（文）Michele Calzavara

跨界建筑師：尤爾根·馬耶爾

CROSSOVER ARCHITECTS：J. MAYER H.

（文）Michele Calzavara

如果不首先提及郵寄信封上那些用于保護(hù)私人內(nèi)容不被窺探的交織曲線、線條、正弦曲線、符號和字符組合，客觀上很難評價尤爾根·馬耶爾·H。

尤爾根·馬耶爾·H自20世紀(jì)90年代中期起就一直在收集這些數(shù)據(jù)保護(hù)小圖案，他似乎已經(jīng)癡迷于這種以不同方式沉淀在其作品中的視覺（或反視覺）元素。它們代表了其作品中的主要圖像材料和概念源（也包括在2012年威尼斯雙年展瓦萊里奧·奧爾賈蒂（Valerio Olgiati）展臺上的作品《象形文字-當(dāng)代建筑師的文字》），尤爾根·馬耶爾·H已明白其中的隱喻，用它們解釋（ 或者更可能是混淆）我們?nèi)粘Ｉ罱佑|到的對象和空間的形式和意義。

其圖案庫是否與建筑，設(shè)計或藝術(shù)相關(guān)，對其作品無關(guān)緊要：在其建筑外表的形式或其前期互動藝術(shù)作品的表演方面，這種多符號的糾結(jié)往往會產(chǎn)生一種裝飾飽和，一種可以泰然自若地著筆于任何表面或材料上、像埃及象形文字和瑪雅或印第安人象形圖的涂鴉，如同涂鴉藝術(shù)大師凱斯·哈林 （Keith Haring）為其都市“作品”設(shè)想的那樣。整體看來，這種做法可能啟發(fā)“萬能裝飾”的新設(shè)計思路。

當(dāng)然，這種裝飾不同于亞歷山德羅·門迪尼1981年剛樹立起自己設(shè)計風(fēng)格時提出的“裝飾”理論，但也不同于把“膚淺地帶”作為人與人之間唯一可能溝通地帶的某種解放式欣快感。只要存在或多或少潛在內(nèi)涵的可能性，尤爾根·馬耶爾·H從不放棄，但他駕馭其訣竅還是多虧了對混淆有形和無形二者差別的迷惑性薄紗的辨別力，畢竟薄紗必須揭開，至少暫時去除，以提取其中某種可溝通的含義。而此類“揭開面紗”原理首先在人體體現(xiàn)。

這就是其前期互動藝術(shù)作品的運(yùn)作方式，其實，全部在于各種熱敏顏料的應(yīng)用：在其《留言冊（1996年）》互動藝術(shù)作品中，各頁貼滿了密集的圖形圖案，遮蓋了留言冊中書寫的最終評論，只有用手按壓加熱才會顯現(xiàn)片刻； 在《躺（1997年）》互動藝術(shù)作品中，各種圖案裝飾床單，卻被在那里躺著的女人用體溫融化，更讓其姿態(tài)留下幻像印記（或 “眼睛欺騙”，英文中與“躺”是同一詞，打的是雙關(guān)語）； 《熱·座（2001年）》互動藝術(shù)作品中用熱敏材料記錄了就座用戶的側(cè)影。在所有這些作品中，人體和科技之間的關(guān)系如此神奇，在實踐中以表演的形式就解開了其中的謎團(tuán)。

當(dāng)尤爾根·馬耶爾·H將其轉(zhuǎn)用到建筑尺度時，在尺寸更大、變量更復(fù)雜且不再直接受制于操控的建筑空間，相對于他作為藝術(shù)家時的前期作品，產(chǎn)生另一種類型的感知模糊：一層擬態(tài)的東西像連續(xù)的蒙皮包絡(luò)其建筑作品，以傳統(tǒng)觀念無法識別，只能通過人體感知解開其中奧妙。這是發(fā)揮功能、材料、幾何平衡和比例作用的另一種或許更注重形式的特性。

盡管當(dāng)他的第一個建成項目——斯塔德豪斯沙恩豪塞（Stadthaus Scharnhauser）公園（1998-2001年）還是箱體建筑（雖然略有傾斜）時，臨時采用技術(shù)手段增強(qiáng)，輔之以好像還有點(diǎn)令人不安的支撐設(shè)施（如“風(fēng)·光”這件作品中監(jiān)控攝像機(jī)用作娛樂目的這么不可思議）以“夸大”其真實性，但后期項目看起來幾乎要熔入平緩而有彈性的地幔下，以幾乎油腔滑調(diào)的形式，使建筑與自己捉迷藏。在這里，其原始圖示參考和那些數(shù)據(jù)保護(hù)圖案，又以片段、無限放大的細(xì)節(jié)、超圖形的伸出或換位形式體現(xiàn)到巨大的三維體。

例如“都市陽傘”（2004至2011年）——目前其最有名的項目，建于塞維利亞市中心的巨型結(jié)構(gòu)也可以解讀為城市尺度的巨大波浪形圖案。這也適用，并且也許以更明確的方式適用于同期項目?——卡爾斯魯厄（Karlsruhe）大學(xué)的毛奇（Moltke）食堂（2004-2007年），與陽傘采用相同的材料（木材覆蓋聚氨酯貼膜），因此具有同樣柔軟、觸感良好的外觀。食堂看起來像兩塊粘質(zhì)板，分開時產(chǎn)生交叉細(xì)絲的圖案，有時只是表面上具有結(jié)構(gòu)性的細(xì)絲（其實是不承擔(dān)任何負(fù)載的假梁，例如，有點(diǎn)像埃森曼應(yīng)用于其私人住宅群或維克納中心的某些權(quán)宜手段），形成“防護(hù)網(wǎng)”來過濾、選擇并阻擋內(nèi)部和外部、形式和內(nèi)涵之間每一線性溝通。

這是對追求透明度的功能主義狂熱信徒和策略上線性技術(shù)派的明確挑戰(zhàn)，并且意義非凡的是，這出自出生于1965年的尤爾根·馬耶爾·H設(shè)計師之手，他有扎實工程背景知識，先后就讀于德國斯圖加特大學(xué)（魏森霍夫市，現(xiàn)代名勝）、美國柯柏聯(lián)盟學(xué)院及普林斯頓大學(xué)，沉浸在諾亞方舟和巴別塔中，在那里吸收了更間接、更具文學(xué)性和概念性的主題設(shè)計方法。

他的許多項目可以解讀為這種技術(shù)和符號的組合：像在漢堡的ADA1項目（2005-2007年）或Schlump One辦公樓改造項目（2010-2012年），或比利時哈瑟爾特市的”法院”項目（2005-2013年）。在第一個項目，厚的雙立面與水平流體帶有助于通風(fēng)和儲能系統(tǒng)，無需空調(diào)，而其凹陷和突起形成一定包層利用深度；第二個項目中，采用穿透室內(nèi)空間的流暢而有機(jī)的建筑語言、新型通風(fēng)蒙皮包絡(luò)，統(tǒng)一了建于20世紀(jì)50年代的現(xiàn)有行政大樓；第三個項目是比利時哈瑟爾特市主火車站周邊區(qū)域更新計劃的一部分，更多的背景性參考信息包括當(dāng)?shù)亍靶滤囆g(shù)運(yùn)動”風(fēng)格鋼鐵建筑的傳統(tǒng)，甚至是城市的標(biāo)志性象征也是鋼結(jié)構(gòu)，像大樹一樣矗立，伸出二維樹枝形成樹枝狀建筑。

ZZ.SANKT.GEORG牙醫(yī)診所ZAHN MEDIZIN醫(yī)療中心2008-2009德國漢堡攝影： Ludger Paffrath

公園咖啡屋攝影： Marcus Buck， Munich；www.marcusbuck.com

這無疑是尤爾根·馬耶爾·H建筑師事務(wù)所常用建筑策略，尤其是在競爭激烈的格魯吉亞系列項目：從中我們可以繼續(xù)識別其圖形起源的那些片段，或從鋼筋混凝土的結(jié)構(gòu)序列中突出（高速公路休息站， 2009-2012年），或多方位凝固（梅斯蒂亞的“塔瑪皇后機(jī)場”小樓，2010年），或圓潤、面向黑海濱，呈現(xiàn)起始于波紋形狀、建立超現(xiàn)實主義平衡的厚重懸臂梯田形式（薩爾皮邊境檢查站，2010-2011年），簡直就是畫家馬格利特于1946年在《注重心智（Le regard mental）》中的超現(xiàn)實主義。邊境建筑作品則處在介于二者之間的邊緣地帶。

但是植根于歷史背景的建筑類型的舉例也同樣是超現(xiàn)實的，像梅斯蒂亞警察署（2010-2011年）建筑中對中世紀(jì)石塔的懷念（雖然那時在一種液化過程中它已化為烏有），實現(xiàn)了單戶型住宅而言更全面的有機(jī)表達(dá)：下面我們又回到德國路德維希堡附近Dupli.Casa私人別墅（2005-2008年）或斯圖加特附近OLS私人住宅（2009-2011年），這些都是客觀反映景觀的作品。 但是，尤爾根·馬耶爾·H建筑師事務(wù)所全部建筑語言變得清澈、連續(xù)、光亮和動蕩，顯然已受凱斯勒《無盡的房子（Endless House of Kiesler）》詩學(xué)的影響，有一定的門德爾松表現(xiàn)主義，（正如費(fèi)莉希蒂·斯科特和菲利普·烏爾施普龍所指出 ）還受從激情年代如20世紀(jì)70年代起恢復(fù)的風(fēng)格的影響：這些風(fēng)格包括拐角取圓，邊緣光滑，橫向縱向面的連續(xù)性，盡管正是其作品中這個最明顯和最直接的特點(diǎn)也是其刻意做作，也許也是其最無傷大雅而令人欣慰的方面。

不太放心的是這一切背后的前因，在1996年尤爾根·馬耶爾·H工作室開張時有其歷史和文化動因。對盡管還很不成熟，但無疑具有革命性的數(shù)維，他被吸引成為當(dāng)時的迷戀者。然而，就一代人而言，他不是“天生的電腦高手”，因此他沒有把這一切視為理所當(dāng)然。尤爾根·馬耶爾·H的“裝飾論”（如果存在）已更新到電子層面，且其中傾注其詩情，關(guān)聯(lián)到對當(dāng)代數(shù)字文明中信息狀態(tài)的某些全面批評諷喻，聯(lián)系到其控制設(shè)施，牽扯到我們所經(jīng)受的大數(shù)據(jù)及其有效清晰度之間問題不斷的交流。因此，人體、空間、科技和通信之間的關(guān)系成為他工作的基本主題，例如：建筑師在通用的電子環(huán)境下、在基于穩(wěn)定信息、客觀轉(zhuǎn)化的變更年代如何工作，如哲學(xué)家利奧塔關(guān)于在這種技術(shù)變更的影響下知識的性質(zhì)所提前預(yù)見的那樣：“知識可轉(zhuǎn)變成以價值形式體現(xiàn)的大量信息， 知識的產(chǎn)生就是為了要出售，其消耗是為了在新的生產(chǎn)中進(jìn)行增值：兩種情況的目的都是為了交換。知識本身不再是目的，它失去了其使用價值”2。因此，它恰恰停止維持使用價值可以確保的徹底不可轉(zhuǎn)移性（不可譯性）。

尤爾根·馬耶爾·H以其聲望回應(yīng)這一切，加一層不透明的面紗以阻擋我們與生俱來的感知力，轉(zhuǎn)化信號成噪音，尋求某種形式的不可轉(zhuǎn)移性（不可譯性）。當(dāng)然，他是在以相當(dāng)賞心悅目、睿智、極具魅力、吸引力和美感的方式這么做，不過，因美學(xué)與政治之間無解的交替，使得他總是受此基本模糊性的困擾。但是，這也許是任何人都很難解決的問題。

本文最初發(fā)表的文章名為《跨界建筑師/ 尤爾根·馬耶爾（JüRGEN MAYER H.）》，Inventario 09，Corraini EDIZIONI出版社，2014年7月，www.inventario-bookzine.com

1.參見亨利·爾巴赫（Henry Urbach），克里斯蒂娜·斯坦格雷伯（Cristina Steingraber）（主編），尤爾根·馬耶爾·H（JüRGEN MAYER H.），Hatje Cantz出版社，Ostfildern（奧斯特菲爾德爾恩），2009年。

2.讓 - 弗朗索瓦·利奧塔（Jean-Fran?ois Lyotard），《后時代狀況》：Rapport sur le savoir.巴黎：米紐伊特（Minuit）出版社， 1979年。 讓 - 弗朗索瓦·利奧塔（Jean-Fran?ois Lyotard），曼徹斯特大學(xué)出版社，曼徹斯特，1984年。

塔瑪皇后機(jī)場2010格魯吉亞，梅斯蒂亞攝影： J. MAYER H. Architects

It is objectively hard to talk about Jürgen Mayer H. without mentioning, from the start, those intertwining curves, lines, sinusoids, coagulations of symbols and characters printed on postal envelopes to protect personal content from possible prying gazes during their voyage to their destination. Jürgen Mayer H. has been collecting these minute arabesques since the mid-1990s and seems to have made them into a sort of visual (or anti-visual) obsession that settles on his projects in different ways. They represent the main iconographic and conceptual roots of his work （also on the large table Valerio Olgiati set up in 2012 at the Venice biennale，with “Pictographs – Statements of Contemporary Architects”), and Mayer H. has extracted a pervasive metaphor from them, with which to interpret – or more probably, to confuse – the forms and meanings of the objects and spaces with which we come into contact in everyday life. It matters little in his work whether this inventory of graphic textures finds its way onto architecture， design or art： in the form of his architectural enclosures or the performances of his first interactive works，this tangle of signs tends to produce a sort of ornamental saturation， a kind of graffiti that can settle with equal aplomb on any surface or material， much as Keith Haring envisioned for his metropolitan “writings,” like an Egyptian hieroglyph or a Mayan or Indio pictogram. As a whole, this approach might suggest a new idea of design as“universal cosmesis.” Certainly this cosmesis is different from the one Mendini theorized in 1981, when he embraced with disenchantment, but also a certain liberating euphoria, that “depth of the superficial” as the only possible terrain of communication between human beings. Mayer H. does not give up on the presence of a possible more or less underlying content, but he governs its access thanks to the power of intercession of a surface patina that embrangles things, blurring the boundaries between visible and invisible, and has to be dissolved, at least temporarily, to extract a meaning that is somehow communicable. And the first activating principle of this “unveiling” is the body. This was how his first interactive objects functioned， in fact， all sharing the use of thermosensitive pigments： “guest Book” (1996), where pages filled with dense graphic patterns concealed the eventual comments written in a guestbook, revealing them only for a short while under the pressure and warmth of the hands; “Lie” (1997), where the patterns decorated sheets on a bed and vanished with the warmth of the body lying there, leaving the phantom imprint of its posture (or imposture, playing with the pun of the title); “Heat.Seat” (2001), where thermosensitive furnishings recorded the silhouettes of seated users. In all these objects, the relationship between the body and technology generated surprise and, in practice, resolved its enigma by means of a performance. When Mayer H. shifts to the architectural scale, the larger and more complex variable of a space that is no longer directly subject to manipulation imposes another type of perceptive ambiguity with respect to his first works as an artist： that of a mimetic layer that wraps his architectural objects like a continuous skin, preventing conventional recognizability, which cannot be resolved only with the body. It is another, perhaps more formal quality that nevertheless calls functions, material, geometric balance, proportions into play. While his first constructed project, the Stadthaus Scharnhauser Park (1998-2001), was still a box building (though leaning slightly), enhanced by technological mischief to “augment” its reality by playing with devices that are also a bit disturbing (like the “Wind.Light” where surveillance cameras are used as entertainment), the subsequent projects seem almost to melt under a smoothed, elastic mantle, with almost oily forms, that make the architecture play hide-and-seek with itself. And here his original iconographic references， those data-Protection Patterns， return in the form of fragments，boundlessly enlarged details, supergraphic extrusions or transpositions into monumental three-dimensional objects. This is the case of the Metropol Parasol (2004-2011), now his best known project, a megastructure built in the center of Seville that could also be interpreted as a gigantic undulated pattern on an urban scale. It also applies, and maybe in a more explicit way, to the Moltke canteen of the University of Karlsruhe （2004-2007）， a project from the same period， in the same material (wood covered with a polyurethane skin), and hence with the same soft, tactile appearance. The canteen seems to spring from the separation of two sheets of viscous material that generate a pattern of crossed filaments, at times only apparently structural (fake beams that bear no loads, for example, a bit like certain expedients applied by Eisenman in his Houses or in the Wexner Center), forming a protective forest that filters, selects and also blocks every linear communication between outside and inside， form and content. There is a clear challenge to the functionalist cult of transparency and to the tactical linearity of technique, and it is significant that this comes from a designer with a solid background in engineering，trained in Stuttgart – the city of the Weissenhof, showplace of the Modern – wherehe was born in 1965. but he also studied in the United states， first at Cooper Union and then at Princeton, absorbing a more indirect, literary and conceptual approach to design themes， steeped in noah's Arks and Towers of babel. Many of his projects can be interpreted in terms of this technological and symbolic combination：like AdA 1 （2005-2007） or schlump One （2010-2012）， both in Hamburg， or the Hasselt Court of Justice （2005-2013）， in Flemish belgium. In the first， a thick double facade with fluid horizontal bands contributes to a system of ventilation and energy storage that makes climate control unnecessary, while its recesses and protrusions bring a certain depth of utilization to the wrapper; in the second, a new ventilated skin envelopes and unifies an existing complex, from the 1950s, using a fluent, organic language that penetrates the interior spaces; in the last, which is part of a more extensive renewal of the area around the main railway station of the city of Hasselt, more contextual references to the local tradition of Art Nouveau architecture in iron, or even to the heraldic emblems of the city, give form to a steel structure that grows like a plant to produce a large tree-building, obtained a bit by extrusion of the two-dimensional branchings. This is undoubtedly a frequent stratagem of the architecture of Mayer H.， especially in the intense series of projects in georgia：those fragments in which we can continue to recognize the graphic origin are now extruded in structural sequences of reinforced concrete (Highway Rest Stops, 2009-2012), become solids with multiple directions (the small building for the Queen Tamar Airport， 2010）， take on thickness starting with an undulated profile that establishes a surreal balance (Border Checkpoint, 2010-2011), almost a Magritte –that of “Le regard mental” in 1946 – rounded and facing the shore of the Black Sea. Works of frontier architecture, in between, at the margins. But the references to typologies rooted in historical contexts are just as surreal, like the tribute to medieval stone towers in the building for the Police Station of Mestia (2010-2011), though it then melts the volume in a sort of liquefaction, which reaches a fuller organic expression in the single-family houses： we are back in germany， where the dupli. Casa villa (2005-2008) near Ludwigsburg or the Ols House (2009-2011), near Stuttgart, are objects literally poured onto the landscape. But it is an entire language, in Mayer H., that becomes liquid, continuous, polished and unstable, avowedly influenced by the poetics of the Endless House of Kiesler， by a certain expressionism of Mendelsohn, by stylemes – as pointed out by Felicity Scott and Philip Ursprung - recovered from warm decades like the 1970s： rounded corners，smoothed edges, horizontal-vertical continuity of surfaces, though precisely this characteristic, the most obvious and immediate in his work, is also its formal affectation and perhaps its most innocuous, reassuring aspect. What is less reassuring is the premise behind all this, which has its historical and cultural motives in the moment in which Mayer H. opened his studio, in 1996. He absorbed all the fascination of the time for a digital dimension that was still immature but undoubtedly revolutionary. Nevertheless, since in terms of generation he was not “born with the computer，” he did not take it all for granted. The cosmesis of Mayer H. （if it exists），updated to the electronic aspect in which his poetics is immersed, links up to something that is an overall critical allegory on the state of information in the contemporary digital civilization, to its devices of control, to the always problematic exchange between the big data to which we are subjected and their effective intelligibility. Thus the relationship between body， space， technology and communication becomes the underlying theme of his work, i.e. how architecture can operate in a generalized electronic environment, in a constant information-based transformation that literally translates what Lyotard had foreseen, well in advance, about the nature of knowledge under the impact of such technological transformations, and thus “knowledge translatable into quantities of information, [in] form of value. Knowledge is and will be produced in order to be sold， it is and will be consumed in order to be valorized in a new production： in both cases， the goal is exchange. Knowledge ceases to be an end in itself， it loses its ‘use-value'” . so it stops maintaining the radical untranslatability precisely that use-value could ensure. Mayer H., to his credit, responds to all this by imposing an opaque veil to block the perception of our artificial habitat, transforming signals into noise, seeking some form of untranslatability. Of course he does this in a rather pleasing, intelligently seductive and appealing aesthetic manner, and this keeps him in the basic ambiguity of a never resolved alternation between aesthetics and politics. But this, perhaps, is an issue that would be hard for anyone to resolve.

This text was originally published in the article "Crossover architects/ J. Mayer H."， Inventario 09， Corraini Edizioni, July 2014, www.inventario-bookzine.com

1） see Henry Urbach， Cristina steingraber （edited by）， J. Mayer H.， Hatje Cantz， Ostfildern 2009. 2） Jean-Fran?ois lyotard， la Condition postmoderne： Rapport sur le savoir. Paris： éditions de Minuit， 1979. Jean-Fran?ois lyotard， Manchester University Press， Manchester， 1984.