,architecture is no longer seen as relevant. Instead, information-age capital is being invested in an infrastructure necessary to maintain a high level of services that has nothing to do with architecture and iconic symbolism.西方资本的观念是在200多年的发展过程中逐渐演变而来，它是在阶级斗争的革命和思想政治中成长出来的。

西方殖民主义的大部分表现都是以这种意识形态为基础的。

殖民主义不再是占主导地位的意识形态，阶级政治被地缘政治更换。

印度尼西亚、马来西亚、新加坡和香港是很明显的例子。

这是一个世俗而不再依赖西方殖民地的生存状态的一个方面。

由于西方资本在其经济框架内不再能够为它自己提供基础设施，它很难支撑一个标志性的结构，即建筑学的批判性结构。

在这样的背景下，建筑不再被视为政治相关的。

取而代之地，在信息时代中资本被投资进以维持高水平服务所必须的基础设施中，再没有什么与建筑和标志性的象征意义有关了。

In Jakarta，Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, the idea of a critical architecture has little relevance because there is no enabling mechanism to support such an idea. This gap in society's sensibility as to what would even constitute a critical architecture and its purposes, leads to afracturing of architecture away from its social, ideological and iconic purposes. And since the ideological mechanisms which sustained a critical architecture in the West for 200 years are no longer in place, the questions that must be asked are,what is the nature of a critical architecture in the context of the geopolitical, and if such an idea of the critical could be formulated, what would be its relevance today?在雅加达，吉隆坡和新加坡，一个批判性建筑的想法是几乎没有道理的，因为没有使批判性建筑成为可能的机制以支持这样的想法。

这种社会敏感性的缺口甚至影响了批判性建筑和其目的，导致了一个建筑远离其社会政治，思想政治和标志性的目的。

而且，由于在西方持续了200年的批判性建筑的思想机制已经不在了，必须要问的问题是，在地缘政治的背景下，一个批判性建筑的本质是什么，如果这样的想法可以成形，在今天与它相关的又有什么？The idea of a critical architecture began in the late eighteenth century, and was always related in the western world to an ideological politics. Two figures, Immanuel Kant and GB Piranesi, are important. Kant formulated the critical as that condition of being which speaks of the possibility 'in being' of knowledge. The idea of the possible deals with both the present and the future. In succession, therefore, the ideas of the future, the avant-garde and the modern became linked with the critical. In the late nineteenth century, the rise of an avant-garde was an attempt not only to protect art from capital, but also to protect the system of the critical from erosion by capital. For while the critical evolved in tandem with the ideology of capital, the critical as it concerns the possibility of knowledge was always against any accommodation with the status quo. Thus, for a time the critical and the avant-garde were synonymous.批判性建筑的思想开始于18世纪晚期，总是与西方政治意识形态相关。

其中有两个重要人物，康德和GB·皮拉内西。

康德定义批判为知识“存在”的可能性。

这种可能性的理念处理了现在与未来的关系。

因此在其思想被继承的过程中，未来的想法、前卫和现代都与批判性联系在了一起。

在十九世纪末，先锋派的崛起，不仅是为了保护艺术的资本，更是为了保护被资本侵蚀的批判系统。

批判一度演变成与资本的意识形态相串联，考虑到知识存在可能性的批判总是与现实的妥协相对抗。

因此，批判与前卫一度成为同义词。

Also in the late eighteenth century, Piranesi translated Kant's discourse into a manifestation in architecture. In his drawing of the Campo Marzio, Piranesi presented, in the forms of both ancient and invented building types, a city plan that stood as a critique of the existing hierarchical structure of centralised axial cities that symbolised the central authority of the ancien regime. In Piranesi's drawing, buildings were jammed one next to the other, creating urban spaces that had never before been conceptualised. His drawing was not merely a new iconic representation of city, but also contained the possibility of city in its critique of the existing order. Succeeding generations of architects, from Ledoux and KF Schinkel to Le Corbusier and Mies van der Rohe, conceptualised architecture in a similar critical manner, always in relationship to an ideological politics.在十八世纪后期，皮拉内西将康德的话语翻译成为建筑的格言。