漢斯·斯科特，英格里德·赫爾辛·阿爾莫斯/Hans Skotte, Ingerid Helsing Almaas

司馬蕾 譯/Translated by SIMA Lei

行動與反抗
——挪威建筑師的成就

漢斯·斯科特，英格里德·赫爾辛·阿爾莫斯/Hans Skotte, Ingerid Helsing Almaas

司馬蕾 譯/Translated by SIMA Lei

建筑師的工作往往與占主導地位的權力結(jié)構(gòu)相關，或在某些社會中與政治相關。在挪威，建筑職業(yè)從第二次世界大戰(zhàn)以來就與政治發(fā)展密切相關，尤其在住宅領域的重建工作中。在住宅建造經(jīng)濟下的城市發(fā)展日益偏向技術治國主義化，而1960和1970年代出現(xiàn)了強烈的反抗，無論是公眾還是職業(yè)建筑師都開始聚焦于環(huán)保觀念。在城市中心之外，國家政策致力于支持區(qū)域經(jīng)濟的發(fā)展，在現(xiàn)代福利國家進程中，建筑師在塑造小型社區(qū)的實體環(huán)境中起到關鍵作用。而今，建筑職業(yè)受到的外界影響日漸減小，很多充滿創(chuàng)造才能的挪威建筑師將他們的工作變成影響挪威本土以及全球的資源和靈感。

挪威，戰(zhàn)后重建，住宅政策，技術治國主義，保護，政策福利，性別平等，北歐模式

建筑是一項具有社會性的工作，因此，建筑師的工作勢必與其所在社會的社會和經(jīng)濟事件發(fā)生聯(lián)系。漢斯·斯科特和英格里德·赫爾辛·阿爾莫斯認為，在20世紀下半葉的挪威，這種聯(lián)系表現(xiàn)得尤為緊密。雖然建筑行業(yè)的政治影響力在各個時代有盛衰波動，但那些有才能的建筑師們?nèi)〉玫某删蛥s能跨越時空，給身處各個時代的人們帶來靈感。

建筑師的工作總是與他們所處的社會中普遍存在的權力結(jié)構(gòu)或政治息息相關。因此，建筑實際上反映了那些有能力雇用建筑師的人心中的愿望和象征。從金字塔、帕提農(nóng)神廟到帕拉迪奧和普金的作品莫不體現(xiàn)著這種映射。當西方文化輸出到世界其他地方時，建筑也成為了殖民政策的一部分；而當這些殖民地在300年之后開始為自由斗爭時，建筑也是彰顯其獨立性的重要標志。進入20世紀后，現(xiàn)代主義建筑則展現(xiàn)出新形式的國家的愿景。即使在今天，對于諸如“歸零地”一類的建筑，我們除了將其看作高度政治化的象征，又能如何理解它呢？

然而，建筑也不僅僅是出自訓練有素的建筑師的產(chǎn)物。基于比較合理的估計，我們可以認為全球僅有約5%的建筑環(huán)境是由受過訓練的建筑師設計的。其余的建筑要么是由工程師主導建造的，要么就是由當?shù)厝俗孕行藿ǖ?。不過在挪威，建筑師在塑造現(xiàn)代化的建筑環(huán)境方面比在大多數(shù)國家更有主導權——至少直到最近都是如此。這主要是因為挪威的經(jīng)濟發(fā)達，經(jīng)濟力量給予了我們不斷擴大和翻新建筑物的能力，這一不停更替的過程也和我們歷史上喜愛使用壽命較短的木材來建造建筑的傳統(tǒng)有關。這種建筑環(huán)境與形成它的政治力量之間的互惠性在所有的社會中都可以見到，但即便如此，建筑師和建筑物在現(xiàn)代挪威的發(fā)展中也可能比在其他許多國家發(fā)揮著更重要的政治作用。挪威（圖1）人口稀少，在1950年代初期僅有約300萬人（今天則上升到了約520萬人），這些人口分布在相當于內(nèi)蒙古的2/3規(guī)模的約325,000km2的土地上。因此，即使在20世紀，無論用哪種標準看，建筑在挪威都是個很小的行業(yè)，其卓越的影響力主要源于建筑師們在二次大戰(zhàn)后的歲月中承擔的專業(yè)承諾和社會責任。

戰(zhàn)后重建

要理解今天的故事和昨天的歷史間的關系，我們需要先了解一些戰(zhàn)前的社會線索。挪威在歷史上沒有過封建制度或貴族王朝來建造國家性的建筑或?qū)m殿。戰(zhàn)前的挪威擁有的是基于漁業(yè)的強大的沿海經(jīng)濟（圖2），并實行著包含著內(nèi)在不平等性的傳統(tǒng)土地所有制度。在經(jīng)歷了19世紀的工業(yè)化之后，勞工運動成為了一個重要的政治力量，到1930年代，這一力量已經(jīng)成為了挪威政界的主宰。許多建筑師也加入了這一運動，他們的參與大多是出于信仰，而不是出于階級原因。他們主要關注城市發(fā)展和住房的問題（圖3），這些領域在過去則由房地產(chǎn)的投機者所主導。他們的努力促成了戰(zhàn)前時期的首個合作住房計劃（圖4）。但戰(zhàn)爭結(jié)束了這一切——挪威在1940-1945年間遭到德軍的占領，到了戰(zhàn)后，許多事情都發(fā)生了變化。1945年戰(zhàn)爭結(jié)束后帶來的戰(zhàn)略性飛躍改變了建筑師遵照行事的政治現(xiàn)實，建筑師也開始參與改變現(xiàn)實社會。因此，這正是我們的故事開始的地方。

挪威：挪威人口僅500多萬，分布于大小約為德國的面積之上/Norway. The population of Norway, just over 5 million people, are spread over an area the size of Germany. （圖片來源/Photo: https://pixabay.com/en/norway-fjord-villagepanorama-954895/）

沿海漁業(yè)傳統(tǒng)：Femb?ring漁船連同其他漁船是挪威沿海地區(qū)生活的必要組成/Coastal fishing traditions. The open Femb?ring and other open fishing boats were essential for life along the Norwegian coast. （圖片來源/Photo: lofotenfolkehogskole.no）

Architecture is a social endeavour, and so the work of architects is bound to the social and economic events of any society. In Norway in the last half of the 20th Century, this connection has been particularly close, argues Hans Skotte and Ingerid Helsing Almaas. But though the political influence of the profession may wax and wane, the work of talented architects remain as an inspiration across time and place.

The work of architects always relates to the prevailing power structures, or politics, in the societies in which they are engaged. As such, architecture reflects the aspirations of and symbolises those who can afford to engage architects. This has manifested itself from the pyramids and the Parthenon to Palladio and Pugin. Architecture was part of the colonial framework as Western culture imposed itself on other parts of the world, and it was a significant symbol of the independence when these same colonies fought for liberation 300 years later. Into the 20th Century, modernist architecture displayed the aspirations of newly established nations. Today, how are we to understand the architecture of Ground Zero, for example, if not as a highly charged political symbol?

Yet architecture is much wider than merely the output of trained architects. At a reasonable estimate, a mere 5% of the global built environment stems from the work of trained architects. The rest is the work of engineers at one end of the scale or vernacular self-builders at the other. In Norway, however, architects have been more dominant in shaping our modern environment than in most countries - at least until recently. This is primarily the consequence of the strength of the Norwegian economy and the capacity this has given us to constantly extend and renew our building stock, a practice which also relates to our historical dependency on the relatively short lifespan of timber structures. The reciprocity between the built environment and the political forces that shape it is of course visible in all advanced societies, but even so architects and architecture may have played a more significant political role in the development of modern Norway than in many other countries. Norway (Fig.1) is scarcely populated, with a population of about 3 million people in the early 1950s (rising to about 5.2 million today), spread across a land mass of some 325,000 square kilometres, about two-thirds the size of Inner Mongolia. So even well into the 20th Century the architecture profession was small by any standard, and the influence it had was predominantly grounded in the professional commitment and social responsibilities that architects shouldered in the years following World War II.

Post-war reconstruction

Acknowledging that the story of today rests on the history of yesterday, some threads into Norway's pre-war past are required. Historically, Norway has had no feudal system or aristocracy to construct country estates or palaces. The country has a strong coastal economy based on fisheries (Fig.2), and an agrarian tradition with its own built-in inequalities. Following industrialisation in the 19th Century, the labour movement emerged as a significant political force, which in the 1930s came to dominate much of Norwegian politics. Many architects joined the movement, usually more out of conviction than class. Those within the movement focused their energies primarily on urban development and housing (Fig.3), which was until then the domain of property speculators. These efforts resulted in the first co-operative housing programs (Fig.4) of the pre-war period. However the Second World War put an end to all that - Norway was under German occupation from 1940-1945, and after the war many things changed. The strategic leap that took place after the end of the war in 1945 significantly changed the political realities in which architects acted, realities that architects also helped change.Therefore, this is where our story will start.

托爾紹夫：位于奧斯陸托爾紹夫的新古典主義住宅，由市政住房當局設計并于1918-1923年建成/Torshov. Theneoclassical housing blocks at Torshov in Oslo were designed by the municipal housing authorities and built 1918-1923.（圖片來源/Photo: krogsveen.no, http://krogsveen.no/Selgebolig/Solgte-boliger/Bolig/Leilighet/Agathe-Groendahls-gate-5-891158696）

艾塔斯塔德：“Etterstad Palace”是奧斯陸最早的合作住宅項目，由雅各布·克里斯蒂·謝蘭設計，于1931年建成/ Etterstad. The "Etterstad Palace", one of the first co-operative housing projects in Oslo, was designed by Jacob Christie Kielland and completed in 1931.（圖片來源/Photo: obosno/ wikimedia commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:OBOS-borettslaget_Etterstad_1..jpg）

瑞典房子的現(xiàn)狀：位于克里斯蒂安松的瑞典房子現(xiàn)狀/ Swedish houses today. The Swedish houses as they appear today, in Kristiansund. （圖片來源/Photo: 由作者漢斯·斯科特提供/provided by Hans Skotte）

敵對勢力長達5年的占領徹底破壞了挪威最北部地區(qū)的基礎設施，建筑師們從這里開始了行動。除了重啟經(jīng)濟發(fā)展，住房建設是人們優(yōu)先關注的行業(yè)（圖5、6）。在這一樂觀的戰(zhàn)后年代建設的住宅項目具有很強的社會關注度，房屋和公寓的功能性往往很強，甚至比現(xiàn)在的開發(fā)商建設的住宅實用性更高。體現(xiàn)國家公共意愿、具備專業(yè)性和社會信任度，這使得建筑師成為了建設戰(zhàn)后環(huán)境的中心角色之一。在戰(zhàn)爭中經(jīng)歷了流亡的人們帶回了關于現(xiàn)代住宅和城鎮(zhèn)、區(qū)域規(guī)劃方面的創(chuàng)新性思想——劉易斯·芒福德在這一領域產(chǎn)生了重要的影響力。一些返回祖國的建筑師在戰(zhàn)后重建的國家機構(gòu)中繼續(xù)擔任戰(zhàn)略職務，他們很快叫停了在戰(zhàn)爭年代制定的重建計劃（圖7），因為這些計劃顯得過于“德式”，也太老套了。他們想尋找一種更為現(xiàn)代化和國際化的規(guī)劃方法。然而，因為時間的緊迫性和當時專業(yè)能力的局限性，大多在戰(zhàn)時制定的計劃還是得到了實施——雖然他們有著明顯的“德國味”。

從功能至上到對反技術治國運動

7博德：二戰(zhàn)后的博德重建規(guī)劃，由斯維勒·彼得森主持的BSR事務所設計；水彩畫作者雅各布·漢森，1943年/Bod?. Plan for the reconstruction of Bod? after World War II, by BSR, the office for reconstruction headed by architect Sverre Pedersen. Watercolour by Jacob Hanssen, 1943.（圖片來源/ Photo: The National Museum of Art, Architecture and Design, Norway/Dag André Ivars?y）

8蘭貝斯特：位于奧斯陸蘭貝斯特的住宅方案，由弗羅德·林南和奧拉夫·特韋滕于1950年設計，水彩畫作者阿爾內(nèi)·斯滕森/Lambertseter. Scheme for housing at Lambertseter in Oslo by Frode Rinnan and Olav Tveten, 1950. Watercolour by Arne Stenseng.（圖片來源/Photo: Oslo Museum）

住房不僅僅是由建筑設計、磚頭和砂漿組成的。居住，無論作為動詞還是名詞，都和家庭息息相關。在戰(zhàn)后的挪威，政府鼓勵人們擁有自己的家，希望人們進行儲蓄并將錢投入到建設自己的家園中去。同時，政府也對保護私有財產(chǎn)進行了立法，并用相關的經(jīng)濟激勵措施來支持這一政治前提。挪威的戰(zhàn)后住宅（圖8）由獨立運營的合作社來組織開發(fā)，由新建的國家住房銀行資助其建設，并由居民自身來對其進行管理。這使得建筑師能與用戶群體保持密切的聯(lián)系，可能也解釋了早期的戰(zhàn)后住房項目為何功能性特別優(yōu)越。但是在整個1950年代末和1960年代，建筑師的政治作用和影響力逐漸被削弱了。住房和建筑逐漸成為了可量化的商品，由官僚來進行開發(fā)管理。這一時代的建筑只注重數(shù)字。在奧斯陸的周邊建起了第一個具有普適性的高層郊區(qū)居住區(qū) （圖9），這一住區(qū)的建筑由許多著名的建筑師進行設計，各種建筑風格被統(tǒng)一在“實用主義”的標簽之下。這一崇尚技術性的轉(zhuǎn)變發(fā)生在了二戰(zhàn)后的世界大多數(shù)地區(qū)，催生了全球性的反應，并最終導致了1968年5月在巴黎發(fā)生的學生騷亂以及隨之而來的反殖民主義思潮。

9阿梅魯?shù)拢?968年,哈康·米耶爾瓦和佩爾·挪森為阿梅魯?shù)碌?000居民規(guī)劃的住宅項目/Ammerud. H?kon Mjelva and Per Norseng planned the housing project for 6000 people at Ammerud, 1968. （圖片來源/Photo: Office for Cultural Heritage, Oslo; http://www.oppdaggroruddalen. no/Omraader/Ammerud/Plan-og-arkitektur/Arkitektur-ogplanlegging）

10布林肯，1978年：對奧斯陸的歷史街區(qū)坎彭的保護工作/ Brinken, 1978. Working to preserve the historic neighbourhood of Kampen, Oslo, 1978. （圖片來源/Photo: Robert Lorange/kampenhistorielag.no）

建筑是一種社會化的活動，因此大多數(shù)的建筑師都是公眾眼中的專業(yè)人士。隨著這種要求變革的思潮的產(chǎn)生，許多被邊緣化了的建筑師重新進入了公眾視野。這些建筑師首先代表了反對由官僚主義或技術治國主義來主導城市規(guī)劃的聲音，出現(xiàn)在了從都柏林或者說柏林，再到簡·雅各布斯的紐約等諸多城市。此后，建筑專業(yè)的人士開始提出新的城市問題解決方案，并根據(jù)新時代的需求著手開發(fā)務實的物質(zhì)干預手段。這也是城市保護運動的開始：根據(jù)城市技術專家的論證，本來要組織拆遷的舊城，通常屬于工人階級社區(qū)的這些地區(qū)突然沐浴在了新的陽光之下，并被賦予了新的價值。許多建筑師親自參與到保留和恢復整個街區(qū)舊建筑的項目中去（圖10）。他們不僅廣泛活動，也通過公開抗議讓今天許多被我們認為是城鎮(zhèn)中最珍貴資源的歷史街區(qū)在被拆除的命運中幸免?；钴S在這些辯論和反抗計劃背后的常常是建筑師和建筑學專業(yè)的學生。

11 Storhamarl?ven：海德馬克博物館，哈馬爾；過去與現(xiàn)在相交，斯維勒·費恩，1967-2005/Storhamarl?ven. Hedmark Museum, Hamar. Where past and present meet. Sverre Fehn 1967-2005. （攝影/Photo: Helene Binet）

12沿海漁業(yè)：現(xiàn)今位于羅弗敦的沿海漁業(yè)仍部分依靠小型漁船/Coastal fisheries. Today's coastal fishing at Lofoten is still partially done from small boats.（圖片來源/Photo: Einar Stamnes/Aftenposten）

Emerging from five years of hostile occupation and the total devastation of the built infrastructure of the northernmost part of Norway, the architects mobilised. Aside from kick-starting the economy, housing became the prioritised sector (Fig.5, 6).The housing units built during the optimistic postwar years had a strong social focus, and the houses and apartments were often of a higher standard of usability even than those built by today's housing developers. The sense of a common national purpose, embodying professional and social trust, made architects some of the central actors in the shaping of the post-war environment. However, those who had been in exile during the war brought back innovative ideas on modern housing and on town and regional planning - Lewis Mumford became an important influence in this respect. Some of these returning architects went on to hold strategic positions in the state apparatus for postwar reconstruction, and they soon put a stop to the reconstruction plans that had been drawn up during the war years (Fig.7), as they were seen as being too "German" or too old fashioned. They wanted a more modern and international approach. However, due to time constraints and the limited professional capacity available, most of the war time plans were in fact implemented - despite their perceived "German-ness".

From functionalism to the reaction against technocracy

Housing is more than architectural design, bricks and mortar. Housing, both as a verb and a noun, is about the home. In post-war Norway, people were encouraged to own homes and to save and invest their savings in their homes. Property legislation and economic incentives were introduced to support this political premise. Norwegian postwar housing (Fig.8) was organised as independent co-operatives, funded by the new State Housing Bank and managed by the inhabitants themselves. This brought the architects into close contact with the user groups, which may explain the highly functional quality of the early post-war housing programs. However throughout the late 1950s and 1960s the architects' political role and influence waned. Housing and architecture gradually became all about numbers, in other words, it was a quantifiable commodity, managed by bureaucrats.The first repetitive high rise suburbs (Fig.9) sprang up around Oslo, designed by respectable architects in a style loosely labelled "pragmatism". In general this technocratic shift took place throughout most of the post-WWII world, and finally resulted in a world-wide reaction, culminating in the student riots in Paris in May 1968, and the counter-culture that followed.

Architecture is a social endeavour, making most architects publicly minded professionals. Consequently, a great number of the marginalised architects re-entered the scene as this shift took place. First as voices of opposition to the bureaucratic or technocratic approach that dominated urban planning, as was the case throughout many cities, from Dublin or Berlin to Jane Jacobs' New York. Next, architecture professionals started proposing novel urban solutions and developing actual physical interventions in response to the demands of a new age. These times also witnessed the birth of urban conservation: old, often working class neighbourhoods, scheduled for demolition by city technocrats, were suddenly seen in a new light and given new values. Many architects engaged personally and practically in saving and restoring whole quarters of old buildings (Fig.10). Not only did they prevail, but much of what are today the most cherished historic neighbourhoods of our towns and cities were saved from destruction by these public protests. Behind the arguments and counter-proposals were often architects and architecture students.

These were times of critical change. The protests were the first signs of opposition to the bureaucratic state. What followed was a political shift: individualisation, privatisation and finally neo-liberalism - and a cultural postmodernism which also engulfed architecture. Internationally, architects followed the flow of capital with an increasing inward-looking obsession with theorising and aesthetics. As societal trust in the profession waned and the sense of common purpose slowly evaporated even in Norway, so did the concept of "public" housing. Housing became less a question of providing people with homes and more a question of providing them with investment opportunities.

Still, impressive architectural work was being done during these years by exceptional architects. Storhamarl?ven (Fig.11), the museum project at Hamar by Sverre Fehn, is an outstanding example - grounded as it is in a sophisticated and profound discussion of the interplay between built history and the architecture of today. Also within the postmodern idiom some fine buildings emerged. However, these were individual endeavours, not a consequence of societal solidarity or public policy. It took a couple of decades, well into the 1990s, before architecture again started to emerge as a politically relevant force with the power to make a societal contribution.

Building to support the districts

Although around 80% of the 5.2 million people in Norway live in towns and urban centres scattered thinly across the whole of the country, only the capital, Oslo, reaches over one million inhabitants. This demographic pattern of a thin spread of small towns and villages is a result of the political strength of the periphery, very much a legacy of the country's history and its dependence on natural resources, namely small scale farming and fishing (Fig.12). Norway has a coastline of 25,000 kilometres, almost twice the length of the coast of China, which gives ready access to rich fishing grounds. This decentralised pattern of population has been protected by post-war policy and supported by state investments in the outlying districts, investments like schools, kindergartens, hospitals and health facilities, care homes, cultural (Fig.13) and religious institutions and sports facilities. This has in turn has called for architectural interventions to define the public sphere. Up until the turn of the 20th Century, architectural competitions were held to ensure that these investments were of the high architectural quality that their underlying social purpose called for.

這是個孕育重大變革的時代?？棺h是反對官僚主義治國的第一階段。緊接著而來的是政治上的轉(zhuǎn)變：個人化、私有化，以及最后到達新自由主義和一些后現(xiàn)代主義的文化思潮都開始影響建筑。在國際上，建筑師追逐著資本的流動方向，越來越沉迷于對理論和美學的內(nèi)在追求。即使在挪威，社會對建筑專業(yè)的信任度也逐漸衰減，公眾的共同目標感緩慢消失，“公共”住房的概念也是如此。對住房問題的探討開始更少關注如何讓人們承載他們的家，轉(zhuǎn)而關注如何為人們提供投資機會。

不過即使在這些年，那些杰出的建筑師仍然在創(chuàng)造令人印象深刻的建筑作品。由斯維勒·費恩在哈馬爾設計的博物館項目Storhamarl?ven（圖11）就是一個杰出的例子，這一項目探討了歷史街區(qū)與今天的現(xiàn)代建筑之間復雜而深刻的相互作用關系。在后現(xiàn)代的語境中也出現(xiàn)了一些精品建筑。然而，這些作品都是憑借個人努力，而不是社會團結(jié)或公共政策作用的結(jié)果。直到幾十年后的1990年代，建筑才再次開始成為具有社會貢獻作用的政治力量。

支持地區(qū)發(fā)展的建筑

雖然挪威520萬人口中約80%都居住在全國各地的城鎮(zhèn)和城市中，但只有首都奧斯陸才有超過百萬人口的居民。這種居民稀疏地分布在各個小城鎮(zhèn)和村莊中的人口模式是首都外的政治力量角力的結(jié)果，也源于國家的歷史傳統(tǒng)中對自然資源、小規(guī)模農(nóng)業(yè)和漁業(yè)（圖12）的依賴。挪威擁有25,000km的海岸線，幾乎是中國海岸線長度的兩倍，可以方便地到達資源豐富的漁場。這種去中心化的人口格局受到戰(zhàn)后政策的保護，國家對首都外地區(qū)的投資也得到保護，投資的對象包括了學校、幼兒園、醫(yī)院和保健設施、護理院、文化（圖13）和宗教機構(gòu)以及體育設施等。這種政治模式要求通過建筑的干預來界定公共領域。到了20世紀初，各地都會通過舉辦建筑設計競賽來確保這些投資能得到和其所體現(xiàn)的社會目的相匹配的高質(zhì)量建筑。

所有這些設施的興建都是為了支持當?shù)氐牡貐^(qū)活動，或是為居住在大城市中心地區(qū)以外的人們提供平等的機會。其中對兒童看護設施的投資也是1960和1970年代婦女解放運動的結(jié)果。挪威現(xiàn)在是在兩性平等方面世界排名最高的國家之一，因此在建設幼兒園和兒童日托中心方面存在著根深蒂固的性別優(yōu)先政策。通過這一系列的公共項目（圖14），建筑師和規(guī)劃師為全國建筑環(huán)境的現(xiàn)代化建設做出了貢獻，也許在某些方面也幫助了邊遠地區(qū)的社區(qū)保持了存在的目的感，甚至是自豪感。

這些散布的社區(qū)中的許多都在“美景路線”沿途，在這些異常美麗的風景中有公路穿過。近年來，挪威公路行政管理局已經(jīng)投入數(shù)百萬經(jīng)費，為旅客建造休息站（圖15），讓人們能在沿途駐留、觀賞景觀；由年輕建筑師設計的這些寶石般的小建筑提升了人們欣賞挪威擁有的令人窒息的美景時的體驗。這些投資也被視為對當?shù)芈糜螛I(yè)的公共資助，因此也符合廣義的地區(qū)發(fā)展政策。

國家旅游線路計劃是在1990年代初制定的一項政治舉措。當時，建筑學正處在重新進入影響國家政治的時期，這一計劃得到了當時的文化部長奧瑟·克萊韋蘭作為一個藝術家的個人倡議。在那之前的幾年中，很少有人關注城市環(huán)境的公共場所屬性。而這一計劃帶動了相關立法，確保了城市設計的最低標準，也成立了相關的政府組織來傳播好的想法，推動市政當局和公共機構(gòu)為其所處的物質(zhì)環(huán)境承擔更多的責任。

在這幾年中，國際建筑界也開始對挪威建筑師的一些工作感興趣。這反過來又有助于鞏固建筑師在國內(nèi)的地位，并且允許他們嘗試更多具有探索性和國際影響力的工作。大約10年前，政府通過與建筑行業(yè)的密切合作，發(fā)布了第一個國家性的建筑政策。這是一個值得稱贊的倡議——雖然迄今為止似乎還沒有因此產(chǎn)生任何廣受好評或是具有實質(zhì)性的建筑作品。

發(fā)達的經(jīng)濟與本地人才

世界上第一位研究和平學的教授約翰·加爾通為經(jīng)濟和社會發(fā)展的“北歐模式”發(fā)明了一個簡短卻廣為流傳的解釋：發(fā)展=生產(chǎn)×分配。北歐模式受到世界銀行和世界各國進步經(jīng)濟學家的好評，至今仍是全球化經(jīng)濟發(fā)展的參考模板。各種不同版本的加爾通原則在二戰(zhàn)后期間指導了挪威的經(jīng)濟政策和公眾理念。在其指引下，世界銀行的研究顯示挪威是世界上不平等性最低的國家之一。但是，我們同時也是全球新自由主義經(jīng)濟的成員，社會的平等性正因此面臨威脅。挪威的建筑學和建筑業(yè)作為政治現(xiàn)實的一部分，也正面臨新的挑戰(zhàn)。面對這種情況，國家的法律和良好的文化政策能起的作用通常不大。但挪威的情況有其獨特之處。

13 弗萊克峽灣文化中心，海倫與哈德建筑事務所，2016/FlekkeThord Cultural Centre. FlekkeThord Cultural Centre. Helen & Hard, 2016. （攝影/Photo: Jiri Havran）

14 富魯塞特圖書館，奧斯陸：一個多功能面向說有年齡層的公共場所；Rodeo建筑事務所，2016/Furuset Library, Oslo. A place for many activites and people of all ages. Rodeo Arkitekter, 2016.（攝影/Photo: Sverre Christian Jarild）

羅爾斯蒂根瞭望臺：國家旅游線路上的羅爾斯蒂根瞭望平臺，雷于爾夫·拉姆斯塔建筑事務所，2012/Trollstigen lookout. Lookout platform on the National Tourist Route Trollstigen. Reiulf Ramstad Arkitekter, 2012. （圖片來源/ Photo: ? 2011 diephotodesigner.de; www.diephotodesigner. de）

These public facilities were constructed to support local activities and initiatives or to secure equal opportunities for people living outside the large urban centres. Investing in child-care facilities was also a result of the women's liberation movement of the 1960s and 1970s. As Norway is now one of the top-scoring countries (Fig. 14) in the world when it comes to gender equality, there are deep-rooted gender policies embedded in the construction of kindergartens and day-care centres. Through the whole range of public projects, architects and planners have contributed to the modernisation of the built environment throughout the whole country, and may in some ways also have helped outlying local communities retain a sense of purpose, even pride.

Many of these "off-the-grid" communities are reached by way of "scenic routes", roads passing through exceptionally beautiful landscapes. In recent years, the Norwegian Public Roads Administration have invested millions in creating rest stops for travellers (Fig.15), places to stop and view the landscape along these routes. These rest stops are frequently small gems designed by young architects, heightening the experience of passing through the beautiful and breath-taking landscapes that Norway has to offer. These investments are also conceived as publicly funded support for the local tourist industry, and as such are also in line with a broader regional development policy.

The National Tourist Route Program was the result of a political initiative in the early 1990s. At that time, architecture was returning to the stage of national politics, primarily through the initiatives of the then-Minister of Culture ?se Kleveland, an artist in her own right. During the preceding years, the public aspect of the urban environment had been given scant attention. This changed as laws were passed securing minimum standards of urban design, and government organisations were established to propagate good ideas and nudge municipalities and public institutions to take on a broader responsibility for their immediate physical environment.

亞歷山德里亞圖書館：斯內(nèi)赫塔于1989年獲得位于埃及亞歷山德里亞的新圖書館國際設計競賽，該項目于2001年完工/Alexandria Library. Sn?hetta won the international competition for a new library at Alexandria in Egypt in 1989. The building was completed in 2001. （圖片來源/ Photo: Sn?hetta）

During these years, the international architectural press began to take an interest in the work of Norwegian architects. This in turn helped to strengthen their domestic standing, and allowed for more explorative and internationally commended work. About ten years ago the Government - in close collaboration with the profession - issued their first national architecture policy. Though it was a laudable initiative, nothing sensational or even tangible seems to have emerged from it so far.

Economic success and local talent

Johan Galtung, the world's first professor in Peace Studies, is the author of a short and much popularised explanation of the "Nordic model" of economic and social development: Development = production × distribution. The Nordic model has been much praised by the World Bank and progressive economists throughout the world, and it remains a fixture in the global economic discourse. Different versions of Galtung's principle have guided the economic policies as well as public perceptions in Norway throughout the post-WWII era. As a result, Norway is one of the world's least unequal countries, according to the World Bank. But we are partners in the global neo-liberal economy, and as such that social equity is under threat. Norwegian architecture, and the business of architecture as part and parcel of this political reality, are also facing new challenges. Under such circumstances national laws and well-intended cultural policies play a lesser role. Yet Norway emerges unique.

卡西亞合作社：蒂因-特內(nèi)斯圖恩建筑事務所于2011年在蘇門答臘島設計的肉桂生產(chǎn)訓練中心，在當?shù)鼐用窈徒ㄖW生協(xié)助下建成/Cassia Coop. TYIN tegnestue designed a training centre for cinnamon production on Sumatra in 2011, built with the help of local people and architecture students.（圖片來源/Photo: Pasi Aalto/TYIN tegnestue）

Why? Norway has oil. Since the early 1970s the oil economy has made Norway enviously rich, both as a nation and as private citizens. Though there are fewer and fewer people employed in the oil industry, the income from nationalised offshore oil extraction has filled public coffers for decades. We have had the means to build buildings, resources that could have exploded into architectural excess echoing the oil nations of the Middle East. But this never happened. In Norway, the ethos of social equality still prevails - albeit under some stress. This has to some extent prevented us from channelling our riches into luxurious structures - in the recent competition for a new government building in Oslo, for example, the only qualities specifically required by the programme were that the building be "modest" and expressive of "Norwegian values".

Furthermore, we have had a steady trickle of architectural talent capable of giving form to this social ideal. Sn?hetta are a case in point. After winning the international competition for the Alexandria Library (Fig.16) in 1989 as mere youngsters, they have not only become international "starchitects", but more importantly they have made innovative contributions to Norwegian architecture and design at home. Sn?hetta as a national brand has thus played a crucial role in heightening public awareness of architecture within Norway today.

論及原因，是因為挪威有石油。自1970年代初以來，無論作為一個國家或是作為個人公民，石油經(jīng)濟都使我們富裕得引人稱羨。雖然石油工業(yè)的從業(yè)人數(shù)已經(jīng)越來越少，但國家近海石油開采的收入已經(jīng)滿足了未來數(shù)十年的公共財政所需。我們具備的建造技術，以及擁有的資源足以造出超越中東石油國家的宏大建筑物，但卻從來沒有這么做過。這是因為在挪威，雖然面臨一些壓力，社會平等的精神仍然盛行。這在一定程度上阻止了我們將財富轉(zhuǎn)化為豪華的建筑物，例如最近在奧斯陸的一座新政府大樓的競標中，計劃書中唯一的一項對設計品質(zhì)的要求就是建筑物要“溫和”，能體現(xiàn)“挪威的價值觀”。

此外，我們也擁有一個穩(wěn)定的建筑人才庫，有能力實踐這種社會理想。斯內(nèi)赫塔建筑事務所就是一個例子。 他們作為一群年輕人在1989年獲得了亞歷山德里亞圖書館（圖16）的國際競賽大獎，之后不僅成為了國際上的“明星建筑師”，更重要的是為挪威的建筑和設計方面做出了創(chuàng)新性的貢獻。作為一個民族品牌，斯內(nèi)赫塔在提高挪威當今的建筑的意識方面發(fā)揮了至關重要的作用。

除了斯內(nèi)赫塔之外，一些其他挪威公司也一直活躍在國際舞臺上，其中的大多數(shù)是規(guī)模較大的公司。較小的公司則依靠國內(nèi)的工作量就已經(jīng)足夠運營了。不過目前，建筑行業(yè)正在經(jīng)由合并和收購發(fā)生重組，規(guī)模較小的建筑、景觀和工程類公司常常被較大的公司并購，而這些大公司通常是國際化的工程咨詢公司。這種情況反映了現(xiàn)行的商業(yè)環(huán)境，以及與建筑行業(yè)相關的新的國家規(guī)章和制度。傳統(tǒng)的建筑師和客戶之間的聯(lián)系方式也因此被嚴重削弱；建筑師現(xiàn)在主要是與工程承包商之間發(fā)生關系了，有些人會說建筑師是被承包商“束縛”了。在城市規(guī)劃領域，這也導致了“由承包商驅(qū)動”的城市發(fā)展實踐，這一力量越來越多地打破了委托建筑師和規(guī)劃師來為公共利益服務的傳統(tǒng)——在由左派和右派共同組成的中間派政府的一貫政策下，本應該服務公眾的規(guī)劃目標開始讓位于私人投資者的經(jīng)濟利益。

建筑界的反抗

自行車驛站：位于利勒斯特倫火車站的自行車驛站，遠距離的上班族可以在搭乘火車前停放他們的自行車；由多個建筑師設計，2016/Bicycle hotel. Bicycle hotel at Lillestr?m train station, where commuters can park their bicycles before getting the train. Various Architects, 2016.（攝影/Photo: Ibrahim Elhayawan）

但是，我們也再次看到了建筑師們的反抗。新的建筑從業(yè)者們基于不同的目標創(chuàng)立了各自的小公司，這些小公司具有多元性和互補性，許多公司堅持將焦點放在本地區(qū)，但也和其他小公司建立戰(zhàn)略合作伙伴關系。這些努力需要成本來支持，許多小公司在維持經(jīng)營和實現(xiàn)新想法上掙扎著，其中的一部分獲得了成功，更有一些則獲得了巨大的成功。蒂因-特內(nèi)斯圖恩建筑師事務所（圖17）也許是最熱門的例子。繼在南方國家開展了一系列基于社會目的的小型實踐并得到廣泛報道后，他們成了唯一被邀請參加2016年威尼斯建筑雙年展主展覽的斯堪的納維亞公司。蒂因-特內(nèi)斯圖恩的創(chuàng)始人在開始創(chuàng)業(yè)時只是學生，但在幾年間，他們在國際建筑新聞界獲得的報道比包括斯內(nèi)赫塔在內(nèi)的其他斯堪的納維亞建筑公司更廣泛。盡管他們的作品到目前為止都較為溫和，但他們所獲得的關注也證明了建筑行業(yè)的轉(zhuǎn)變：建筑師正在脫離他們的后現(xiàn)代美學專家的角色，轉(zhuǎn)而關注當今時代面臨的更為迫切的挑戰(zhàn)，例如社會公平和全球資源的可持續(xù)利用。

建筑與政治間有著千絲萬縷的聯(lián)系，而政治也與公眾情緒密不可分。建筑師在二戰(zhàn)之后扮演的直接政治角色的時代早已過去了。對于當今挪威個性化的消費者來說，建筑主要傳遞的是個人興趣。目前的右派保守政府已經(jīng)將住房和城市發(fā)展完全托付給了自由市場經(jīng)濟。挪威的建筑師現(xiàn)在還不能大幅地影響公眾情緒，從而恢復在政治上的重要地位。他們?nèi)匀辉谡紊媳贿吘壔?，專業(yè)發(fā)揮的空間也受到承包商和一系列專業(yè)顧問的擠壓。面對當前的建筑實踐與資源短缺、氣候變化問題之間不可避免的沖突矛盾，他們有可能起到的潛在關鍵作用也許也會因為那些將可持續(xù)性（圖18）作為市場發(fā)展機會的專家的存在而被減弱。例如，節(jié)能現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)成為整個建筑行業(yè)的關注焦點，但這并不是一個由建筑師主導的專業(yè)領域。不過，社會的可持續(xù)性目前尚未明確地被定義，因此挪威的建筑界也并未完全失去其重要性（圖19）。

在過去的10多年間，挪威的建筑師們針對21世紀人類面臨的重大挑戰(zhàn)，實驗、調(diào)查、設計并建造了一些真正具有創(chuàng)新性的建筑（圖20）。這些建筑不止于遵循法律法規(guī)的要求，也不屈從官僚政府的指引，而是通過對空間和物質(zhì)的具有創(chuàng)造性的革新和設計來回應社會問題。無論這些作品的作者們的政治影響力如何，這些建筑都將成為未來的挪威和海外建筑師們的參考和資源。

In addition to Sn?hetta, there are a handful of other Norwegian firms consistently active on the international scene, most of them being larger firms. Smaller practices have had mostly plenty of work at home. Currently however, the profession is being restructured through agglomeration and acquisitions, whereby smaller firms of architects, landscape architects and engineers are bought up by larger, often international consultancies. This is a response to the prevailing business climate as well as to new national rules and regulations governing the building industry. As a result, however, the traditional link between architect and client has been severely weakened and architects are now mostly contractually linked, some would say "chained", to a contractor. In the field of urban planning this has led to a practice of "contractor driven" urban development, which is increasingly outmanoeuvring the traditional public interest mandate of architects and planners - public aims have been giving way to the interests of private investors, with the blessing of a succession of centrist governments both from the left and the right.

Architectural reactions

But again, we see architects react. Small startups are being established by new practitioners with different aims, small firms diversify and collaborate whilst others stubbornly continue to work with a local focus and in strategic partnership with other small offices. Though these efforts come at a cost and a lot of smaller firms struggle both economically and in the realisation of new ideas, some succeed while others succeed magnificently. TYIN tegnestue (Fig.17) is perhaps the most arresting case in point. Following a string of small, socially motivated and widely published projects in the global south, they were the only Scandinavian office to be invited to the main exhibition of the 2016 Venice Architecture Biennale. TYIN began as mere students, but a few years ago they had had a wider coverage in the international architectural press than any other Scandinavian architecture practice, Sn?hetta included. Though their oeuvre so far is modest, the attention they have received bears witness to a shift in the profession: architects are leaving their postmodern role of aesthetic specialists to focus on addressing the more urgent challenges of our time, like social equity and a sustainable use of global resources.

Architecture is inextricably linked to politics, and politics is inextricably linked to public sentiment. The direct political role architects played in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War is long gone. For the individualised consumer citizen of present-day Norway, architecture is an issue of only passing interest. The current right-wing conservative government has left the architecture of housing and urban development completely in the hands of the market. Architects in Norway have not yet been able to significantly influence public sentiment and thereby reclaim political prominence. They remain politically marginalised and professionally squeezed between contractors and an array of specialised consultants. Their potentially pivotal role in the inevitable showdown between current building practices and resource scarcity and climate change may be eclipsed by specialists who see sustainability (Fig.18) as a market opportunity. Energy conservation, for example, is by now established as a concern for the whole of the building industry, by no means a specialist domain for architects. Social sustainability, however, has yet to be clearly defined but nevertheless, it is an area where the Norwegian architectural profession has never entirely lost focus (Fig.19).

Architects in Norway have over the last decade or so experimented, investigated, designed and built truly innovative buildings (Fig.20) responding to the momentous challenges of the 21st Century. This is not guided by the requirements of laws and regulations or by bureaucratic demands, but rather through sheer creative spatial and material innovation and design. Irrespective of the political influence of their authors, these built works will be a reference and a resource for future architects in Norway and abroad.

Action and Reaction: The Work of Architects in Norway

The work of architects always relates to the prevailing power structures, or politics, within the societies in which they are engaged. In Norway the architectural profession has been grounded in political developments since the Second World War, starting with reconstruction efforts, particularly in the area of housing. As the economy of housing construction made urban development increasingly technocratic, the 1960s and 1970s saw a strong public as well as professional reaction which focused on conservation and environmental values. Outside the urban centres, national policy was dedicated to supporting regional economies, and architects have been essential in shaping the physical environment of smaller communities throughout the modern welfare state. Today, as the profession operates within a narrowing band of influence, the creative talent of many Norwegian architects makes their work a resource and an inspiration in Norway and abroad.

Norway, post-war reconstruction, housing politics, technocracy, conservation, public welfare, gender equality, the Nordic model

學生住宅：位于特隆赫姆的學生住宅。挪威最高的用交錯層壓木材（CLT）建造的結(jié)構(gòu)之一；MDH 建筑事務所，2017/Student housing. Student housing in Trondheim. One of the tallest structures in the country built with CLT-elements (cross-laminated timber). MDH Arkitekter, 2017。（攝影/Photo: Ivan Brodey）

斯邁斯特回收中心：位于奧斯陸斯邁斯特的回收中心，公眾可以直接向此中心運送回收物品；隆格瓦建筑事務所，2015/Smestad recycling. Recycling centre at Smestad in Oslo, where the public can deliver goods for recycling. Longva arkitekter, 2015. （攝影/Photo: Einar Aslaksen）

挪威科技大學建筑與設計學院，《建筑N》／Faculty of Architecture and Design, NTNU; Arkitektur N

2017-05-10