公共性事件孔隙與日常生活

Abstract

中國當代身兼樂評人、詩人與聲音藝術先鋒等多重身分的顏峻曾寫過這麼一句話：「每一個聲音都不是偶然的。它像一萬顆冰雹中的一顆，凝聚了整個天空的信息。」（註一）空間何嘗不是？空間從來都不是中性的、毫無理由地就生成在那兒的，空間也從來不是僅關乎純粹審美向度的 - 空間總是內藏由無數政治經濟文化因素搓揉出來的複雜訊息。有論者認為，當代空間已被社會控制（”form follows FEAR”）、資本積累的目的有效編織成一精密運作的機器以強化人的被宰制與異化；然而這樣的批評不能廉價地否定掉眾多空間規劃 / 建築設計者在資本支配的基礎上，不斷提出對於新生活的想像之努力，這些努力可以說是在體制內的寧靜革命 – 無論成敗，都是對人們日常生活的堅實回應，而非獨將實存世界拱手讓給理論性架空。

「日常生活」（everyday life）這個看似平庸的命題，卻是構成空間擁有真實、深層底蘊的血肉，它具有衝突而多元的可能，並藉此在扁平化的空間裡產生詩性沉澱、化「空間」（space）為「地方」（place）。在當今建築普遍商品化的過程中，我們完整的生活情態被從中剝除了，日常生活的意義彷彿只剩下工作與消費，甚至工作就是為了消費。那麼，關於建築設計的新想像、通往「地方」的具體連結在哪裡？有著開放 / 不確定特性的「公共性事件孔隙」（public event interstices）或許是條進路。

每個建築都有其必須回應的時代議題 / 社經脈絡，這是使建築設計有別於藝術（可反應但沒有回應必要）的關鍵 – 在每個建築設計前著手於相關議題的研究，並透過議題研究所衍發出來的幾組關鍵詞（tag）去進行具脈絡的公共性事件之類型想像與佈局，後以建築量體為介面、塑造出在時空中連續的「孔隙」，邀請人們在踏入各種事件孔隙時，得到較以往為陌生的本體經驗、以掌握生活的多向度延伸；同時，也透過鬆動的機制設計允許之後無數的互動介入，以產生空間脈絡的分歧衍異。這樣的想法甚至可以說有遊戲（play）的意念涵蓋其中，透過遊戲溢離重複均質、毫無創造力的假性日常生活，讓紮實的生命力道復返、揉塑真正有情感投入的日常生活，讓差異性的詩情「地方」復辟。

Yan Jun, a contemporary music critic, poet and pioneer of sound art in China, once wrote such a sentence, “Every single sound is not accidental. It's like one from ten thousand hail, which is an embodiment of the entire sky.” (see note 1) Isn’t space like this? Space is never neutral and being there with no reason. Space is never just about aesthetic dimension; it’s always carrying complicated message composed of numerous political, economic and culture factors. Some people suggest that contemporary space has been controlled (“form follows FEAR”) by social regulation and capital accumulation, thus has become a sophisticated, highly effective machine to dominate people and reinforce their alienation. However, such criticism cannot easily dismiss the efforts from many designers. They keep on imagine what the new life would be on the basis of capital investment. Their endeavors could be regarded as one quiet revolution within the system, and are firm responses to people’s everyday life instead of yielding the existential world to theoretical thinking, regardless of success or failure.

"Everyday life”, such a seemingly banal proposition, is the genuine flesh and blood constitutes space. It’s full of conflict and diversity and has potential to create poetic precipitation, to transform “space” to “place” on this super flat planet. When architecture becomes more commercialized nowadays, our fundamental life experience has been deprived of. The meaning of our life left only work and consumption, we even work more for further consumption. Then, where is the specific path leading to “place”? Where is our practical imagination of architecture? The “public event interstices” with openness / uncertain characteristics might be one possible approach.

Architecture has responsibility to response its raising issues and socio-economic context with no evasive excuse, that’s what makes architecture different from art (the latter could reflect reality but has no necessity of response). By paying attention to every particular issues, we are able to carry out the vision and layout of contextual public events during design process, creating continuous interstices through the passage of time. Those interstices invite people to obtain fresh and private experience then grasp the multidimensional extension of daily routine. Meanwhile, such catalysts could allow future interaction involved through the loose mechanism, and generate more differentiation of context. It can even say that this idea involved the perspective of “play”. Via play, we may evacuate from the pseudo-everyday life with no creativity and arouse the vitality of genuine everyday life - bringing back the “place”.