论文部分内容阅读
写在前面这里的几篇短文引自伍蠡甫主编的《现代西方艺术美学文选》建筑美学卷——汪坦、陈志华编。按主编要求的总体例.需对译文及其原作者的艺术思想写一些简略的介绍.只能从命。我们所选的论文作者,除了个别外都撰写过大量文章.象勒·考(?)西埃和莱特已属于时代的思想家.我们并未能全面阅读研究.短文所述不免挂一漏万。竭诚盼望读者多看原文并和历史事实对照。我想从事建筑理论探讨对比建筑实践来说并非“松绑”,可以随心所欲.想入非非。下面我摘录一段彼得·柯林斯关于建筑比拟于文学的论点:“勿庸置疑,它助长了比较能说会道的建筑师们去用纯粹言语的概念.代替实实在在的建筑物。”(《现代建筑设计思想的演变》彼得·柯林斯著.英若聪译,第313页—)当然这个论点也还需要加以解释的,请看原书吧。
The short essays written in front are quoted from the Architectural Aesthetics Volume of Modern Western Art Aesthetics Selected by Wu Bai, edited by Wang Tian and Chen Zhihua. According to the editorial requirements of the general case, it is necessary to write a brief introduction to the translation and the original author’s artistic ideas. The authors of the papers we have selected have written a large number of articles except for a few. Like Le Couch (?) Siegel and Wright are already thinkers of the era. We have not been able to fully read the study. We sincerely hope that readers will read more of the original text and contrast it with historical facts. I would like to engage in the architectural theory. It is not “relaxed” in contrast to architectural practice. You can do whatever you like. Next I’ve extracted a section of Peter Collins’s argument about architecture as compared to literature: “Undoubtedly, it encourages more articulate architects to use pure language concepts instead of real buildings.” (“Modern Architecture Design”) The Evolution of Thought, by Peter Collins. Indra Translation, p. 313 —) Of course, this argument still needs to be explained. Please read the original book.