社区遗产的重要性_伊格纳西奥·盖兰.pdf

北京规划建设 205 INTERVIEW 访谈YZ:Along many years you have been investigating and working in the field of rural and post-industrial heritage.In the Chinese academic context,the theme of“community heritage”has not been much developed yet.How would you define community heritage?许多年来，您都在做着与当地社群联系密切的乡村遗产与后工业遗产相关的工作，这也被您称之为“社区遗产”。在中国，社区遗产似乎还没有被充分认识，您能首先简要介绍一下社区遗产的相关概念吗？GG:Community heritage can be defined as the everyday heritage or mundane heritage.In that sense community heritage is an integrated part of the daily life of people.Heritage places as meaningful locations can form a bridge linking the past to the future in a sensitive way.Accessing a local communitys connections to their surrounding environment and recognising and acknowledging the role that community heritage plays here is critical because peoples relationships with places are key to the contemporary policy issues surrounding(social)sustainability.When thinking about the meaning of a community heritage place,we cannot exclude the sense of rootedness,or the nature of emotional bonds between people and places.These aspects are often placed in the same row as historical continuity and stability,identity and enclosure while setting aside a more conservative idea about the meaning of place.With my research I want to demonstrate that the interaction with community heritage,such as vernacular and industrial heritage,addresses the past,present and future simultaneously,which means that it emphasizes both stability and dynamics,enclosure and openness.社区遗产可以定义为日常遗产或世俗遗产。从这个意义上说，社区遗产是人们日常生活的一个组成部分。遗产地作为有意义的地点，可以以一种敏感的方式形成一座连接过去和未来的桥梁。了解当地社区与其周围环境的联系，并认识和承认社区遗产在这里发挥的作用至关重要，因为人们与地方的关系是当代围绕（社会）可持续性的政策问题的关键。在思考社区遗产地的意义时，我们不能排除根植于地方的感觉，或者人与地方之间情感纽带的性质。抛开对于“地方”概念更为保守的释义，这些方面往往与历史的连续性和稳定性、身份认同和封闭性放在一起。通过我的研究，我想证明与社区遗产（如乡土和工业遗产）的互动同时涉及过去、现在和未来，这意味着它强调稳定性和动态性、封闭性和开放性。嘉宾：吉赛尔 冈图瓦（GisleGantois），比利时鲁汶大学（KULeuven）建筑学院副教授，建筑遗产学者，建筑师采访：伊格纳西奥 盖兰（IgnacioGalan），比利时鲁汶大学建筑学院博士候选人，建筑师张一平，比利时鲁汶大学建筑学院博士候选人Unveiling the Significance of Community Heritage社区遗产的重要性GG吉赛尔 冈图瓦IG伊格纳西奥 盖兰YZ张一平206 北京规划建设访谈 INTERVIEWYZ:What challenges is community heritage currently facing?您认为当下社区遗产面临的挑战有哪些？IG:How should we differently approach community or monumental heritage?对于社区遗产和纪念物遗产，我们的处理方法有何差别？GG:Community heritage often has an activating,generating and inspiring appearance.It serves as a threshold of collective memory of shared ideas that are constantly renewed with an opening in looking to the future.This process is supported and questioned by a myriad of individual memories,experiences and wishes,hence underscoring the idea of openness,diversity,historical heterogeneity and social interactions as sources of place meaning.社区遗产通常具有触发、激活和鼓舞人心的作用。它作为共同思想的集体记忆的门槛，随着对未来的展望而不断更新。这一过程受到无数个人记忆、经历和愿望的支持和质疑，因此支撑了开放性、多样性、历史异质性和社会互动作为地方意义来源的理念。GG:Because of the need for alternative funding and of the challenge of urban pressure and post-industrial processes,in many parts of the world,increasing commercialisation has impacted numerous historical city centres,quarters and peri-urban areas.As a result,the important agency of community heritage in the creation of locality and place and the well-being related to the interaction with a heritage place wasand is stilllargely undervalued in development plans.These plans heritage.The focus is on their instant economic utility because they are often located in very attractive senescent environments and their archetypical form allows for multiple reuse.Unfortunately,in many cases,their new function dramatically changes their spatial context and composition,reducing them to empty shells.Hence,this heritage is not only disrupted from its historical continuity in time and space,but also from what it essentially isnamely,a long-term developed common with deep significance for local communities.Ultimately,these heritage sites can no longer be active drivers of positive change as they once were.Instead,they become something that is only subject to change.由于需要资金维护，加之城市化的压力和后工业进程的挑战，在世界许多地方，历史悠久的城市中心、街区和城郊地区被日益增长的商业化改变了。因此，社区遗产对于创造在地性和场所感，以及与遗产场所互动相关的福祉方面的重要作用在城市开发中很大程度上被低估了。（当今城市开发的）重点在于社区遗产的即时经济效用，因为它们通常位于非常有吸引力的历史环境中，并且它们的建筑本体允许被反复再使用。不幸的是，许多情况下新功能极大地改变了它们的空间环境和构成，使它们变成了空壳。因此，这一遗产不仅在时间和空间上的历史连续性被打断，而且其本质也被打断了即对当地社群具有深远意义的长期形成的纽带。最终，这些遗产地不能再像以前那样成为有益变化的积极推动者。相反，它们变成了只能被改变的东西。GG:Until recently,the official valuation of heritage buildings and sites has been nearly exclusively based on their material historical characteristics.In the past,there was a concentration on monumental heritage,and then,in the second part of the twentieth century,the focus was also on preserving the vernacular and industrial heritage for future generations as both the material and immaterial witnesses of all facets of human life and activity.In the mid-1970s,environmental protection and the preservation of monuments,objects,ways of life,landscapes and animal species became major concerns in the context of increasing globalisation.This was translated in UNESCOs charters in 1972 with theConvention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage,which codified the idea of world heritage.The year 1980 was declared Heritage Year,and the idea of memory(invisible and intangible)attached to places came into the foreground.In 1984,the historian Pierre Nora introduced the idea of a site of memory lieu de mmoire together with heritage(visible and tangible)and its protection and promotion.Inventorying and rethinking it became major issues.直到最近，对遗产建筑和遗址的官方评价几乎还完全基于它们的物质历史特征。（在遗产保IG:What is the interaction between local community and community heritage?那么，您认为当地社群与社区遗产的关系是怎样的呢？北京规划建设 207 INTERVIEW 访谈YZ:In the management of community heritage:how should the practitioner cope with the perspective of local inhabitants?在社区遗产的管理中，从业者（建筑师、规划师、项目经理等）应该如何应对当地居民的看法和反馈？护）早期阶段，人们专注于纪念性遗产。自20世纪下半叶，乡土遗产和工业遗产保护开始受到关注，因为它们可以作为人类生活和活动的物质/非物质的见证。70年代中期，在日益全球化的背景下，环境保护和保护古迹、物品、生活方式、景观和动物物种成为主要关注点，并在1972年被列为联合国教科文组织的章程保护世界文化和自然遗产公约。该公约编入了世界遗产的相关概念。1980年被宣布为“遗产年”，与地方记忆（不可见的和无形的）有关的想法出现了。1984年，历史学家皮埃尔诺拉提出了“记忆之场”以及遗产（可见的和有形的）保护和开发的概念。盘点和再思考成为主要问题。This preoccupation with preserving,even reconstructing,a past that might never have existed finally resulted in an over fabrication of heritage.Today we could state that the approach towards monumental heritage is rather static and object focussed.The approach towards community heritage should rather be active,contextualised and with a clear focus on the life human and other-than-human-embraced by the building.这种对保存甚至重建可能并不存在的过去的执着，最终导致了对遗产的过度加工。今天我们可以说，处理纪念性遗产的方法是相当静态的和以对象为中心的。处理社区遗产的方法应该是积极的、情境化的，并需要关注建筑所拥抱的生活人类的和非人类的。GG:We realise that there is a danger in using community as an easy concept to defend the choices made in restoration or development of heritage site projects.These projects tend to involve things that are done for communities,rather than with them.For this reason,it is important to(re-)define on a case-by-case basis what the community is in relation to a particular project,here having in mind that community is a very fluid concept rather than fixed entities and descriptions,in flux and constant motion,unstable and uncertain as stated by the authors Waterton and Smith(2010).It is important to understand community as a powerful concept within the field of heritage studies because there is indeed a growing need for considering the intense interaction between local residents and community heritage in the creation of emotional bonds between people and a particular place or environment of which the heritage structures are an integrated part.我们意识到将社区作为一个简单的概念来捍卫，在修复或开发遗产地项目中所做的选择存在危险。这些项目往往涉及为社区所做的事情，而不是与他们一起做的事情。出于这个原因，重要的是根据具体情况（重新）定义当地社区与特定项目的关系。正如学者Waterton和Smith（2010）所说，“社区”是一个非常流动的概念，“而不是固定的实体或对象，它在不断变化和不断运动中，是不稳定和不确定的”。认识到“社区”在遗产研究领域中的意义和价值非常重要，因为在人们与包含遗产结构的特定地点或环境之间建立情感纽带时，确实越来越需要考虑当地居民与社区遗产之间的密切互动。GG:Interactive Walking is a new survey methodology of routes,observations and narratives,which is characterised by an active,process-based and context-related approach,whereby knowledge is derived from the practice of everyday life.It shifts a heritage practitioners attention from an exclusive substantial(or material)focus on the historical building or site to a broader peripheral vision with an anthropological perspective.Indeed,it underscores the field role of the heritage practitioner with time and slowness as the methods essential features.The instruments and strategies employed in the new methodology of Interactive Walking combine methodological approaches in cultural anthropology such as historical and phenomenological approaches with unplanned open interviews to community members as important features with the skills of an architect,comprising observational drawing and model making,and historical heritage studies.The working method facilitates the detection and implementation of multiple narratives,both old and new;these narratives are indirectly collected while moving and pausing on site through IG:The methodology“Interactive Walking”that you have developed throughout time is a fascinating subject.Could you briefly explain us what does it consist of?您在工作中所创造的“交互式行走”研究方法非常具有启发性，可以简要介绍一下吗？208 北京规划建设访谈 INTERVIEWunplanned encounters with randomly run-into subjects,members of the community impacted by a heritage project,here without distinction between natives and newcomers,minorities or gender.“交互式行走”是一种包含路径、观察和叙述的调查方法，其特点是主动、基于过程以及与情境相关。（通过此方法获得的）知识来源于日常生活的实践。它将遗产从业者的注意力从对历史建筑或遗址的排他性的“具象”（或物质）关注转移到具有人类学视角的更广泛的视野。事实上，它以“时间”和“缓慢性”作为方法的基本特征，强调了遗产从业者的现场角色。“交互式行走”方法中采用的工具和策略结合了文化人类学中的方法论途径（如对社区成员的随机采访）和建筑师的基本技能（如观察绘图和模型制作），以及历史遗产研究的历史学和现象学方法。该工作方法有助于检测和实施多种新旧叙事：这些叙述是在现场行走和停歇时，通过与随机遇到的主题、受遗产项目影响的社区成员的意外相遇间接收集的，而社区成员也不会基于本地人和新来者、少数民族或性别来区分。Interactive Walking consists of three successive steps.Step 1:Interactive Journeys entails the heritage practitioners immersion in the natural setting of the heritage place while walking,observing,sketching and interacting.In Step 2:Spatial Narratives,the practitioners individual experiences on location are represented in artistic drawings and tactile models in which heritage places play a central role.In Step 3:Cartes Parlantes,the individual experiences are confronted and combined with existing expert knowledge.The three steps of the method were built up through different real-life case studies and further elaborated in master studio assignments for students of the International Master in the Architecture programme at KU Leuven,Belgium.交互式行走由三个连续的步骤组成。第一步：交互之旅。遗产从业者在步行、观察、速写和互动的同时沉浸在遗产地的自然环境中。第二步：空间叙事。从业者在场地中的个人经历以艺术绘画和立体模型的形式呈现，要凸显遗产地的核心作用。第三步：有效表达。交流地图（speaking maps）中，个人经验与现有的专业知识相结合。该方法的三个步骤是通过不同的实际案例研究建立的，并在比利时鲁汶大学国际建筑硕士设计课程的作业中得到详尽体现。GG:The method and more specifically the first step of Interactive Journeys has similarities with other existing walking methods such as the so-called natural go-alongs.This particular variation of the walking method raises the most interesting issues about how an existential dimension of heritage space,such as its actual meaning,may be detected,unveiled and grasped.However,here,the aim is not so much to walk with others but to meet people and have unplanned open interviews,pausing to draw a chosen view.It is the practitioner who wanders and chooses the stops.It is the people on location who decide whether the chosen and drawn views are tempting enough to talk about(turning it into the topic of conversation)while they are in that place.At that moment,the interviewees are prompted by meanings and connections to the surrounding environment or heritage structure that are being drawn by the practitioner.The fact that the conversation takes place while taking a break to be able to sketch the selected views counters the critique that both concentrating on the(informal)interview and taking notes are very difficult and unnecessarily interrupt the flow of the conversation.The method meanders through different temporalities not only when looking at heritage as such(to be understood as a mixture of past,present and future without a clear delineation),but also in the combination of different practice-based methods and tools from different academic traditions,including heritage studies,cultural anthropology and architecture.该方法更具体地说，第一步“交互之旅”与其他现有的步行方法（例如所谓的“自然行走”）有相似之处。“交互之旅”作为普通步行方法的一种变形引发了最有趣的问题，即遗产空间的存在维度（如实际意义），如何可以被检测、揭示和掌握。然而，在这里，“行YZ:What are the benefits of using this methodology as compared to other conventional approaches?与传统方法相比，该方法有什么优势？北京规划建设 209 INTERVIEW 访谈走”的目的与其说是与他人同行，不如说是与人会面并进行随机的访谈，或停下来画个速写。选择行走路线和停脚地点的是实践者，但是看到实践者的速写画决定是否与之攀谈的是正巧在那里的人。在那一刻，受访者被实践者所描绘的周围环境或遗产结构的意义与自身的联系触动。聚焦于速写的谈话自然而然地发生，而不像常规的“访谈-笔记”方法：当你专注于倾听的同时，做笔记就很难，因为这会打断聊天，所以很难进行深入和有趣的对话。这种方法（交互之旅）在看待遗产本身时，不仅跨越了不同的时间性（被理解为没有明确边界的过去、现在和未来的混合），而且跨越了不同学科以实践为基础的多种方法工具，包括遗产研究、文化人类学和建筑学。GG:Historical approaches address the past through the study of material culture and its evolution.They can provide insights into the past values of the site and how perceptions and significance have changed over time.Heritage practitioners,however,not only have to pre-sent the future use,but they also have to consider both the values of past-and current users,and those of other stakeholders.These are best understood through ethnographic and observational approaches because they seem to be the most appropriate to the heritage practitioners task to include the historical,as well as the social and the political context of the site.The utmost important characteristic is that human behaviour or interaction with the heritage location cannot be understood without being on site and studying the context as part of peoples daily lives and activities.In the method of Interactive Walking,these approaches merge with the specific skills of an architectspecifically,the ability to draw by hand,as well as to work with models that both serve,in each stage of the procedure,as primary communication tools in the process of understanding the meaning of heritage places in the life of its occupants.历史学方法通过研究物质文化及其演变来呈现过去，阐释该地的历史价值，以及人们的看法和观念是如何随着时间的推移而变化。然而，遗产从业者不仅要呈现未来的用途，而且还必须考虑（遗产对于）过去和当前用户的价值，以及其他利益相关者的价值。这些最好通过民族志和观察法来理解，因为综合考虑该遗产地的历史、社会和政治背景，似乎是最适合遗产从业者的任务。最重要的是，如果不亲临现场并研究作为人们日常生活和行为一部分的语境，（从业者）就无法真正理解人类行为或与遗产地的互动。在“交互式行走”中，这些方法与建筑师的传统技能相结合特别是手绘的能力，以及使用模型的能力。这些手绘或模型作为主要的交流工具，可以帮助从业者充分理解遗产地在社区居民生活中的意义。This approach shifts the perspective from the conventional top-down academic approach to a more community-based approach where there is total involvement.In adopting a more anthropological view,local people are no longer considered to be simply users of the heritage place,or passive observers;neither are they elements to be simply observed or educated.Instead,with a more phenomenological approach,they are the individuals who interact with each other and with the heritage place,which is a vital part of the community.Local residents are crucial for more deeply understanding the perceptions and experiences of heritage places and events.This is important in the framework of feasibility studies and(re-)development plans for heritage sites in which local people are more explicitly represented.I