维尼·马斯与进化城市—一切都是城市主义

和马町 采访/Interviewed by Martijn de Geus

尚晋/Translated by SHANG Jin

1 作为手段的城市主义；超越内向物

和马町：您为今天访谈选择的题目是“一切都是城市主义”。我想从您对主题选择的理解开始，理解您现在的关注点。建筑是城市主义吗，您是城市主义吗？一切指什么？

维尼·马斯：所谓一切是指建筑的创作，从城市一直到桌子或者淋浴器，再到各种材料。我们越来越发现在小尺度和各种要素中也存在一种城市主义的处理手法或特征。比如在材料的小尺度上，你可以运用和大尺度相同的原则；你可以调整比例后再创作。就像我们在阿姆斯特丹香奈儿水晶宫上的玻璃砖，人们利用了这种材料的概念，这样它就成了城市主义的。对于中等尺度，工作的方式是相似的。比如，要建一所住宅，我就会让它在设计中表达某些邻里的东西，这样它立即就成了城市主义。和马町：所以它是一种手段。

维尼·马斯：是的，一种手段。或许是我的手段，但我的确认为它在建筑设计实践中运用得越来越多，包括对那种尺度和文脉的处理。超越单一，超越内向物。那就是在我看来“一切都是城市主义”这个题目所包含的意义。

和马町：它是关于各要素之间关系的；您把它定义为城市主义的特征？

维尼·马斯：是的，通过各种尺度、各要素之间的关系。和马町：那么让我们来谈一谈某些建筑尺度的可能性以及它们在城市中的可能性。在过去的几年中，您的事务所在一些“过度拥挤的城市”中实现了不少大型的建筑或构筑物[3]。例如鹿特丹的市场大厅、天津图书馆或者首尔铁道项目。它们之所以特别，是因为非常之大，这并不一定是指功能，而是空间……那是不是城市主义？建筑在密集城市中的可能性是创造空间，而不是占据空间？

维尼·马斯：是的，在这些建筑上我们把它称作“开放行为”——物体向周围环境开放。它们不是围合起来的，而是在说“欢迎，请进”。这是一种摆脱在大型构筑物和建筑中常见的内向性的方式。

1 天津滨海图书馆（摄影：奥西普·范杜伊芬博德）/Tianjin Binhai Library (Photo: Ossip van Duivenbode)

而且，这些建筑还表明，如果有这么大的尺度，就也有一种责任、任务或义务，要比单纯的内向建筑发挥更多作用，还要回馈城市。比如市场大厅，建筑就是城市主义。它只是创造了一个拱顶，然后人们就能在里面开集市。我甚至不关心他们如何去利用，若是把里面搞得一团糟，或许会更好！

和马町：您就是说，用建筑可以真正地回馈城市，而不是从中攫取。

维尼·马斯：是的，可以。或许你必须这样做。这个界线很微妙，因为在你知道可以的这个时刻，真的很难去说你不应该做。

2 城市主义的科学性

和马町：在中国，目前学界讨论的一个话题是“城市设计的科学性”。不是用数据来确定造型，而是用能够具体化的数据/计算机模型，“对构思的各种方案进行检验和可视化。当我们改变某些东西时，立刻就会知道给整个方案带来的效果是什么。”[4]您在这方面以及《FarMax》《KM3》和大巴黎方案“市长工具”或“中国山”项目中是一位先行者。您如何有效地将数据作为设计过程的一部分？

维尼·马斯：对，我觉得自己是这种科学城市主义在当代的一位教父。当然我这么说的时候，不得不立刻承认还有更多的人也是。比如荷兰的范埃斯特伦，他早在1950年代就用统计作为城市规划的基础，那有一段完整的历史。而我那时还不了解这个趋势，但我喜欢那种“科学化”的想法。我认为这很可能会有帮助并且会成功，是有几个原因的。第一，因为它为决策给出了一种短暂的证明。统计帮助我们看到什么是共同特征，什么是住宅曲线的顶点，它在哪里出现，而且很容易将它与其他方法和发现结合在一起。最近我还发现，对于进化城市的工具组，我们希望能在有大数据可用并且更加开放的时候使用它。欧洲现在正通过脸书对它进行批判性讨论，我们在这里也可以用腾讯（微信）展开讨论。然后就能读取数据，通过邻居和其中的数据就能表达你的意愿。而且我确实知道可以用很多途径问人们“你想要什么”，当然也会有矛盾。

2 鹿特丹市集住宅（摄影：沃嫩·温克伦）/Martkhal,Rotterdam (Photo: Wonen Winkelen)

1 Urbanism as an approach; beyond the introverted object.

Martijn de Geus: Your chosen title for today's talk is "Everything is Urbanism", I'd like to start with understanding your choice of topic, to understand your current pre-occupation; are buildings urbanism,are you urbanism? What is Everything ?

Winy Maas: By "Everything" I mean the build production, from a city, of course, down to a table or a shower, down to the materials. More and more we fi nd, also in the smaller scales and elements an urbanistic touch or contribution. For instance on the smaller scale, such as in materials, you can apply the same principle toward the larger scale; you can scale it and reproduce it. Like the glass bricks for our Chanel Crystal Houses in Amsterdam, people appropriate the concept of the material, and then it becomes urbanism. For the medium scale, it works in similar aspects. For instance, if I make a house,and I design it in such a way that it says something about the neighbours, immediately it's urbanism.

MG: So it's an approach.

WM: It's an approach yes, maybe it's my approach,but I do think that it's happening more and more in the architectural and design practice, to deal with that scale and context. To go beyond the singular,beyond the introverted object. That's for me what's enclosed within this title "Everything is Urbanism."

MG: It's about the relationship between elements;which you de fi ne as an urbanistic quality?

WM: Yes, and through scales. A relationship between elements, through scales.

MG: Then, let's talk about the potential of the scale of certain buildings and their potential within a city. In the past few years your firm has realised some very large buildings or structures inside some"overcrowded cities"[3]. For example, the Markthal in Rotterdam, the Tianjin Library or the Seollo project in Seoul. They are special because they are very big,not necessarily in programme, but in space… is that urbanism? Is the potential of buildings in a dense city to create space, instead of occupying space?

WM: Well, yes, in these buildings we call this "the opening act", objects that open themselves towards their surroundings. They're not enclosing, they say "welcome, come in". It's a way to get rid of the introversion that is happening so much with big structures and buildings.

And, these buildings also say, that if you have such a big scale, you also have a responsibility, if not a task, or obligation, to do more than only an introvert structure. To also give something back to the city. Yes, like the Markthal, the building becomes urbanism. It's just making an arch and then people can make a market inside. I don't even care how they appropriate it, if they make a mess in there, it's maybe even better!

MG: Thus you say, with buildings you can actually give back to the city, rather than take from it.

WM: You can, yes. And maybe you have to. That's a delicate line, because at the moment that you know that you can, then it becomes really hard to deny that you should not do it.

2 The scienti fi city of urbanism

MG: In China, a current topic in academic discussion is the "scienti fi city of urban design", Not using data to de fi ne shapes, but a data/computer model which allows to objectify, "to test and visualise various schemes of an idea. When we change something, we instantly know what the effects will be throughout the whole scheme.[4]" You were one of the pioneers in this, FarMax, KM3, and in the "Mayor Tool" for the Grand Paris scheme or The China Hills project,how can you use data effectively as part of your design process?

WM: Yes, I feel I'm one of the contemporary godfathers of this scientific urbanism, of course when I state that, I am immediately compelled to acknowledge that there are more people, such as Van Eesteren in The Netherlands, already in the 1950's working with statistics as a base for urban planning, there is a whole history to that. But yes,I didn't know about this trend, but I love that idea of "scienti fi cation", there are a couple of reasons of why I think this is probably helpful and successful.First, because it gives a kind of temporary proof for decisions. The statistics help us to see what is the common denominator, and what is the top of the house-curve, and where does it occur, and easily combine this with other methods and findings.Recently also I fi nd, coming to the toolbox for the evolutionary city, hopefully we can tap into Big Data, when it's accessible, and when in it is getting more open. That's being critically reviewed now in Europe with Facebook, we can also discuss that here with Tencent. And then that creates access to data, and then with your neighbourhood, with your data in it you can express your desire. And I do know that with many processes, I ask people "what do you want", and then there are contradictions of course.

For example, in Holland we have a problem with earthquakes in the North of Holland now because of gas leaks that occur after extracting natural gas. And about 200,000 houses have to be removed or replaced by new houses. These homes are all based in villages of around 400 houses. And then you ask the people what they want, and some say "I want to have a new house", or "I want to have my old house". And “where would you want to put your house"; "well I wouldn't mind living next to the lake". But others think almost polar opposite,so how to organise that process? So I think it's very exemplary to see what will come out of that, we are now doing this for the fi rst village. And we can do it better, we can have more data to show it in real-time, backed by environmental or economic data for instance, we can script that. Because there is more knowledge in this field than ever before,in the data, in the data development, in the data usage and in the way to bring them together into spatial compositions, if not architecture. And what we invest now in the office, and in the Why Factory (T?F, at TU Delft) is enormous; half of it is about scripting. And then you delve into these relationships, because scripting is only about relationships. About correlation, “if you want that,I have to go to the left". And complex elements need more correlations, more algorithms to bring them together. And then to show that very clearly helps the understanding of that complexity, and that helps to give meaning to bigger data, and also activates action groups and other Private/Public/Partnerships, so that they can respond to a suggestion of an authority, because they have the data to back it up. And they can live with the paradoxes. So I do think it's a very interesting moment with this scienti fi cation, and we should be very active on that. More than ever.

3 城市主义的科学性：大巴黎项目，建议功能/Scienti fi city of urbanism: Grand Paris project, proposed programme

4 城市主义的科学性：大巴黎项目，功能分布/Scienti fi city of urbanism: Grand Paris project, programme distribution (3.4©MVRDV)

例如，我们今天在荷兰北部遇到了地震的问题，因为采集天然气之后会发生气体泄漏。约有200,000座住宅不得不拆除或换为新房。这些住宅都在约400户的村子里。那么你去问这些人想要什么，有些人会说“我想要一个新家”，或者“我想要我的老房子”。然后再问“你想把家安在哪里”；“我不会介意住在湖畔的”。但其他人几乎会想到另一个极端，所以怎么组织这个过程？我认为这个工作的结果会很有示范性，现在我们正在第一个村子里开展这项工作。而且我们能做得更好，我们可以有更多数据来实时体现，并以环境或经济数据等作为支撑——我们可以写这样的脚本。因为在这个领域的知识要比过去多，包括数据、数据开发、数据使用以及将它们整合到建筑或者空间构成中的方式。我们今天在事务所和“为什么工厂”（T?F，代尔夫特理工大学）上投入的精力是巨大的；其中有一半在写脚本上。然后你就可以钻研这些关系，因为写脚本只涉及关系。至于关联，“如果你需要它，就必须出其不意。”而复杂的要素需要更多的关联、更多的算法来整合它们。然后证明它明显有助于理解那种复杂性，有助于给更大的数据赋予意义，并激发行动团体和其他政府与社会的合作。这样他们就能对一种提出的权威作出回应，因为他们有支撑的数据。他们可以允许矛盾。所以我真的认为这种科学化带来了非常有趣的时刻，而我们在这一点上应该非常积极，比以往任何时候都积极。

我在这次威尼斯双年展上完全没看到这一点；只是“弗兰姆普敦、弗兰姆普敦、弗兰姆普敦”，毫无关于“未来”的东西。这根本就是在嘲笑我们应该处理的各种问题。事实上，你现在让我发觉刚刚意识到上周末在威尼斯看到的东西，这让我非常生气，谢谢你让我意识到这一点。你帮我用某种语言表达了这种气愤。

和马町：让我来这么看，您是以这种方式将科学数据处理用于城市主义的开拓者之一。另一位喜欢写脚本并将它更多地用在形式上的人是扎哈·哈迪德建筑事务所的帕特里克·舒马赫。用这种数据驱动的过程来造型的人有一大群。

维尼·马斯：对，没错。从我对他们在过去某届双年展上展示作品和研究的方式的理解看，他们的作品是参数驱动的。但并不总是清楚这些数据是关于什么的，比如北京的“舞动大厦”（望京SOHO）。是的，它们在舞动，而且是参数化的，但这种舞动是为了什么？这对我而言并不清楚。由此看来，我们的确来自两个不同的背景。我的理念是要非常清楚，没有任何神秘的东西；而扎哈和帕特里克在某种意义上打的是“新花样”的牌，神神秘秘的。而他们玩得很成功。或许我们是相互借鉴的，或者说两家事务所是相反相成的，做的是相反的事。比如，我和帕特里克一起从AA开始教了20年的书，所以很可能我们两家事务所之间一直在这样共舞。

和马町：您在手法上大体是相反相成的。关于神秘的造型我们可以问帕特里克，关于城市决策的客观证明，我们可以问您吗？

维尼·马斯：哈，可以。我们的客户对此也是接受的，有些客户想要某种神秘的参数化，其他的想要清楚的参数化。这基本上可以体现出那种区别。但是，让我们请帕特里克加入这个讨论吧。这需要一个直接的对话，我想邀请他参加那种讨论。

3 从自我到大我

和马町：看上去您至今对亚洲建筑密度的研究，比如与T?F合作的《垂直村庄》，考察的是相当小的尺度，比如住宅单元、大厦综合体或是街区。而在欧洲您通常会做相对大尺度的城市项目，比如大巴黎方案或阿尔默勒城。

维尼·马斯：是的，有一种有趣的矛盾，这不假。虽然欧洲的小尺度项目很可能比亚洲更多，但欧洲有更长的开放规划的传统。它需要在公共法律的驱动下由民主带来的沟通，并经过投票和公决实现，所以这个过程需要多得多的可视化和外部批评。尤其是像荷兰这样的国家，从16、17世纪开始一直在用这种方法，并且需要这种方法来弘扬这种集体式的城市规划。而且存在着庞大的中产阶级，这就意味着他们可以承担起这种研究。他们可以借助集体的资源，并以此创造集体的愿望，然后真的付诸实践。比如我们刚刚在瑞士实现的集装箱码头。那是一个巨大的投入，并由国家支付和建造。但对于这座城市，我们在7年前给过他们建议，为什么把这个集装箱码头从巴塞尔移过来，并将它经过瑞士、再经过意大利与另一种基础设施结合在一起更好。这样会激活国家层面的预算，并创造出更好的巴塞尔和更好的水质。

你可以看到先是发起一种集体行动，然后付诸实施，一段时间后资金就会到位。这是一种特定的机制。

我发现在中国也可以同规划局进行讨论。但作为“非规划局的人”，或许我们还要更多地去推动。所以我很高兴现在有这些政府/社会合作，而且为此刻能以这种方式设计深圳CBD感到自豪。在这个项目上，中央政府与私人开发商合作改善道路，提出新的基础设施方案，并让私人市场提供部分资金，形成我们的CBD“新路网”——未来几年将建造30～40座立交桥。目睹这种新的规划如今正在实现是令人激动的。那不只是自上而下的。

和马町：这基本上是一种参与式设计过程，但不一定只是同客户，还有各相关方。

维尼·马斯：我想这也是新的现实，因为这种CBD还有更多的业主。那么如何来组织呢？它可以用一种集体的方式来实现。以那种方式工作也是越来越必要的，还要加入不断增长的中产阶级，以及形成的各种相应价值观。我认为这是一个非常积极的过程。

和马町：我们能不能将这定义为一种从大众向市民空间的转变：不是一种彼此之间非黑即白的分工，而是一种集体的市民责任？

维尼·马斯：是的，我把它称作从“自我”向“大我”的转变，培养尊重的方式。有几个要素支撑着“市民空间”这个词。一方面你尊重别人，但你也想保护自己，所有会形成一种自尊的文化。做到这一点要费一番工夫，如今谈论城市主义等的利益相关方管理已蔚然成风，这是很好的。欧洲现在甚至还有专门做这项工作的事务所，他们会对各种过程中的利益相关方进行管理。我也同他们密切合作，一方面解决各种需求，并从中建立一种集体的自尊。但最终这些都需要持之以恒，即项目的“长时段”。这也是需要的，但不是关于建筑，而是在其间的东西。

维尼·马斯：这让我想起您不久前在“自由家园”中探讨的这个问题。那是一个自下而上的城市设计项目，利益相关方在里面通过有机的方式解决社区中的各个需求。其中您与他人行为之间的关系是关键。

维尼·马斯：是的，这种“大我”与自由家园项目之间的关系涉及到一种“自由”，即具有双重含义的自由。因为无疑自由是好的，但在伤害到邻居时就不好了。所以看起来自由是有界限的，而且我知道这个界限越远越好。有些人把自由的这个界限称为“文明”，而其他人叫它“独裁”。这取决于停留在这两个极端之间的什么位置上。所以这个自由之家就是我们检验这些极端的尝试，去看它是否可行。事实上，我很高兴现在能看到，当个体行为不涉及伤害邻居时，你就要马上协商，然后这就成了城市主义；因为你要相互协调，那就不再只是关于个体的了。这就是我所谓的从“自我”到“大我”的含义。它的发生有一条耐人寻味的界线，而在更高的建筑密度下会更有趣。还很有趣的是，这个自由家园的概念实际上是为10年前深圳的一个城市规划项目提出的。也许那时还太早，因为它与规划局的设想背道而驰，而今天它正在荷兰实施。这很有意思；“创于中国，建于荷兰”，与“建于中国，创于欧洲”正相反——历史上多么耐人寻味的时刻啊！

4 下一步如何？星球建造者

和马町：如果我们再回顾一下您大概5年前的作品，《建筑素描》第173期MVRDV专辑中的“进化城市”。您用这个概念来描述自己的作品，“一座希望随时间形成、提高和发展的城市”。您从自己的大量作品中看，今天正在形成什么样的城市性？如果说一切都是城市主义，您的城市此刻已进化成了什么？

And I miss that in the current Venice Biennale completely; it's only "Frampton, Frampton,Frampton", and it's nothing about “future". Which is basically mocking the issues that we should be touching on. In fact, you make me very angry now about this discovery about what I've just realised about what I saw in Venice last weekend, thank you very much for this insight. You helped me give this anger a certain kind of words.

MG: Let's see it in this way; you are one of the founders of using scientific data processing in urbanism in this way. One of other fond users of scripting processes, who is using it more for form,would be Patrick Schumacher, with Zaha Hadid Architects, there is a whole group of people who use these data-drive processes for form-making.

WM: Yes, that's true, their work, as I understood it from how they displayed their work and research at one of the previous Biennales for instance, their work is parametric driven. But it's not always clear what the data is about; for instance the Beijing dancing towers (Wangjing Soho ed.), ok they're dancing, and it's parametric, but what is the dance about? That's not quite clear to me. In that way indeed we come from two different backgrounds,my culture is about being very transparent, no mystics at all, while somehow Zaha and Patrick played the card of something "new", something mythical. And they do that in a very successful way.And maybe we use each other, or the two oきces use each other, to do the opposite. For instance, I've been teaching with Patrick for about 20 years, we've started that together at the AA, and so probably this dance between our two offices has somehow been happening all along.

MG: You kind of complement each other in your approach, for mystic shapes we can ask Patrick, for objective legitimation of urban decisions, we can ask you?

WM: Ha, yes. And that also works for our clients,some clients want to have a certain mythical parametrisation, and others want to have clear parametrisation. That could somehow frame that distinction. But then, let's get Patrick involved in this discussion, this would need to be a direct conversation, I want to invite him for that type of discussion.

3 From Ego to WEgo

MG: It seems that so far your research on density in Asia, like in the Vertical Village book with T?F,has looked at quite a small scale, such as a housing unit, a tower complex, or a neighbourhood. Whereas in Europe you're often working on relatively large scale urban projects, like the Grand Paris project or Almere City.

WM: Yes, there's a funny contradiction, that's true, while in Europe there's probably more small scale projects than in Asia. There is of course a longer open planning tradition in Europe, that needs communication, driven by public law,generated by democracy and generated by voting and referendums and therefore this process needs much more visualisation and outside criticism.Especially in a country like the Netherlands, which has been using that approach since the 16th/17th Centuries onwards, it needs this approach to celebrate this collective urban planning. And there's a big middle class, which means they can afford these kind of studies. They can tap into collective resources and therefore also create collective desires,and truly apply that. Like we just made it possible in Switzerland for instance to have a container terminal, a giant investment, but that's paid by the county, and build by the country. But with the city we have suggested to them, 7 years ago why it's better to move this container port up from Basel and combine it with another type of infrastructure through Switzerland and then through Italy in order to active the national level budget and allow for a better Basel of better water quality.

You can see there's a collective initiative first undertaken and then carried out, and after a while the fi nance is there. And that's a speci fi c mechanism.

And I find in China that you can also discuss things with the planning bureau's. But maybe as"non-planning bureau people" maybe we have to activate that even more. Therefore I'm quite happy with these public/private partnerships that are happening now. And also proud to work in this way on the Shenzhen CBD at the moment, where the central government works with private developers to make better pavement, to make new kinds of infrastructural solutions and to have these be partly fi nanced by the private market, so that you can have what we call a "new web" in the CBD, about 30 to 40 bridges that will be build in the coming years.And it's fascinating to witness that this kind of new planning is happening now. That it's not top down only.

MG: It's kind of a participatory design process, not necessarily just with the client, but with various parties involved.

WM: I think it's also the new reality, because there are also more owners in such a CBD for instance.So, how to organise that? And that can be done in a collective way. And there's also more necessity to working like that, also with the growing middle class, and the corresponding values that are developed. Which I think is a very positive process.

MG: Could we define this as a move from public to civic space, not with a black/white division of tasks between us and them, but a collective civic responsibility?

WM: Yes, I call it from "Ego" to "WEgo", how to somehow create respect. And there are a couple of elements that maybe drive this word of "civic spaces". On the one hand that you respect others,but also that you want to defend, that you develop a culture of pride. It's quite a game how to do that,it's quite the trend now to talk about stakeholder management for instance, in urbanism. Which is fine; there are now even offices in Europe who specialise just in that, the managing of stakeholders in processes, whom I also work closely with, that address desires on one hand and also identify a collective pride in that. But in the end that all relates to the durability, or the long duree of a project, and that's what also needed, it's not about the building,it's the in between.

5 “自由家园”概念，应用于阿尔默勒的奥斯特沃尔德，第一步：组件/Freeland concept, as applied in Almere Oosterwolde, step 1: components.

6 “自由家园”概念，应用于阿尔默勒的奥斯特沃尔德，进化的总体规划/Freeland concept,as applied in Almere Oosterwolde, evolutionary master plan proposal (5.6 ©MVRDV)

7 “大我”概念，定制住宅/WEgo concept, tailor made housing(©MVRDV)

维尼·马斯：嗯，现在我从一种意向清单出发，列出未来城市的各种需求——它能够和应该包含的内容，以及任何人都不能反对的东西。比如，谁反对绿色或是反对氧气，谁反对美、便利或自由？未来城市能够或应该包含的内容可以列出一个大清单。这些看起来是非政治性的，但我觉得很耐人寻味，它对我至今合作过的每种政府都是有效的。当然，让这些要素中的每一个都使城市更有效，实现更高的绿色效率，使城市真的绿色、真的开放，或者真的便利、有历史或有文脉，甚至使城市真的自由，还有很长的路。这就是为什么我想谈论它，说明那就是进化今天给我们带来的结果。这种进化城市现在分成了许多愿望，当然它们是可以重叠的。我们可以将它们整合起来，或许称之为“生态城市”。这就会成为从今往后几年的结论。所以，从5年前辨析进化城市这一概念来看，如果问我们在那之后做

8 “大我”原型，建于荷兰埃因霍芬（摄影：奥西普·范杜伊芬博德）/WEgo prototype, as built in Eindhoven, the Netherlands(Photo: Ossip van Duivenbode)

9 首个“大我”原型，双宅，乌得勒支，1997/First "WEgo prototype"? Double House, Utrecht, 1997 (©MVRDV)

了什么，未来的步骤就是：深化和传播。

和马町：您曾写道，“要做的事太多，我们需要吸收很多东西才能创造美好的未来。” 那么下一步是什么？

维尼·马斯：嗯，我还缺少关于地球、城市与环境、生物圈、资源之间关系的大视野。比如，小设计事务所有很多创意、极有关怀的要素。但我们必须要给它更引人注目的舞台，将这个宏图展开。所以，从短期来看，这是下一步首先要做的。从长远看，还有更多要探索的。比如，我们只有这个星球吗？我们也会生活在其他星球上吗？那将是另一个话题。

和马町：好，那么建筑师接下来要做什么呢？我们应该明确这些计划，启动这项工作，还是应该等待委托项目让我们给出答案？

维尼·马斯：问题一般是怎样出现的？在出现危机时，要么你把危机扩大，有时能帮助推动；要么你去讨论它。而“避免危机”的机制通常是有帮助的。北京的空气污染就是这样，似乎现在有可能采取行动改善空气质量；因为有人提出在过去5年中有大的改观，而这很耐人寻味。

和马町：所以，危机和讨论？

维尼·马斯：是的，而意识是另一个问题。建筑师可以帮上忙，他们可以把可能的情况可视化出来。他们还能通过创造原型、发明材料、寻求新的合作提出解决方案。

和马町：现在以您在过去几年中完成的所有研究、著作、文章和项目，您是不是觉得现在自己了解得越多，别人就越会误解您？

维尼·马斯：啊，说的好！我还没这么觉得，但的确如此，是有风险的。

目前我正在尝试用100个星球做一个装置。我在达沃斯世界经济论坛上设想出一个场景，把直径2～3m的巨大橡皮球全都挂在一起。然后想象特朗普总统从这些球中穿过，这时突然看到世界上的其他领导人在中间。他们都挤在这些球展现出来的各种可能性之间。比如，一个球可以展示开放所有边境的结果，人们会去哪里？假如消除地球上的某些生产区，会让所有空气清洁一新吗？我想把这些假设展现出来，所以把它称作“你有做某事的球（双关语：勇气）吗”。展示的效果会非常奇妙。我们正在制作这些东西，并将它与我们所谓的这种“星球建造者”结合起来。现在我们已经制作了第一批展示这些变化的3D视频，它们很精彩。如果改变某些参数，它就可以让人看到地球如何像一个迪斯科球那样旋转、舞动。它会根据节奏随时间变幻。回头看我们的书《KM3》，那时人们觉得我们是疯子，因为我们在思考世界，但现在这比10年前容易接受多了。

和马町：的确如此，因为现在有更明显的需求？

维尼·马斯：是的，因为今天思考世界只是一件小事。现在我很高兴能参与到我们的“地球2.0”的过程中，想象地球可以变成什么样。当然它还没有完成，而我还不觉得这是误解。要进入达沃斯很难，他们很强硬。

我真的希望用我们的平台以那种方式向更多的人展示未来的可能，并对各种可能性和极端情况进行可视化和尝试。所以我希望他们也会读到这篇文章。□

10 整合城市功能的首尔空中廊道（摄影：奥西普·范杜伊芬博德）/Seoullo Skywalk integrated with urban programme,in Seoul, South Korea (Photo: Ossip van Duivenbode)

11 整合城市功能的首尔空中廊道/Seoullo Skywalk integrated with urban programme, in Seoul, South Korea (©MVRDV)

参考文献/References

[1] MVRDV. The Evolutionary City. El Croquis 173:MVRDV (2003-2014), 2014.

[2] MVRDV's Winy Maas on future cities. [2018-06-10].https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoC6e87-vfk.

[3] Winy Maas. MVRDV. Interviewed by Jan Klerks.[2018-06-10]. http://www.ctbuh.org/Publications/Journal/TalkingTall/WinyMaasMVRDV/tabid/1542/language/en-GB/Default.aspx.

[4] "What's next" by Winy Maas. [2018-06-10]. http://thewhyfactory.com/news/whats-next-by-winy-maas/.

MG: That reminds me of this issue you explored in "Freeland", from a while ago, which is a project for a bottom-up urban design process, letting stakeholders organically address their individual needs within a community, in which the relationship between what you do and what others' do is key.

WM: Yes, this relation of "WEgo" and the Freeland project, is about a "freedom", or liberty that has a double meaning. Because sure, liberty is fine, but when you hurt your neighbour then it's not fi ne. So,there's seemingly an end to liberty, and I'm aware that this end should be as far as possible. And, some people call that limit of liberty "civilisation", and others call it “dictatorship". That depends on where the slider between those two extremes is stopping.So, with this Freeland exercise we're testing those extremes, to see whether that is doable. And in fact, I'm happy to now be able to show that at the moment when individual tasks are about not hurting your neighbour, then immediately you have to negotiate and it becomes urbanism;because you deal with each other, it's no longer just individual. That's what I mean when saying,from "Ego" to "WEgo". And there's an interesting line at where that occurs, and under conditions of higher density this becomes more interesting.What's also interesting, this Freeland concept was actually invented for a project in Shenzhen about ten years ago, for an urban plan. And maybe it was too early then, because it was the opposite of what the planning bureau was imagining, while it's now being implemented in the Netherlands. It's funny;“invented in China, made in the Netherlands".It's the inverse from "made in China, invented in Europe", a very interesting moment in time!

4 What's next? Planet maker.

MG: And, if we re fl ect back a bit more at your own work, about 5 years ago, the EL Croquis #173 about MVRDV, you titled the "Evolutionary city", a concept you used to describe your work", as a city that wants to describe, enhance and develop over time." What kind of projection of urbanity do you see emerging now from your mass of work? To what has your city evolved to at the moment? If everything is urbanism,

WM: Well, now I start with a kind of bucket list,to list down the needs of the future city, what it can and should be about, and what nobody can be opposed to. Like, who's against green, or against oxygen, who's against beauty, or access, or freedom?There's quite a list of what the future city could or should include, which seemingly becomes almost a-political, which I find intriguing, it is working for every type of government I've worked with so far. And sure, there's still a long way to go to for each of these components to make the city more effective, to achieve a higher eきciency in greenness for instance, to make a city really green, or to make it really open, or really accessible or really historic even, or contextual. Or to make a city really free.And that's why I want to talk about it, to say that's what the evolutionary is now bringing to us, this evolutionary city now kind of splits up in many desires, and of course they can overlap, and we can try to bring them together, and maybe it's called a "Biocity". That could be the conclusion in several years from now. So, from this notion of identifying the Evolutionary city 5 years ago, if you ask what we have done since then, these are the next steps on it:deepening and spreading.

MG: And you've written, "There is so much to do, we need so much input to make our future good." Then,what's next?

WM: Well, I miss the larger perspectives on our planet; on the relation between cities and the environment, the biosphere, resources. There are a lot of inventions by smaller designers for instance,very sympathetic components, but yea, we have to stage that more dramatically and to unfold that agenda. So, on the short term that's first what's next. And on the longer term, there is a lot more to explore. For instance, do we only have this planet,or do we also colonise other planets? That will be another subject.

MG: Ok, and then what is next to do for architects?Should we de fi ne these agendas, should we initialise this, should we wait for commissions to be given for us to give these kind of answers?

WM: How do questions arise normally? When there's a crisis, so or you enlarge crisis, that helps sometimes to push it, or you discuss it. And the mechanism of "avoiding crisis" normally helps. That counts for the dirty air in Beijing, as somehow it seems that it has been possible now to take actions to make the air quality better; because it has been suggested that there has been a big change in the past 5 years, which is intriguing.

MG: So, crisis and discussion?

WM: Yes, and awareness is another one. And architects can help, they can visualise possible situations. And they can suggest solutions, by making prototypes, by inventing materials, by fi nding new collaborations.

MG: Now with all these research you have done in the past years, all the books, the writings, the projects Do you feel that now you understand more,that you are more misunderstood by others?

WM: Wow, good point. I don't feel that yet, but it's true, there is a risk.

Right at this moment, I'm trying to make a hundred planets, as an installation. I dream of this moment in Davos, at the World Economic Forum, that you have these giant rubber balls with a diametre of 2 to 3 metres, all hung next to each other, and I dream then that president Trump has to go in between those balls, and suddenly sees other world leaders amongst them. And they are squeezed between the different potentials of those balls, for instance, one ball could show what would happen if you open up all the borders, where would people go? If you would get rid of certain production zones on the planet, can I clean the air completely? I want to show these hypotheses, and I therefore call it"do you have the balls", to do something. It would be fantastic to present that, we are now making them, and we are combining it with what we call the "planet maker" for this, and it's very beautiful to see now that we have the fi rst 3D videos of these changes, to see how the planet can move, dance,like a disco ball if you change certain parametres. It changes according to a rhythm, over time. Because,looking back, with our book KM3, people thought we were lunatics, because we were thinking about the world, but now, somehow this is much more acceptable than ten years ago.

MG: Very true, because now there is a more obvious need?

WM: Yes, and because it's only a small thing now this enterprise, to think about the world. So I'm happy to be part now of this process, of our Planet 2.0, and to imagine what the planet could be like.So, it's certainly not fi nished yet, and I don't feel this misunderstanding yet. And it's hard to enter Davos,they're tough.

And I actually hope to use our platforms to show more people these possible future situations in that way. Show what's possible, visualise the potential. The extremes, and to experiment on that.So I hope they will also read this article for that.□