作者：索尼婭 · 丁佩爾曼

翻譯：胡凱富　吳曉彤

Text: Sonja Dümpelmann

Translator:　HU Kai-fu　Wu Xiao-tong

機(jī)場一種文化景觀？

作者：索尼婭 · 丁佩爾曼

翻譯：胡凱富吳曉彤

Text: Sonja Dümpelmann

Translator:HU Kai-fuWu Xiao-tong

在20世紀(jì)，機(jī)場已被理解和設(shè)計為一種文化景觀和獨(dú)特環(huán)境。盡管機(jī)場在其演化過程中被各種批評家、建筑師和哲學(xué)家描述為是一種反景觀，過時的“非場所”和反烏托邦，但總體上對機(jī)場和航空的理解已經(jīng)與景觀、環(huán)境、生態(tài)的概念緊密地交織在一起。機(jī)場被認(rèn)為是一種文化景觀和一種脆弱的容易被破壞的環(huán)境，這種觀點(diǎn)引發(fā)且起因于對機(jī)場特定地點(diǎn)的景觀設(shè)計，對野生動物的管理實踐，在機(jī)場設(shè)計中納入歷史遺跡、以及以廢舊機(jī)場的適應(yīng)性再利用為目的的飛機(jī)跑道和其他特征的保護(hù)。盡管很多設(shè)計師把機(jī)場構(gòu)想為新的標(biāo)志性的高科技文化景觀，其他設(shè)計師則認(rèn)為機(jī)場破壞了現(xiàn)有的文化景觀。機(jī)場作為文化景觀的理念也因此總是與其周圍的社會、經(jīng)濟(jì)和政治密切相關(guān)。這篇文章把機(jī)場作為景觀的思想，融入到文化景觀自身概念的變化解釋中，這種理念在動力飛行誕生的那幾年中，第一次在英美世界得到更廣泛和準(zhǔn)確的運(yùn)用。

機(jī)場；文化景觀；地理；風(fēng)景園林；環(huán)境

1966年，美國藝術(shù)家羅伯特·史密斯主辦了一個被認(rèn)為是新型大地藝術(shù)運(yùn)動的重點(diǎn)項目：達(dá)拉斯-沃斯堡國際機(jī)場的一系列藝術(shù)作品。①這個項目脫胎于史密斯就初步研究的磋商以及由曼哈頓建筑和工程公司（Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton）承擔(dān)的概念規(guī)劃。史密斯沉醉于巨大的機(jī)場規(guī)模和像紐約中央公園那么長的跑道。規(guī)劃官員、建筑師和工程師都一再強(qiáng)調(diào)，如果把它放在曼哈頓島上面，機(jī)場將超出島嶼的范圍。1966至1967年間，史密斯產(chǎn)生的對場地雕刻干預(yù)的理念是為著陸和起飛的航測圖設(shè)計的，不需要垂直狀態(tài)。它們包括嵌入地表的含有成排的“黃色霧燈”的淺層玻璃蓋盒；大型瀝青混凝土廣場和白色礫石小徑；一個由三角形混凝土板組成大型螺旋（見航測圖）；提出“蜿蜒土丘”和 “礫石小徑”的意見，即一種在跑道之間和圍繞跑道的低矮的不規(guī)則曲線土丘圖案。②

Translator:

HU Kai-fu, who was born in 1992 in Inner Mongolia, is a postgraduate student in Landscape Architecture, Beijing Forestry University. His research focuses on Landscape Planning and Theories.

Wu Xiao-tong, who was born in 1993 in Inner Mongolia, is a postgraduate student in Landscape Architecture, Beijing Forestry University. Her research focuses on Landscape Planning and Theories.

正如史密斯所說，以“一種新的方式定義航空集散站的界限”和“開創(chuàng)先例并創(chuàng)造通向機(jī)場景觀美學(xué)的獨(dú)特方法”。③這個“空中藝術(shù)”的靈感來自于航測圖，他認(rèn)為特定的場地條件和個人對場地的看法取代了17、18和19世紀(jì)自然主義藝術(shù)。在空中藝術(shù)中，史密斯認(rèn)為“景觀看起來更像是一個三維地圖而非一個質(zhì)樸的花園”。④這個機(jī)場項目讓他正面交鋒與其同事托尼·史密斯所說的“創(chuàng)造世界……在傳統(tǒng)之外”是一個“沒有文化先例的人造景觀”。⑤然而，史密斯不是第一個，也不是最后一個這樣斷言的人。

在20世紀(jì)20年代的商業(yè)飛行興起時期，景觀設(shè)計師與建筑師就認(rèn)為機(jī)場是一種需要被設(shè)計的景觀。第二次世界大戰(zhàn)之后，在許多廢棄的軍用機(jī)場被決定利用時，以及第一個像達(dá)拉斯-沃斯堡這樣的機(jī)場被設(shè)想和計劃時，機(jī)場景觀的創(chuàng)造再次獲得資金支持。機(jī)場景觀設(shè)計十分專注于視覺模式的設(shè)計；這種視覺為導(dǎo)向的文化景觀研究在當(dāng)時一開始是受到地理學(xué)家的批判的。

最近，已故的文化地理學(xué)者丹尼斯·科斯格羅夫?qū)⑾Ｋ剂_機(jī)場與格魯吉亞莊園的景觀進(jìn)行了對比分析?？扑垢窳_通過兩場地比較，不僅是為展現(xiàn)18世紀(jì)的園林與20世紀(jì)的噴氣機(jī)機(jī)場之間相似的形態(tài)——相似的規(guī)模和綿延的草坪；同時指出，這兩塊場地作為促進(jìn)土地發(fā)展的經(jīng)濟(jì)引擎，各自都發(fā)揮了重要作用。科斯格羅夫認(rèn)為，從理論上，研究機(jī)場能“將景觀恢復(fù)為一個綜合體、一個靈活的概念”，這種景觀還包括社會、政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)領(lǐng)域（在18世紀(jì)的英國，花園景觀作為經(jīng)濟(jì)引擎，是紳士們聚集并且從某種程度上看可以生產(chǎn)出資本的地方；同樣地，如果沒有倫敦希斯羅機(jī)場，英國的經(jīng)濟(jì)將受到極大限制 ）?？扑垢窳_夫認(rèn)為不管是希思羅機(jī)場，還是大多數(shù)普通的機(jī)場都是一種文化景觀。20世紀(jì)90年代，正當(dāng)科斯格羅夫?qū)懽髦畷r，許多地理學(xué)家已經(jīng)開始將文化景觀看作是權(quán)力關(guān)系的體現(xiàn)，也是社會、經(jīng)濟(jì)和政治結(jié)構(gòu)方面文化特征的表達(dá)方式和組成力量。他們的研究開始更加注重形成文化景觀的過程，而不是文化景觀產(chǎn)生的視覺效果。

最近，許多前軍事機(jī)場和商業(yè)機(jī)場已更多的在字面上作為新的城市公園與社區(qū)的文化景觀。在一些案例中，這些新的城市公園甚至能夠重建或恢復(fù)現(xiàn)存的文化景觀，如柏林的約翰內(nèi)斯塔爾前機(jī)場（圖1）和加布里埃萊·基弗在柏林西部設(shè)計的加圖機(jī)場。在很多其他的案例中，新的景觀設(shè)計中也涵蓋著古建筑、跑道和一些其他的設(shè)計元素。例如，柏林滕珀爾霍夫（圖2），緊鄰法蘭克福市的前莫里斯·羅斯機(jī)場和在厄瓜多爾的前基多國際機(jī)場的公園設(shè)計。那些結(jié)合不同場地隨著時間推移而累積形成的景觀層進(jìn)行設(shè)計的項目，表示對將當(dāng)代文化景觀作為文本與文化表征媒介的當(dāng)代認(rèn)識。

1 羊群在舊的約翰內(nèi)斯塔爾機(jī)場內(nèi)吃草（攝影師：索尼婭·丁佩爾曼）Sheep grazing on the former airfield Johannisthal, Berlin, Germany. （Photograph: Sonja Dümpelmann）

2 德國柏林的滕珀爾霍夫前機(jī)場跑道（攝影師：索尼婭·丁佩爾曼）A runway of the former airport Tempelhof, Berlin, Germany. （Photograph: Sonja Dümpelmann）

3 1902年10月24日奧維爾·萊特和威爾伯·萊特在基蒂霍克試飛（美國國會圖書館）Orville Wright, Wilbur Wright flying at Kitty Hawk, October 24, 1902. (Library of Congress)

機(jī)場景觀的歷史貫穿整個20世紀(jì)，并在進(jìn)入21世紀(jì)之后，機(jī)場顯露出其在自然與科技、工程與設(shè)計之間搖擺的場地特征。正如之前受到人類支配的自然景觀一樣，在Sauerian看來，機(jī)場當(dāng)然是一種文化景觀。⑥機(jī)場是當(dāng)?shù)厝伺c全球溝通的紐帶。作為全球經(jīng)濟(jì)化的動力和產(chǎn)品，機(jī)場及其景觀是乘客離開和進(jìn)入空域和地域的定位點(diǎn)。

1　降落場地

4 地圖顯示哈佛的航空領(lǐng)域，1911年HUD3123箱1（哈佛大學(xué)檔案館）Map showing Harvard Aviation Field, 1911. HUD 3123 Box 1(Harvard University Archives)

5 20世紀(jì)20年代德國埃森的飛機(jī)場鳥瞰圖，出自斯特德曼·沙姆韋·漢克斯，《國際機(jī)場》。（紐約：羅納德新聞公司，1929年）Aerial view of Essen airfield, Germany, 1920s. Stedman Shumway Hanks, International Airports (New York: The Ronald press company, 1929).

載人熱氣球首次升空的場地，通常會選在精心設(shè)計花園或者城市公園之中。在工業(yè)化城市的密集城區(qū)中，花園和公園是唯一足夠大的開放空間?；▓@和熱氣球以及熱氣球航行通常被看作是一種奇觀，并且在某些情況下，熱氣球能夠提供使花園圖像完整的元素。正如1783年，科學(xué)家Jean-Fran?ois Pilatre de Rozier和侯爵Fran?ois d' Arlandes登上了Mongolfier制造的首個熱氣球，并在巴黎外的the Chateau de la Muette公園進(jìn)行熱氣球試飛。

許多關(guān)于動力飛行的早期嘗試都是在可提供適宜自然條件的環(huán)境中進(jìn)行的，包括風(fēng)能和軟質(zhì)著陸區(qū)，例如在北卡羅萊納州海岸在基蒂霍克附近的那個地方，威爾伯和奧維爾·萊特在1902年和1903年在那里嘗試了他們第一次短途飛行，此后他們搬入俄亥俄州代頓市附近的養(yǎng)牛牧場，那是他們的第一個飛機(jī)場（圖3）。盡管?？梢员或?qū)使到牧場最南部，但對于他們首次沿著橢圓飛行的軌跡而言，位于場地中央的荊棘樹遲早都會成為在軌跡方向上的一種障礙。

然而，科技與自然最終在多層面中出現(xiàn)矛盾，這在1911年哈佛航空場地（今Squantum Point公園）的地圖中得到預(yù)示，這個航空場地在1910年哈佛航空學(xué)會召開的哈佛波士頓航空會議中第一次得到使用。⑦對于那些來比賽的飛行員來說，1.5英里（2.41km）的航程會完成5個轉(zhuǎn)折點(diǎn)架線塔標(biāo)記在地上。在地圖上，架線塔被由點(diǎn)劃線準(zhǔn)確的連接，排除掉自然陸地信息如一條小溪和其蜿蜒的岸線（圖4）。其中負(fù)責(zé)首次航行的人是雅培勞倫斯·羅奇，哈佛航空學(xué)會第一任會長，哈佛大學(xué)氣象學(xué)教授，他將航空與環(huán)境科學(xué)的研究緊密結(jié)合，特別是在大氣學(xué)方面。

第一個被選為建設(shè)機(jī)場的場地，是由于它自然條件有利于飛機(jī)起飛和降落。正如工程師阿奇博爾德·布萊克在1929年報告的，理想的“自然”條件為開闊地的平坦地形，自然排水的土壤，緊密生長的全年生長的草，較低或者均勻分布的降雨量，并且能避免大霧和大風(fēng)天氣。⑧因此，第一個機(jī)場為鋪滿草的平地，大約750-1 000m，并在其周邊配備了體量較小的建筑（圖5）。他們的特點(diǎn)是一個直徑為45m的白色圓圈和旁邊巨大的字母名。通常由坐落于中心的發(fā)煙罐指示風(fēng)向。由于飛機(jī)向著更大、更重和更有動力的需求發(fā)展，早期機(jī)場最終配備了混凝土、瀝青跑道以及完善的地下排水系統(tǒng)（圖6），成為了或多或少遵循綜合設(shè)計理念的機(jī)場。

機(jī)場基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施愈加從自然條件中脫離出來，由放牧羊群和夯實土地的“宜人的田園風(fēng)光”，轉(zhuǎn)變成為一種場地，在這里“人類必須采用自己帶來的機(jī)器以及材料整頓簡樸的自然，用道路在土壤表面留下疤痕，設(shè)計筆直的精心安排的跑道，砍伐樹木和去除那些可能危害到飛機(jī)空中航行的障礙物。”正如一位評論家在1945年評論的，“現(xiàn)代化的機(jī)場必須是人造的”⑨。唯一由自然決定的事情便是主跑道的方向、長度和強(qiáng)度，主跑道需要平行于盛行風(fēng)并依賴于海拔高度，因為海拔高度會造成大氣密度的不同。在20世紀(jì)20年代時，機(jī)場作為文化景觀的概念已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)，因為當(dāng)時許多景觀設(shè)計師已經(jīng)意識到機(jī)場設(shè)計給他們提供了工作機(jī)會。

2　機(jī)場景觀與風(fēng)景

6 機(jī)場工程的典型機(jī)場排水規(guī)劃，。出自霍華德·奧克利·夏普，《機(jī)場工程》。（紐約：J. Wiley Sons出版，INC.,1944）Exemplary airport drainage plan. Howard Oakley Sharp, Airport Engineering (New York: J. Wiley & sons, inc.,1944).

7 恩斯特·赫明豪森在美國堪薩斯城設(shè)計的費(fèi)爾法克斯機(jī)場，出自《美國的美國景觀設(shè)計師3》，第一期（1930年7月）:15-18.Ernst Herminghaus’s design for Fairfax Airport, Kansas City, U.S. American Landscape Architect 3, no. 1 (July 1930): 15-18.

建筑師和設(shè)計師們很快的發(fā)現(xiàn)機(jī)場是一個綜合設(shè)計，包括飛行區(qū)的設(shè)計、航站樓、機(jī)庫和周圍的開放空間與種植設(shè)計。如果運(yùn)用美國城市美化運(yùn)動的思想，機(jī)場甚至可以被理解為是一個類似于延伸的17世紀(jì)法國園林那么復(fù)雜的設(shè)計問題。許多設(shè)計師都將其設(shè)想如大地景觀和城市來規(guī)劃。

在20世紀(jì)20年代末期，工程師們用不同航道模式的設(shè)計標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行實驗，以能夠滿足不同機(jī)場發(fā)展的需要組合。 另一方面，建筑師和景觀設(shè)計師也將這些跑道的設(shè)計植入到更大的景觀層面。美國建筑師弗蘭西斯·基利制定了一個有遠(yuǎn)見的機(jī)場設(shè)計方案，將宏偉的圓形停機(jī)坪設(shè)在仿照 17世紀(jì)法國園林的大型觀賞花園中。

美國景觀設(shè)計師出身的規(guī)劃師約翰·諾倫提出了一個典型的機(jī)場規(guī)劃，包括四角機(jī)場和與之配套的衛(wèi)星城鎮(zhèn)，其中根據(jù)patte d'oie的街道布局類似于17世紀(jì)凡爾賽的城鎮(zhèn)和花園的整體效果。

在20世紀(jì)50年代末期，噴氣式飛機(jī)場之一的紐約國際機(jī)場（今天的JFK機(jī)場），實施了所謂的國際化公園設(shè)計，事實上是以17世紀(jì)法國園林為藍(lán)本的套用。220英畝（89hm2）的國際公園圍繞在停車場、通道和候機(jī)樓中，沿著國際候機(jī)樓與加熱制冷廠之間形成的軸線展開。公園包括種植池以及3個圓形噴泉，它們的尺度以及沿軸線的位置造成了一種強(qiáng)迫性的透視效果。

在20世紀(jì)20年代末開始，像早期候機(jī)樓和建筑內(nèi)飾的設(shè)計那樣，人們越來越關(guān)心外部空間的造型。為了平息乘客的緊張情緒，并使乘客感到安心舒適，候機(jī)廳的設(shè)計常常設(shè)計得像包含靠背座椅、沙發(fā)和壁爐的私人客廳。同樣，室外空間的設(shè)計往往表達(dá)出本地現(xiàn)代主義的風(fēng)格，設(shè)計者希望其產(chǎn)生相同效果，并確保和指引乘客達(dá)到各自想去的地方。

機(jī)場的景觀設(shè)計能夠形成對地方、區(qū)域甚至國家的認(rèn)同感，并在機(jī)場日益標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的技術(shù)環(huán)境中，機(jī)場景觀通常被認(rèn)為是地域形象的象征。從20世紀(jì)20年代起，很多設(shè)計師認(rèn)為與現(xiàn)代主義和地方特征性相比，機(jī)場應(yīng)該是一種綜合的景觀，也是近來稱為“全球本土化”的思想的表現(xiàn)。盡管機(jī)場景觀在地面設(shè)計已經(jīng)驗豐富，但它也需要適應(yīng)垂直方向的視覺效果。

如果建筑師能夠自由的使用裝飾藝術(shù)和鄉(xiāng)土風(fēng)格進(jìn)行實驗，像終端建筑中西班牙殖民地復(fù)興那樣，景觀設(shè)計師就能夠?qū)⒌谝粋€商業(yè)機(jī)場作為實驗場地，以探索與現(xiàn)代主義和地方主義都有關(guān)的新表現(xiàn)形式。新的交通方式將提供新的設(shè)計機(jī)會，來挑戰(zhàn)傳統(tǒng)形式和觀點(diǎn)。上述觀點(diǎn)表明，這為景觀設(shè)計師帶來提供新垂直景觀的機(jī)會。1930年，恩斯特·赫明豪森在美國創(chuàng)造了少數(shù)早期的現(xiàn)代主義景觀設(shè)計之一的美國堪薩斯城的費(fèi)爾法克斯機(jī)場（圖7）。他發(fā)現(xiàn)黃色和橙色在空中最容易被察覺到，但它們的細(xì)節(jié)在高空高速運(yùn)動下仍很難被觀察到，因此他提議種植大片色彩鮮艷的植物。他設(shè)計的航站樓前區(qū)域采用對稱布局的幾何形式，在空中都能被輕松辨認(rèn)。⑩

8 該規(guī)劃包括俄亥俄州托萊多市莫米河上的灣景公園內(nèi)新機(jī)場，出自《美國公園和休閑》（5月 - 1930年6月）:266. The plan to include a new airport in Bay View Park on the Maumee River Toledo, Ohio, U.S. Parks & Recreation (May-June 1930): 266.

9 丹尼爾·厄本·基利在1969年4月為得克薩斯州的達(dá)拉斯/沃斯堡國際機(jī)場設(shè)計的景觀。感謝弗朗西斯勒布圖書館提供資料，哈佛大學(xué)設(shè)計研究生院。Daniel Urban Kiley, landscape design for Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, Texas, April 1969. Courtesy of the Frances Loeb Library. Harvard University Graduate School of Design.

不同于這種從空中輕易辨識的標(biāo)志和圖形的設(shè)計，德國景觀設(shè)計師赫爾曼·馬特恩在20世紀(jì)30年代的斯圖加特新機(jī)場設(shè)計中，試圖使機(jī)場建筑與地面得聯(lián)系更加緊密。他通過種植設(shè)計進(jìn)一步強(qiáng)調(diào)了建筑師恩斯特·扎格比爾的設(shè)計意圖（一定程度上由于對空襲的擔(dān)憂）即機(jī)場建筑與景觀相適宜，并設(shè)計了能夠使建筑融入到周圍景色中的輪廓。長而蜿蜒的游客露臺的清晰輪廓和紀(jì)念性框架被灌木打斷并得到 “軟化”處理。依據(jù)該地區(qū)的鄉(xiāng)村特色選擇樹木、灌木種類，并采用不規(guī)則種植方式。無論是從地方主義思想角度還是預(yù)防空襲措施角度出發(fā)，景觀設(shè)計會將機(jī)場融入到周邊環(huán)境中。在第二次世界大戰(zhàn)期間，整個機(jī)場都被轉(zhuǎn)化為偽造的文化景觀。在各種化學(xué)應(yīng)用、涂料和陪襯物的幫助下，他們被偽裝成農(nóng)田、果園和偏遠(yuǎn)住宅區(qū)。

在動力飛行的前幾年，一些景觀設(shè)計師和規(guī)劃師將機(jī)場與城市公共公園聯(lián)系起來，認(rèn)為機(jī)場是公園系統(tǒng)的一部分。以至于，在20世紀(jì)20年代的美國，在不同專業(yè)團(tuán)隊和市政機(jī)構(gòu)引領(lǐng)下，一些景觀設(shè)計師參與到有關(guān)于機(jī)場選址和管理的激烈辯論中。雖然機(jī)場在概念上被理解為開放空間，但景觀設(shè)計師們并不完全同意這種看法。有些人認(rèn)為機(jī)場兼具娛樂和商業(yè)設(shè)施，應(yīng)該被納入公園體系并由公園部門管理。另一些人認(rèn)為，把休閑公園的功能和空中交通相結(jié)合存在危險，并認(rèn)為它們是相矛盾的。雖然存在不同觀點(diǎn)，但在一些小型機(jī)場建設(shè)中，最后仍實現(xiàn)了機(jī)場真的建造配套的高爾夫球場和公園。

俄亥俄州的托萊多市，不顧那些認(rèn)為飛機(jī)會對公園游客帶來安全隱患的質(zhì)疑，將機(jī)場納入到該市的公園規(guī)劃系統(tǒng)中，將其位置就選在位于莫米河河口（圖8）以北的城市灣景觀公園里。

3　將機(jī)場視為環(huán)境

10 丹尼爾·厄本·基利在1969年4月規(guī)劃的得克薩斯州達(dá)拉斯/沃斯堡國際機(jī)場的鉛筆稿與鋼筆鳥瞰圖。感謝弗朗西斯·勒布圖書館提供資料，哈佛大學(xué)設(shè)計研究生院。Daniel Urban Kiley, bird’s-eye view of planned Dallas/ Fort Worth International Airport, Texas, April 1969. Pencil and black ink on trace paper. Courtesy of the Frances Loeb Library. Harvard University Graduate School of Design.

盡管許多早期機(jī)場設(shè)計都只關(guān)注了機(jī)場的場地選址，但是工程師、規(guī)劃師和設(shè)計師們很快意識到，機(jī)場的安全問題和飛機(jī)技術(shù)需要機(jī)場周邊區(qū)域的空域內(nèi)都沒有障礙。事實上，早在20世紀(jì)30年代，機(jī)場規(guī)劃就不僅僅是涉及到國家的機(jī)場和空中航線系統(tǒng)，而開始被認(rèn)為是更大范圍的、與機(jī)場相關(guān)的環(huán)境中心。那個時候噪音污染已經(jīng)成為一個話題，顯然，機(jī)場周邊用地性質(zhì)需要得到管理以防止飛機(jī)起降空域內(nèi)物理危害和障礙物的產(chǎn)生。從機(jī)場邊界開始一直延伸到跑道末端為中心的半徑2英里（3.22km）的范圍內(nèi)，建筑高度均受到機(jī)場分區(qū)的限制。

1960年, 美國首個噴氣機(jī)機(jī)場開始建設(shè)，建筑師和建筑評論家批判說機(jī)場是會廢棄的?，它是一個“城市附屬的寄生蟲”?，像荒地一樣缺乏視覺沖擊力。在這些評論家的眼里，機(jī)場是和公園景觀完全對立的。著名的建筑評論家劉易斯·芒福德用諷刺、干澀的文字這樣的解釋為“公園和場地已被附上新價值”。他認(rèn)為目前的公園意味著“鋪滿瀝青的荒地，僅僅作為機(jī)動車的臨時停車空間”，而“場地”意味著“另一種人造沙漠，水泥條帶被鑲嵌在貧瘠的土地上，隨著噪聲震動，奉獻(xiàn)于飛機(jī)起落”。芒福德認(rèn)為，大量的停車空間和機(jī)場都是廢棄場地，并且它們“是以犧牲大城市周圍的公園用地為代價建設(shè)的”。如果再這樣發(fā)展下去，其結(jié)果必然會是 “遍布硬質(zhì)鋪裝的荒原，不適于人類居住，不會比月球好到哪里”。?

因此，當(dāng)史密森被邀請去為世界上最大飛機(jī)場的達(dá)拉斯/沃斯堡提供咨詢時，很多機(jī)場好像成為反烏托邦式的景觀。機(jī)場建設(shè)開始受制于環(huán)境影響評估。在1968年，美國佛羅里達(dá)州進(jìn)行的第一次環(huán)境影響評價阻止了大賽普里斯沼澤中建設(shè)飛機(jī)場的計劃，原因是機(jī)場建設(shè)會對沼澤地造成巨大破壞。

當(dāng)前的機(jī)場設(shè)計理念是要整合環(huán)境和航空規(guī)劃, 兼并區(qū)域規(guī)劃。除了要減輕噪音、水和空氣的污染，還有對土地利用、水文和野生動物的影響之外，對機(jī)場視覺環(huán)境的關(guān)注也增加了。

景觀設(shè)計師丹尼爾·基利設(shè)計的美國建設(shè)的兩個早期噴氣式飛機(jī)場設(shè)計方案，已為此類機(jī)場處理方式開創(chuàng)先河。他設(shè)計的新杜勒斯國際機(jī)場(1958 - 1962)方案在很大程度上得到了貫徹實施。該機(jī)場位于弗吉尼亞的尚蒂伊，位于華盛頓特區(qū)的外圍。相比之下，他在1962年為達(dá)拉斯/沃斯堡國際機(jī)場所做的設(shè)計大多都沒真正實施。即使比史密斯超前的想法更現(xiàn)實一些，也仍然由于其不朽和宏大而不能被完全理解，他把機(jī)場中央高速公路的脊柱安全島設(shè)計成為具有紀(jì)念價值的倒影水池的傾斜軸線（圖9-10）。由于基利著迷于17世紀(jì)法國花園，并對大型機(jī)場設(shè)計駕輕就熟，因此他很容易的完成了新的噴氣式飛機(jī)場的景觀改造。在杜勒斯和達(dá)拉斯/沃斯堡國際機(jī)場的設(shè)計中，他采用大量的植物種植來平衡航站樓和通道，另一方面也是進(jìn)一步強(qiáng)調(diào)巨大規(guī)模的元素。植物和水景要素是他設(shè)計的一部分，烘托機(jī)場景觀并將航站樓、入口道路和停車場等融入到更大規(guī)模的景觀中。

在達(dá)拉斯/沃斯堡的設(shè)計中，矩形水池被兩排樹木圍繞。網(wǎng)格區(qū)塊內(nèi)的種植樹木在穿過高速公路的滑行道橋梁的垂直位置上。各種形狀的水域位于中央公路側(cè)面的每個終端環(huán)線的中心，包括行列式、環(huán)形式和網(wǎng)格式，每一圈都不一樣?；诳v貫高速路脊柱的兩端安全島上都覆蓋了觀花樹木。這與基利設(shè)計的杜勒斯國際機(jī)場相似，在杜勒斯國際機(jī)場的規(guī)劃中，位于引道和艾羅·沙里寧設(shè)計的標(biāo)志性候機(jī)樓，其兩側(cè)的喬木和灌木都繁花盛開或果實累累，迎接著旅客的到來。高速路的南出口兩側(cè)種植對稱的常綠植物，相反，在它各端邊緣處的大矩形區(qū)域內(nèi)則種植樹苗為機(jī)場日后使用做準(zhǔn)備。建造70km2的機(jī)場，基利的景觀設(shè)計必須考慮到機(jī)場未來的擴(kuò)建——正如在1973年機(jī)場投入運(yùn)營時規(guī)劃師們宣布的那樣——機(jī)場最終要為航天飛機(jī)的升降也提供空間。?基利把芒福德曾經(jīng)認(rèn)為是荒地的機(jī)場轉(zhuǎn)變成為具有功能標(biāo)志性的、吸引人流觀賞的景觀，盡管這項具有里程碑意義的設(shè)計只有部分得以實現(xiàn)，在20世紀(jì)50、60年代首架超音速噴氣式飛機(jī)著陸時，這些設(shè)計證明了將機(jī)場作為綜合性景觀與環(huán)境的理解認(rèn)同者漸增。

自20世紀(jì)90年代起，由于地緣政治的變化和大規(guī)模航空旅行的增多，很多以前用于軍事和貿(mào)易的停機(jī)場和航空港變成了公共的城市公園。這些過去曾經(jīng)位于城市邊緣地帶的老舊機(jī)場，如今在城市化地區(qū)成為新的大型公共開放空間。在20世紀(jì)20年代，美國規(guī)劃師和設(shè)計師已經(jīng)預(yù)言，那些曾被認(rèn)為是過時的、通常建設(shè)在公共綠地旁或內(nèi)部的機(jī)場，有可能重新變回“永久性的公共開放空間”。/如此說來，今天的許多機(jī)場“兜了一圈回到了原地”。在這個過程中，機(jī)場不僅被很多它們的設(shè)計師理解為人文景觀，并且它們的設(shè)計和處理措施還反應(yīng)了各自在不同時代的文化景觀方面的學(xué)術(shù)論述觀點(diǎn)，正如那些英美的地理學(xué)者實踐的一般。

In 1966, the American artist Robert Smithson developed what has been considered the key project in the nascent earth art movement: a series of art works for the site of Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport.①The project grew out of Smithson’s consultation on the preliminary studies and concept plans for the airport undertaken by the Manhattan-based architectural and engineering firm Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton. Smithson was fascinated with the airport's monumental scale and the extent of its runways that, as he pointed out, spanned the length of New York City's Central Park. As the planning officials, architects and engineers did not fail to emphasize, the airport would expand well beyond Manhattan Island if laid on top of it. The ideas Smithson developed for sculptural interventions on the site between 1966 and 1967, were designed for the aerial view from landing and departing airplanes and none required verticality. They included large shallow horizontal glass-covered boxes embedded in the earth that contained rows of "yellow fog lights;" patterns of large square asphalt pavements and a web of white gravel paths; a vast spiral consisting of triangular concrete panels laid out on the ground (Aerial Map); and a proposal for Wandering Earth Mounds and Gravel Paths (1967), a pattern of low amoebashaped earth mounds between and surrounding the runways.②

Smithson strove, as he explained, to "define the limits of the air terminal site in a new way" and to "set a precedent and create an original approach to the aesthetics of airport landscaping."③This "aerial art" inspired by the aerial view, the idiosyncratic site conditions and individual site perceptions in his eyes replaced the "naturalism of seventeenth-, eighteenth- and nineteenth-century art". In "aerial art," Smithson contended, "the landscape began to look more like a three dimensional map rather than a rustic garden."④The airport project confronted him with what his colleague Tony Smith has called a "created world . . . without tradition" and with an "artificial landscape without cultural precedent."⑤However, Smithson was not the first, nor was he the last to make this claim.

At the beginning of commercial flight in the 1920s, landscape architects and architects had understood the airport as a landscape that needed to be designed. The creation of an airport landscape again gained currency after the Second World War when the use of many abandoned military airfields had to be determined, and when the first jetports-like the one at Dallas-Fort Worthwere conceived and planned. Airport landscape designs were preoccupied with visual patterns; and it was the visual orientation of cultural landscape studies that geographers were beginning to criticize at the time.

More recently, in 1999, the late cultural geographer Denis Cosgrove compared HeathrowAirport to the landscape of a Georgian Estate. Cosgrove used this comparison not only to lay out some morphological parallels between the eighteenth-century landscape garden and the twentieth-century jetport-the size, the open stretches of grass; but also to point out their respective importance as economic engines for land development. On a theoretical level then, studying an airport could, Cosgrove argued, "recover landscape as a synthetic idea, a flexible concept", and this landscape included social, political and economic worlds (landscape gardens in eighteenthcentury England were economic engines, they were the places where the gentry amassed and in part, at least, produced their capital; similarly, the economy of Britain would be strongly curtailed if it weren't for Heathrow airport). Cosgrove was proposing that Heathrow, or airports in general are a cultural landscape. In the 1990s, when Cosgrove was writing, many geographers had begun to see cultural landscapes as the embodiments of relationships of power and as expressions of and constituent forces within social, economic and political structures characterizing cultures. Their studies began to focus more on the processes that shaped cultural landscapes rather than the visual outcomes of them.

Lately, many former military and commercial airfields and airports have appeared more literally as the cultural landscapes of new urban parks and neighborhoods. In some cases, these new urban parks even recreate or restore existing cultural landscapes, as in the case at the former airfield of Johannisthal in Berlin (figure 1), and in Büro Gabriele Kiefer's design for the airfield Gatow west of Berlin. In many other cases, the new landscapes incorporate old buildings, runways, and other objects in their design. Examples are Berlin Tempelhof (figure 2), the former Maurice Rose Airfield near Frankfurt, and the park design for the former international airport in Quito, Ecuador. These projects that work with the layers of landscape that have accumulated on the respective sites over time, are expressive of contemporary understandings of cultural landscapes as text and as media of cultural expression.

The genealogy of airport landscape throughout the twentieth and into the twentyfirst century reveals the airport as a site with an oscillating relationship between nature and technology, engineering and design. As formerly natural landscapes that have been acted upon by humans, airports are, of course, in the Sauerian sense, cultural landscapes.⑥They sit at the nexus between the local and the global. As both, motor and product of a global economy, the airport and its landscape is the location where air passengers leave and enter the airspace and are grounded.

1　Airfields

The first manned balloons that took off into the air very often began their journeys in elaborately designed gardens, or public urban parks. In the dense urban neighborhoods of the industrializing cities, gardens and parks were the only open spaces that were big enough. Often both, the gardens and the balloons, as well as the balloon flight, were spectacles, and in some cases the balloons even provided an element that completed the garden picture, as in the case of the first Mongolfier's balloon that was flown by Fran?ois d’Arlandes and Jean-Fran?ois Pilatre de Rozier and took off from the gardens of the Chateau de la Muette just outside Paris in 1783.

Many early attempts at powered flight were undertaken in environments that provided suitable natural conditions including wind and soft landing areas such as the ones on the North Carolina coast near Kitty Hawk where Wilbur and Orville Wright undertook their first short flights in 1902 and 1903 before they moved to a cow pasture-the first flying field-near Dayton, Ohio (figure 3). While the cows could be driven into the southern end of the pasture, the obstacle that remained was a thorn tree in the middle of the field that was sooner or later found to be an important point of orientation for their first flying maneuvers along the oval flight path.

That technology and nature would, however, ultimately come into conflict on multiple levels, was foreshadowed in the simple 1911 map drawing of the Harvard Aviation Field (today Squantum Point Park) that was used for the first time for the 1910 Harvard-Boston Aviation meet convened by the Harvard Aeronautical Society.⑦The one and a half-mile-long course for the pilots who gathered to compete was marked on the ground by 5 pylons signifying the turning points. On the map, the pylons were connected by precise, straight dash-dotted lines that disregarded the natural land formation including a creek and the sinuous coastline (figure 4). Amongst the men responsible for the first aviation meets was Abbott Lawrence Rotch, Harvard Professor of Meteorology and the first President of the Harvard Aeronautical Society who combined in his persona the close connection between aviation and the scientific exploration of the environment, in particular the atmosphere.

The first sites for airfields were chosen because they seemed naturally prone to allow for the easy take-off and landing of aircraft. As the engineer Archibald Black reported in 1929, the desirable “natural” conditions were level terrain on open ground, naturally draining soil, “close growth of tough all-year grass”, low or evenly distributed precipitation, and freedom from fog and gusty winds.⑧Thus, the first airfields were flat and grassy, measured circa 750 by 1000 meters, and were outfitted on their periphery with simple lightweight buildings (figure 5). They were marked by a white circle 45 meters in diameter and by the place name in giant letters. Often a centrally located smoke pot indicated the wind direction. The development of larger, heavier and more powerful aircraft demanded that the early manufactured airfields would finally be equipped with concrete and asphalt runways and extensive subsurface drainage systems (figure 6), and turned into airports that were built more or less following comprehensive designs

The airport infrastructure became increasingly independent from the natural conditions, passing from “pleasant pastoral scenes” where herds sheep had kept the grass short and the ground compacted, to a site where “Men must bring to the site machines and materials to rectify the frugalities of Nature, and scar the surface with broad, straight deep-laid runways, fell trees and other obstructions that might endanger the fastmoving vehicles of the air." As one commentator remarked in 1945, “Modern airports must be manmade."⑨The only thing left, to be determined by nature was the orientation, length and strength of the main runway that was to be paralleling the prevailing wind and also depended on the elevation above sea level that resulted in varying atmospheric density. The conception of the airport as a cultural landscape already began in the 1920s when landscape architects realized the opportunity that airport design provided them.

2　Airport Landscapes and Sceneries

Architects and designers were quick to understand airports as a comprehensive design problem that included the design of the airfield, the terminal buildings, and hangars, as well as the surrounding open space and planting design. Applying ideas of the American City Beautiful movement airports were even understood to be a design problem that resembled the complexity of expansive seventeenth-century French gardens. Many designers conceived of airports as landscapes and cities.

In the late 1920s engineers experimented with the modular design of different runway patterns that could be assembled depending on the airports’ growth requirements. Architects and landscape architects on the other hand, were embedding these runway designs into the larger landscape. The American architect Francis Keally developed a visionary airport design that positioned a monumental circular landing field into a large ornamental garden that was modeled on seventeenth-century French gardens.

The American landscape architect-turned city planner John Nolen proposed a prototypical airport plan in which the quadrangular airfield and its accompanying satellite town with a street layout based upon a patte d’oie resembled the seventeenth-century ensemble of the gardens and town of Versailles.

One of the later jetports, New York International Airport (today JFK Airport), in the late 1950s implemented a design for its so-called International Park that was indeed modeled on seventeenth-century French gardens. Surrounded by parking lots, approach roads and terminal buildings, the 220-acre International Park stretched along an axis between the International Terminals building and the transparent Heating and Refrigerator Plant. It included planting beds and three circular fountains that due to their varying sizes and positions along the axis created a forced perspective.

Like the designs for the early terminal buildings and their interiors, beginning in the late 1920s, increasing care was taken of the design of the outside spaces. To calm passengers' nerves and make them feel at ease and comfortable, the waiting rooms were often designed to resemble private living rooms including armchairs, couches and fireplaces. Similarly, the designs for the outdoor spaces were often expressions of vernacular modernism, conceived to achieve the same effect, and to ground and orientate the passengers in the respective location.

Airport landscape designs fostered a local, regional, and even national identity, often acting as vernacular counterpoints within the increasingly standardized technological airport environment. Many designers from the 1920s onwards therefore conceived of the airport as a hybrid landscape with contrasting modernist and vernacular character traits and as an expression of what more recently has been called “glocalism.” While the airport landscape had to be designed to be experienced on the ground, it also had to accommodate the verticalview.

If architects experimented freely with the use of art deco and vernacular styles like Spanish colonial revival in terminal architecture, landscape architects similarly used the first commercial airports as experimentation grounds for new formal expressions that related to both modernist and regionalist agendas. The new means of transportation provided new design opportunities to challenge accustomed forms and perspectives. It gave landscape architects the chance to provide a new vertical scenery for the view from above. In 1930, Ernst Herminghaus created one of the few early modernist landscape designs in the United States for Fairfax Airport in Kansas City (figure 7).Based upon his observation that yellow and orange were the colors most easily detected from the air, and that details were not perceptible to the aerial viewer at high speeds, he proposed planting brightly colored masses of plants. His design for the area in front of the terminal building was based on symmetrically laid out geometrical forms and could be easily identified from the air.⑩

In contrast to iconic and geometrical designs easily recognized from the air, the German landscape architect Hermann Mattern in his design for Stuttgart’s new airport in the 1930s attempted to tighten the airport buildings' connection to the ground. His planting design further stressed the architect Ernst Sagebiel’s design intent-- partly based upon the concern for air raid protection--to fit the airport’s architecture into the landscape and to design a silhouette that would dissolve into the surrounding scenery. The clean-cut and monumental ledges of the long curved visitor terrace were broken up and thereby "softened"by interspersed shrub plantings. The selection and irregular planting of tree and shrub species adhered to the rural character of the region. Both regionalist ideas and air raid protection measures led to a landscape design that attempted to blend the airport into the surrounding landscape. During World War Two, entire airports were turned into fake cultural landscapes. With the help of various chemical applications, paint, and staffage, they were camouflaged as agricultural fields, orchards, and suburban neighborhoods.

In the early years of powered flight some landscape architects and planners associated airports with public urban parks and considered the airport a part of the park system. So much so, that in the United States in the 1920s, some landscape architects engaged in a lively debate about the siting and management of airports that was led by different professional groups and municipal agencies. Although airports were conceptually understood as open space, not even landscape architects agreed amongst themselves. Some considered airports both recreational and commercial facilities and argued that they should be integrated into the park system and administered by the park departments. Others drew attention to the dangers of combining recreational park use and air traffic, and pointed out that they were incompatible. Although this opinion finally prevailed some small airports were indeed built in conjunction with golf courses and public parks.

Toledo, Ohio, disregarded the skeptical voices that warned against the security hazard that airplanes would provide to park visitors, and included an airport into its park system plan, locating it in the city’s Bay View Park north of the mouth of the Maumee River (figure 8).

3　The Airport as Environment

Although many of these early elaborations concentrated on the actual airport site, engineers, planners and designers realized quickly that security and aircraft technology required unobstructed airspace in the zones adjacent to the airport. In fact, airports as early as the 1930s began to be conceived of as the centers of a much larger airport-related environment, not only in terms of the larger national airport and airway system. Already then, noise pollution became a topic and it became apparent that land use surrounding airports had to be regulated to prevent the creation of physical hazards and obstructions in the airspace of the approach and landing paths of planes. Airport zoning was to determine the height of structures, beginning at the airport boundary and extending to a radius of 2 miles from the ends of the runways.

By 1960, when the construction of the first jetports in the United States had begun, architects and architectural critics were criticizing airports as obsolete,?a "parasite appendix [of cities],"?as lacking visual stimulus, and as wasteland. Airports appeared in these critics’ eyes as the complete opposite of parks and landscapes. To this effect, eminent architecture critic Lewis Mumford explained in ironic and dry prose that the words "park and field have taken on new meanings."According to him, park now meant a "desert of asphalt, designed as a temporary storage space for motor cars" whereas "field" meant "another kind of artificial desert, a barren area planted in great concrete strips, vibrating with noise, dedicated to the arrival anddeparture of planes." For Mumford, parking lots and airports were wasteland that grew “at the expense of parkland around every big city". If this development continued, he argued, the result would be a "universal paved desert, unfit for human habitation, no better than the surface of the moon."?

Thus, when Smithson was invited to consult on what was announced to become the largest jet airport in the world—Dallas/Fort Worth--, airports appeared to many as dystopian landscapes. The construction of airports began to be subject to environmental impact assessments. In the United States, in 1968 the first environmental impact assessment that was undertaken in the state of Florida prevented the construction of a jetport in the Big Cypress Swamp that would have destroyed much of the Everglades.

The intention now was to integrate environmental and aviation planning, as well as regional planning. Besides the alleviation of noise, water, and air pollution, and the impacts on land use, hydrology, and wildlife, concern for the airports’ visual environment increased as well.

Landscape architect Daniel U. Kiley had set some precedents for this kind of airport treatment in the designs that he prepared for two of the first jet airports that were built in the United States. His design for the new Dulles International Airport in Chantilly, Virginia, outside of Washington, D. C. (1958-1962) was to a large extent carried out. In contrast, most of his 1969 design for Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport was not implemented. More realistic than Smithson's preceding ideas, yet still too monumental and grand to be realized in its entirety, Kiley’s landscape design turned the median of the airport’s central highway spine into a sloping axis of monumental reflecting pools (figure 9 and figure 10). Fascinated by French seventeenthcentury gardens and adept at working on the large scale of the airport, Kiley easily adapted to the new jetport landscapes. At both Dulles and Dallas/ Fort Worth International he used massed plantings both as counterweights to the terminal buildings and access roads, and as elements that further emphasized the vast scale. Plantings and water features were parts of his designs that celebrated the airport landscape and embedded the terminal buildings, access roads, and parking lots into the larger landscape.

At Dallas/Fort Worth the designed rectangular pools are surrounded by double rows of trees. Gridded blocks of trees are planted at the locations of the taxiway bridges that run perpendicularly across the highway. Variously shaped water basins are located in the center of each terminal loop that flank the central highway spine, and the accompanying planting designs consisting of rows, circles, and gridded groves of trees vary from loop to loop. Similar to his design for Dulles International where passengers were welcomed by trees and shrubs blossoming or producing fruit in bright colors that flank the approach roads and Eero Saarinen’s iconic terminal building, Kiley covered the medians of the northsouth highway spine at either end with flowering trees. The southern entrance of the highway spine is bracketed by blocks of evergreens, whereas large rectangular areas at its sides on either end are used to grow nursery stock, preparing the airport for the future. Like the airport that was built on 70 square kilometers, Kiley’s landscape designs were developed with expansion in mind, an expansion that--as the planners announced at the airport’s opening in 1973—would ultimately also encompass the accommodation of space shuttle.?Although Kiley’s monumental designs to turn what Mumford had described as wasteland into functional iconic and attractive landscapes were only partly realized, they testify to an increasing understanding of the airport as a comprehensive landscape and environment in the 1950s and 1960s when the first supersonic jet aircraft connected continents.

Since the 1990s changing geopolitics and the increasing mass air travel have resulted in many former military and commercial airfields and airports being turned into public urban parks. Often located on what used to be the periphery of cities the former airfields are today providing large new public open space in urbanized areas. Planners and designers in the United States anticipated already in the 1920s that outdated obsolescent airports, often built near or on former parkland could be turned back into "permanent public open space."/Thus, many airports today have come full circle. Throughout this process, airports have not only been understood as cultural landscapes by many of their designers, but their designs and treatment at various times also reflect the respective scholarly discourse on cultural landscapes as practiced by Anglo-American geographers.

注釋(Notes):

①本文基于索尼婭·丁佩爾曼的著作《想象的飛行：航空、景觀、設(shè)計》（夏洛茨維爾：弗吉尼亞大學(xué)出版社）。參閱于史密斯的“空中藝術(shù)”和蘇贊安·貝特格的首本土方工程著作《六十年代的藝術(shù)與景觀》（伯克利，洛杉磯，倫敦：加州大學(xué)出版社，2002年大學(xué)），45-101。

This essay is based upon Sonja Dümpelmann, Flights of Imagination: Aviation, Landscape, Design (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2014). For Smithson’s “aerial art” and the first earth works see Suzaan Boettger, Earthworks: Art and the Landscape of the Sixties (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2002), 45-101.

②為了使他的航空藝術(shù)更容易被參觀者和乘客所接受，史密斯計劃建造一個電視攝影以將室外空中藝術(shù)圖像傳輸?shù)绞覂?nèi)的候機(jī)廳。

To make his aerial art accessible also to passengers and visitors in the terminal, Smithson planned to set up TV cameras that would transmit images of the aerial art outdoors to the indoors of the terminal.

③羅伯特·史密森《在沃斯堡達(dá)拉斯區(qū)域航空集散站（1966-67）邊緣建設(shè)大地藝術(shù)和景觀地標(biāo)的提議 》，出自書籍《羅伯特·史密森：文集》，該書由杰克·弗拉姆編輯（伯克利：加州大學(xué)出版社，1996年），354-355（354）。

Robert Smithson, “Proposal for Earthworks and Landmarks to be Built on the Fringes of the Fort Worth-Dallas Regional Air Terminal Site (1966-67),” in Robert Smithson: The Collected Writings, ed. by Jack Flam, Jack (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996), 354-355 (354).

④羅伯特·史密森《空中藝術(shù)》，國際工作室177（1969年4月）：180-181（180）。

Robert Smithson, “Aerial Art,” Studio International 177 (April 1969): 180-181 (180).

⑤小塞繆爾·瓦格斯塔夫《與托尼·史密斯的談話》，藝術(shù)論壇5，第4期（12月1966）：14-19。

Samuel Wagstaff Jr., “Talking with Tony Smith,” Artforum 5, no. 4 (Dec. 1966): 14-19.

⑥參閱卡爾·蘇爾的文章《景觀的形態(tài)學(xué)》，加利福尼亞大學(xué)地理科學(xué)出版社2，第2期（1925）：19-54。

See Carl O. Sauer, “The Morphology of Landscape,”University of California Publications in Geography 2, no. 2 (1925): 19-54.

⑦HUD3123，第1盒，哈佛航空學(xué)會記錄

HUD 3123, Box 1, Records of the Harvard Aeronautical Society

⑧阿奇博爾德·布萊克《民用機(jī)場和航空公司》（紐約：西蒙斯-博德曼出版公司，1929），29-30。另請參閱阿奇博爾德·布萊克“機(jī)場航站樓工程”，園林13，第4期（1923）：225-238。

Archibald Black, Civil Airports and Airways (New York: Simmons-Boardman Publishing Company, 1929), 29-30. Also see Archibald Black, “Air Terminal Engineering,”Landscape Architecture 13, no. 4 (1923): 225-238.

⑨維爾利《明日的民航客機(jī)，航空公司和機(jī)場》（倫敦：試點(diǎn)出版社有限公司，1945年），247。

S. E. Veale, To-morrow’s Airliners, Airways and Airports (London: Pilot Press Ltd., 1945), 247.

⑩參閱恩斯特·赫明豪森在《美國景觀設(shè)計師3》中的文章《機(jī)場設(shè)計中的景觀藝術(shù)》，第一期（1930）：15-18; 索尼婭·丁佩爾曼在《文化藝術(shù)園》的文章《 回顧1920-1960的觀點(diǎn)：隱藏與發(fā)現(xiàn)的景觀》。格特和斯蒂芬妮編輯（柏林：迪特里希-雷默出版社），239-264;索尼婭·丁佩爾曼在的文章“科學(xué)與美學(xué)間：熱愛飛行的景觀設(shè)計師”在《景觀的旅程》29，2（2010）：161-178。

See Ernst Herminghaus, “Landscape Art in Airport Design,” American Landscape Architect 3, no. 1 (1930): 15-18; Sonja Dümpelmann, “Der Blick von oben: versteckte und entdeckte Landschaft zwischen 1920 und 1960,” in Kunst Garten Kultur, ed. Gert Gr?ning and Stefanie Hennecke (Berlin: Dietrich-Reimer-Verlag), 239-264; Sonja Duempelmann, “Between Science and Aesthetics: Aspects of ‘Air-minded’ Landscape Architecture.” Landscape Journal 29, 2 (2010): 161-178.

?參閱雷納·班哈姆的文章《過時的機(jī)場》發(fā)表于建筑評論132，第788期（1962）：252-253。

See Reyner Banham, “The Obsolescent Airport,” The Architectural Review 132, no. 788 (1962): 252-253.

?保羅·索萊里在《航空環(huán)境的總體規(guī)劃》的文章《城市作為一種機(jī)場》，安杰洛，威克多和詹姆斯編輯（圖森：亞利桑那大學(xué)出版社，1970年），11-13。

Paolo Soleri, “The City as the Airport,” in Master Planning the Aviation Environment, ed. Angelo J. Cerchione, Victor E. Rothe, James Vercellino (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1970), 11-13.

?劉易斯·芒福德在《空間生活：景觀設(shè)計及其相關(guān)藝術(shù)專業(yè)》的文章《 開放空間的社會功能》。西爾維婭·克勞編輯（阿姆斯特丹：Djambatan，1961年），24，26（22-37）;劉易斯·芒福德的文章《自由的社會功能》發(fā)表于建造師58（1960年4月）：322-328（324，328）。

Lewis Mumford, “The Social Function of Open Spaces”in Space for Living: Landscape Architecture and the Allied Arts and Professions, ed. Silvia Crowe (Amsterdam: Djambatan, 1961), 24, 26 (22-37); Lewis Mumford, “Die soziale Funktion der Freir?ume,” Baumeister 58 (April 1960): 322-328 (324, 328).

?美國國家航空航天博物館檔案館，F(xiàn)4-824000-01《德州，達(dá)拉斯·沃思堡IAP》小冊子中名為“1973年達(dá)拉斯/沃斯堡機(jī)場的啟用，”146。

National Air and Space Museum Archives, F4-824000-01“Texas, Dallas-Fort Worth IAP.” Brochure entitled “Dallas/ Fort Worth Airport Opening 1973,” 146.

/參閱紐約及其周邊規(guī)劃的區(qū)域規(guī)劃委員會。第一卷：地圖集與說明（費(fèi)城：Wm. F. Fell Co. Printers, 1929), 371.

See Committee on Regional Plan of New York and Its Environs, Regional Plan of New York and its Environs, vol. 1: Atlas and Description (Philadelphia: Wm. F. Fell Co. Printers, 1929), 371.

Airport A Cultural Landscape?

During the twentieth century the airport has come to be understood and designed as a cultural landscape and distinct environment. The understanding of airports and aviation in general has been closely intertwined with notions of landscape, environment and ecology, even if the airport has during its evolution been described by various critics, architects, and philosophers as an anti-landscape, as obsolescent, a “non-place,” and dystopia. The recognition of the airport as both a cultural landscape and a vulnerable environment has led to and resulted from site-specific airport landscape designs, wildlife management practices, the inclusion of historic sites into airport designs, and the conservation of runways and other features for the adaptive reuse of decommissioned airports. While many designers conceived of airports as new iconic techno-cultural landscapes, others perceived them as destructive to the already existing cultural landscapes. The meanings of the airport as cultural landscape are therefore also always closely related to the social and economic politics surrounding it. This article contextualizes the idea of the airport as landscape within the changing interpretations of the concept of cultural landscape itself, a concept that first became more widely used in the Anglo-American world precisely during the years of the birth of powered flight.

Airport, Cultural Landscape, Geography, Landscape Architecture, Environment

TU986

A

1673-1530（2016）08-0069-12

10.14085/j.fjyl.2016.08.0069.12

2016-04-26

2016-07-23

索尼婭 · 丁佩爾曼/女/風(fēng)景園林歷史學(xué)者/副教授/美國哈佛大學(xué)設(shè)計研究生院風(fēng)景園林系/研究方向：風(fēng)景園林歷史與理論

Author:

Sonja Dümpelmann is a landscape historian and an associate professor at the Graduate School of Design, Harvard University. Her research focuses on 19thand 20th-century landscape history.

胡凱富/男/內(nèi)蒙古人/漢族/ 1992年生/北京林業(yè)大學(xué)風(fēng)景園林學(xué)碩士研究生/研究方向：風(fēng)景園林規(guī)劃設(shè)計與理論吳曉彤/女/內(nèi)蒙古人/漢族/1993年生/北京林業(yè)大學(xué)風(fēng)景園林學(xué)碩士研究生/研究方向：風(fēng)景園林規(guī)劃設(shè)計與理論