同济大学建筑与城市规划学院C楼丨中国上海丨彬蔚致正建筑工作室

出品人：向玲 / Producer: Xiang Ling

编辑：石安，亓慧、庞任飞，张笑然，高天旗 / Editor: Shi An, Qi Hui, Pang Renfei, Zhang Xiaoran, Gao Tianqi

________

关于致正

About Atelier Z+

1.工作室名称的由来？

What is the origin of the studio’s name?

英文名称”Atelier Z+”，此名称的由来是基于张斌与合作者周蔚的姓氏首字母均为”Z”，故而采用了”Z+”的命名。”致正”二字既是Z+的某种对应，又在汉语中颇具文化意蕴，字面含义恰能体现我们的某种理念与态度。注重设计价值层面的考量，强调在自我约束下寻求适度与平衡的把握。”彬蔚”二字既取自两位合作者的名字，又出自陆机的《文赋》，具有茂盛之意，而经过多年积累，这种茂盛感或许正契合我们对于自身工作的期许，以及我们期望工作成果在社会环境中所能发挥的作用。

▼彬蔚致正建筑工作室logo，logo of Atelier Z+

The English name “Atelier Z+” originates from the fact that both founders, Bin Zhang and Wei Zhou, share the initial “Z” in their surnames, hence the adoption of the name “Z+.” The Chinese name “致正” (Zhì Zhèng) corresponds to “Z+” in spirit and carries rich cultural connotations in the Chinese language. Literally meaning “to aspire to righteousness,” it reflects our design philosophy and attitude—valuing the significance of design, and emphasizing the pursuit of moderation and balance within self-imposed constraints.

The characters “彬蔚” (Bīn Wèi), drawn from the names of the two collaborators, also appear in Lu Ji’s Wen Fu (Rhapsody on Literature), where they suggest flourishing vitality. After years of accumulation, this sense of flourishing may well resonate with our aspirations for our practice, as well as the impact we hope our work can have within the broader social context.

▼彬蔚致正建筑工作室办公室日常工作，Office routine work scenarios of Atelier Z+© 摄影：Atelier Z+

研究与实践并行

Complementarity of Research and practice

2.工作室成立了23年可以分为几个阶段？你如何看待现在所在的阶段，事务所的观念发生了哪些变化？

The studio has been established for 23 years. Can its development be divided into different phases? How do you view the current phase, and how has the studio’s philosophy evolved?

大致来看，我们的发展可以分为两个或三个阶段。其中一个关键节点大约是在2008年至2010年前后。在早期阶段，我们的工作大致可以分为两个部分。其中一部分是我们最初几年主要参与的同济大学校内的两个项目——从建筑城规学院C楼到中法中心。我们在这一阶段是幸运的，这两个项目在业内也引起了一定的反响。即使二十年过去，我依然对这两个早期项目保持高度的认同感。在以校园内的两个项目为主投身实践四五年后，我们也逐步走出校园，相继在多个区域展开工作，例如从青浦到嘉定，再到徐汇、浦东、临港、奉贤等地，随后也逐步开始涉及中心城区的一些项目。总体来看，我们的大部分项目仍集中在上海本地。然而，随着时间的推移，我们也开始逐步拓展外地项目。

Broadly speaking, our development can be divided into two or three stages, with a significant turning point occurring around 2008 to 2010. In the early phase, our work mainly revolved around two campus projects at Tongji University: Building C of the College of Architecture and Urban Planning, and the Sino-French Centre. We were fortunate to be involved in these projects in our formative years, and both received a certain degree of recognition within the architectural community. Even now, two decades later, I still feel a strong sense of identification with these early works.

After four to five years of campus-based practice, we gradually stepped beyond the university, taking on projects across various districts of Shanghai—including Qingpu, Jiading, Xuhui, Pudong, Lingang, and Fengxian—eventually moving into the city center. While the majority of our projects are still based in Shanghai, we’ve also gradually begun to explore opportunities outside the city.

▼同济大学建筑与城市规划学院 C 楼，Building C, College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai © 张嗣烨

▼同济大学中法中心，Sino-French Centre, Tongji University, Shanghai© 张嗣烨

这二十年来的成长始终与上海的发展紧密相连。上海的项目为我们提供了养分，也促使我进一步思考更广泛的话题，例如后来我为何会开始做关于上海的城市研究。这一兴趣的产生，正是源于我希望更深入地理解自己所工作和实践的这片广阔场域。之所以将2008年至2010年前后视为一个分界点，主要源于一个核心议题——当代建筑师在中国所面临的机遇与环境。当时，像我们这样的年轻人确实有机会在实践的早期就参与并主导相对成熟的项目，而且能以相对高品质的设计和建造标示自己对专业和社会的理解。然而，走出校园后，在现实环境中，能够再次遇到类似各方面都契合、可以专心通过设计和建造去表达的机会变得并不确定。

Our growth over the past two decades has been closely tied to Shanghai’s own transformation. The city has provided fertile ground for our development and has inspired broader reflections—for example, my later interest in conducting urban research on Shanghai itself. That research stemmed from a desire to more deeply understand the environment in which we work and create.

The reason I see 2008 to 2010 as a watershed moment lies in a core issue: the opportunities and conditions faced by contemporary architects in China. At that time, young architects like us still had the chance to engage in and even lead relatively mature projects early in our careers. We could, through high-quality design and construction, express our professional and social perspectives. However, once we stepped out of the campus setting and into broader practice, it became less certain whether such ideal conditions—where all factors align to allow design and construction to truly reflect one’s intentions—would be encountered again.

“建造物质空间并不困难，但让这个物质空间被社会系统有效地消化却非常困难。”

“The challenge doesn’t lie in constructing a physical space—it lies in whether that space can be meaningfully absorbed into the social system. ”

在中国，建造一座房子并不困难。年轻建筑师有机会参与成熟的项目，只要有想法并获得支持，便可以迅速将其实现。然而，随之而来的困惑是：如何判断自己所建造的是一座“好房子”？建造物质空间并不困难，但让这个物质空间被社会系统有效地消化却非常困难。离开校园之后，我确实遇到过不少项目，即使是一些规模较大的项目，也常常面临着长时间的空置，或者在投入使用时需要进行改建。被改建这件事常常让我们感到无奈。在设计时，你没有与他人进行过充分的沟通，也没有机会与他人商量说“这是我为你们设计的房子”，无论是为社区设计，还是为使用者或业主设计，都没有这样的环节。你只是根据授权将房子建造出来。如果别人不接受你设定的空间，并进行改建，那也只能算是命运的安排。很多项目无法发挥应有的作用。这让我产生了一种挫败感，那时，我曾经历过一段比较消极的时期，觉得在中国做设计有些无聊。当然，也有某种自我清醒的部分，我也在思考出路该如何走。

In China, building a house is not particularly difficult. Young architects often have the chance to participate in mature projects—if you have a clear vision and receive the necessary support, it can be realized quickly. But with that comes a deeper confusion: how do you judge whether what you’ve built is truly a good house? The challenge doesn’t lie in constructing a physical space—it lies in whether that space can be meaningfully absorbed into the social system. After leaving the campus setting, I encountered many projects, including some on a fairly large scale, that remained vacant for long periods or required major alterations before being put into use. These adaptations often left us feeling powerless.

What was missing was meaningful dialogue during the design process. There was rarely a chance to say, “This is the house I designed for you.” Whether the project was for a community, specific users, or a client, there was little opportunity for discussion. You were simply commissioned to build. If the spatial logic you proposed was later rejected or altered, all you could do was accept it as a matter of fate. Many projects ultimately failed to fulfill their intended role. This disconnect left me with a deep sense of frustration. I went through a period of disillusionment—designing in China started to feel, at times, somewhat hollow. And yet, it was also a moment of clarity, prompting me to think seriously about how to move forward.

▼致正建筑工作室梦中心办公室，Gate M office of Atelier Z+, Xuhui, Shanghai © 杨敏

08年到10年，大概从那个时候开始，我产生了一个念头，想要去了解上海，或者说将上海作为一个研究对象进行观察，想通过实地的调查和研究，去理解我所处的工作环境。当时我与庄慎、范文兵和冯路三位老师的意见交换最为频繁，于是，2012年我们最终选择了田林新村这一有代表性的工人新村作为研究对象。经过之前两年关于永康路的调研积累后，在田林新村的研究中，我们尝试将文字和图绘工具结合开展工作。这至今已经坚持了大约十几年。我们积累了许多案例，从工人新村，到工人自建房、民国时代以来的老工房（工人宿舍），接着是老城厢，甚至还调研过一个上海近郊的小村子，也调研过90年代兴旺起来、后来慢慢失效的老商业中心——浦东八佰伴边上的新上海商业城。

Between 2008 and 2010, I began to develop a desire to better understand Shanghai—or rather, to observe it as a subject of research. I wanted to gain a deeper grasp of the working environment I was situated in, through on-the-ground investigation and study. At the time, I was frequently exchanging ideas with three teachers—Zhuang Shen, Fan Wenbing, and Feng Lu. In 2012, we ultimately chose Tianlin Workers’ Village, a representative workers’ housing development, as our research focus.

Building on two years of prior fieldwork on Yongkang Road, our research in Tianlin Workers’ Village marked a new phase where we began combining written narratives with drawing tools. This approach has continued now for over a decade. Over the years, we’ve accumulated numerous case studies—ranging from workers’ housing estates and self-built homes, to early 20th-century workers’ dormitories, to the old urban quarters (lao chengxiang). We even studied a small village on the outskirts of Shanghai, as well as the New Shanghai Commercial City—a once-thriving commercial center near Pudong’s Babaiban that began to decline in the years following its boom in the 1990s.

▼从“溢出”到“共生”——田林新村共有空间调研，FROM OVERFLOWING TO MUTUALISM Investigation of Common Space in Tianlin Workers’ Village Xuhui District, Shanghai © Atelier Z+

▼从“取用”到“互通”—— 新上海商业城公共空间调研，FROM APPROPRIATION TO INTERCONNECTION Investigation of Public Space in New Commercial City of Shanghai, Pudong New District, Shanghai © Atelier Z+

这些案例涵盖了不同类型的空间，包括今年，我正好开始让研究生调研一个上海早期房地产大盘的样本——万科城市花园。总的来说，我们在研究上海充满矛盾的空间，这些矛盾是日积月累的。在这样的矛盾空间中，我们看到了人和空间是如何互动的。在这些年的调研工作中，我们积累了许多案例，研究的核心载体就是非正规现象——笼统可以违章建设为代表。正规空间无法解决这些矛盾，解决这些问题的往往是非正规空间。虽然这些非正规空间时常会被打击、整治，但一段时间后，矛盾没有得到根本解决，非正规空间又会冒出来。

These case studies cover a wide range of spatial types. In fact, this year I began guiding my graduate students in researching a sample from one of Shanghai’s early large-scale real estate developments—Vanke City Garden. Broadly speaking, our work focuses on the contradictions embedded within Shanghai’s urban spaces—contradictions that have accumulated over time. Within these conflicted spaces, we observe how people interact with and adapt to their environment. Over the years, we’ve gathered a substantial body of case studies, and at the core of our research is the examination of informal phenomena—most broadly represented by illegal or unpermitted construction. Formal, regulated spaces often fail to resolve these underlying tensions; instead, it is informal spaces that tend to provide practical solutions. Although these informal spaces are frequently targeted for demolition or rectification, they often re-emerge once the root causes of conflict remain unresolved.

▼万科小区——城市花园研究范围与原状，Range and original state of Vanke Community — City Garden research © Atelier Z+

这些具有自发活力的空间在维系城市的存在逻辑方面起着作用，然而它们正在成批消失。对于这种消失的抢救性调查，我并非出于怀旧的目的。我实际上是想理解上海多年来所谓“上海人”的变化概念，他们如何与城市互动。例如，以定海桥为例，我们研究了两个地区，一个是1920年代日本纱厂建的老工房，使用了100年；另一个是差不多同时期开始的工人自建区域；它们前两年在我们调研后都被拆除。我们将这两个地区100年的空间历史与社会变迁联系起来。换句话说，在我们调研时所看到的物质遗存和现存状态中，能够清晰地找到它们的建造代际关系。

These organically vibrant spaces play a crucial role in maintaining the urban logic of the city, yet they are rapidly disappearing. My motivation for documenting their disappearance is not driven by nostalgia. Instead, I aim to understand how the concept of the so-called “Shanghai people” has evolved over time and how they interact with the city. Take Dinghai Bridge as an example: we researched two areas—one being an old workers’ housing complex built in the 1920s by a Japanese textile factory, which had been in use for almost a century; the other, a self-built workers’ settlement that started around the same time. Both were demolished within two years of our investigation. Through our research, we linked the century-long spatial history of these areas with the social changes they underwent. In other words, the material remnants and current conditions we observed during our study clearly reflect the generational relationships of construction and habitation.

▼定海桥展览：定海人家 / 隆昌路 542 弄，Dinghai Bridge Exhibition: Living in Dinghai / 542 Lane, Longchang Road © Atelier Z+ / 杨敏

我们通过重点案例的个案、家庭史调查等方法，运用了社会学和人类学的基础方法，但又与建筑物的现场物质辨识相结合，这种能力只有建筑师具备。我与年轻一代专业学生的合作，处理了上海一段非常重要的建造历史，而这段历史可能已经被抹去。我们通过这样的调查，留下一套物质证据，我感到非常满足。正是看到了那些奇奇怪怪的使用方式，也有助于我们反思，我们在实践中面对的那些有的没的任务书，不过是暂时的、阶段性的答案。当我们想要作为建筑师在社会环境中贡献一个好的物质空间时，这个物质空间不仅仅要在建造层面上做到好，还必须在使用层面上也要是（友）好的。而这些研究对我来说，是一个自我再教育的过程。

Through methods like case studies of key examples and family history research, we applied foundational sociological and anthropological techniques, while also integrating the on-site material identification of buildings—an ability unique to architects. My collaboration with the younger generation of professional students allowed us to engage with a critical period in Shanghai’s architectural history, one that may have otherwise been erased. This research has left behind a set of material evidence, which brings me great satisfaction. By observing the unusual and creative ways in which these spaces are used, we are encouraged to reflect on the nature of the tasks we face in practice. These often appear as temporary, stage-specific solutions. When architects aim to create meaningful physical spaces within a social context, these spaces must not only be well-built but also user-friendly and functionally effective. For me, this research has been a process of self-reeducation.

▼从“争夺”到“共治”——陆家嘴上港小区空间调研，FROM OPPOSITION TO COOPERATION Space Investigation of Shanggang Community, Lujiazui, Shanghai © Atelier Z+

▼轨交节点与日常实践:淞沪、沪宁铁路边界老北站地区的城市空间变迁与日常生活演变，Transit Node and Everyday Practices:The Transformation ofUrban Space and The Shift of Daily Life in Shanghai North Railway Station Region along Railway Boundaries，2023-2024 © Atelier Z+

在我开始进行这些研究时，我已经40岁了。我可以说，如果没有这些研究的积累，我现在无法形成对中国空间问题的相对清晰的理解，也无法对自己工作的边界和有效性有某种清醒的认识，甚至是反思。我认为这些认识来源于我这十几年以后的工作，即职业建筑师工作和城市研究工作的双线并行。

When I began this research, I was already 40 years old. I can confidently say that without the accumulation of these studies, I wouldn’t have developed a clear understanding of spatial issues in China, nor would I have gained a conscious awareness of the boundaries and effectiveness of my work, or the ability to reflect on it. These insights have emerged from my dual involvement in both professional architecture and urban research over the past decade.

Since 2015, I have been involved in a series of citizen service station projects in Shanghai. These stations are unique as they are small-scale support facilities designed to complement large-scale green infrastructures and public spaces, such as the One River, One Riverbank project and the Outer Ring Park. They serve essential functions like public restrooms, rest areas, and general services. Our first project, the Dong’an Wangjiang Service Station, was built using standardized, lightweight, and rapid construction techniques to address the emergency need for service stations along the Pudong section of the Huangpu River.

▼致正工作室的一系列驿站项目，A series of station projects of Atelier Z+

The design, construction, and post-use research of the River View Service Stations at East Bank later equipped us with the expertise to design additional stations along the West Bank of Pudong, Suzhou Creek, and the Outer Ring Park. These service stations were not intended to capture attention through “internet fame,” but rather were designed with the simple goal of ensuring they were unobtrusive. Each project had its own unique context and design cues. One notable station is located beneath Wuning Road Bridge, where the design is minimal and focused on revitalizing the otherwise neglected under-bridge space.

▼望江驿，上海，River View Service Station, Lujiazui, Pudong, Shanghai © 吴清山 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

▼东岸望江驿，上海，River View Service Stations at East Bank, Pudong, Shanghai © CreatAR Images，吴清山

点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

▼东岸望江亭，上海，River View Service Kiosk, East-bund, Shanghai © 杨敏 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

“建筑师要为人们的生活、人在空间当中的存在和连接提供一个背景的支撑，这种支撑才是建筑师的成就。”

“The role of architects is to provide a supportive framework for people’s lives, their existence in space, and their connections. This, I believe, is the true achievement of an architect.”

建筑师只是一个被让渡了建造权力的技术官僚群体，建筑师并不能掌控所有人的生活，但是建筑师要为人们的生活、人在空间当中的存在和连接提供一个背景的支撑，这种支撑才是建筑师的成就。中国的当代建造是不需要充分的社会协商的，我们是在一个特殊的维度当中支撑了40年以来的巨量建造，但是这些巨量建造留下了很多空间创伤，这些创伤可能需要两三代人才能去消化。我40岁以后体会到了这件事情的痛苦，也促使我自己用某种行动去平衡它。

Architects, as technical bureaucrats to whom the power of construction is entrusted, do not control the lives of others. However, their role is to provide a supportive framework for people’s lives, their existence in space, and their connections. This, I believe, is the true achievement of an architect. Contemporary construction in China has largely occurred without extensive social consultation. We’ve supported decades of massive construction, but this has left many spatial wounds that will likely take two or three generations to heal. After turning 40, I began to feel the weight of this reality, which motivated me to take action to address it.

▼苏州河武宁路桥下驿站，上海，Service Station Under Wuning Road Bridge, Suzhou Creek, Shanghai © 杨敏 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

近几年以来也可以称为第三阶段，但第二阶段和第三阶段之间，并没有一个完全清晰的时间点，我对自己的工作一直保持一种方式，让自己保持较为清醒的反思能力。反思能力无非就是不让自己过于简单地相信某些东西，而是更多地提醒自己去怀疑某些东西。建筑师在为业主负责的同时，是否可以做一些事情，在合作过程中既不浪费资源，又能够顺势而为，留出一些空间出口，在职业性诉求之外留出某种可能性，或者埋下伏笔。这个问题可能是我在面对各种工作的初始阶段，时常会考虑的。

在这个过程中，也逐渐形成了一个非常典型的工作方法，那就是我可能会更加关注场地问题。经历过这么多历程之后，对于我来说，建筑就是两件事，一是环境，二是人。我认为，人的问题需要通过某种理解和想象来沟通，而环境则是实实在在可以把握的，或者说，环境中会留下一代代人在此生活的印记。场地永远存在一种力量，指引建筑师如何在长时间维度上建立关系。因为一直以来，我们强调建筑师的工作不仅仅是空间工作，但我其实一直相信，空间工作只是一个现象，它的本质是时间性工作。我们这一代人有着明显的前后差异，早期我们处于一种快速共识建造的阶段，一次性完成建设，而后我们也看到了这种一次性建设物质生产的后果。

In recent years, I would consider this as the third phase, though there isn’t a distinct turning point between the second and third phases. Throughout my career, I’ve maintained an approach that allows me to stay critically reflective. Reflective thinking, in essence, is about not easily accepting things at face value, but instead reminding myself to question them. While architects are responsible to their clients, we must also ask whether we can do things that neither waste resources nor force a particular outcome. Can we leave room for flexibility, creating possibilities beyond immediate professional demands, or even planting seeds for the future? This is a question I often consider in the early stages of various projects.

As I’ve evolved in my practice, I’ve developed a typical approach that involves focusing more on site-related issues. After all these years of experience, I now see architecture as fundamentally about two things: the environment and the people. People’s concerns require understanding and imagination to communicate, while the environment is tangible—it leaves a trace of the generations who’ve inhabited it. The site always has a certain force, guiding the architect on how to establish long-term relationships. We’ve often emphasized that an architect’s role goes beyond simply creating spaces, but I’ve always believed that spatial design is just a manifestation—its essence lies in working with time. Our generation has experienced a significant shift: early on, we were in an era of rapid consensus-based construction, completing projects in a single phase. Over time, we’ve witnessed the consequences of such one-off, mass construction approaches.

▼苏州河普陀公园驿站 & 苏州河顺义路口袋公园驿站，上海，Service Station in Front of Putuo Park, Suzhou Creek & Service Station in Shunyi Road Pocket Park, Suzhou Creek, Shanghai © 杨敏

点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

目前，至少对我个人而言，我尤其希望自己的工作能够在时间的维度上实现“缝合”，用时间来弥合空间的问题。我们应以更有机的态度看待自己的工作环境，而这种思考也与我多年来的调研经验密切相关。多年来，我们的研究对象始终是那些不起眼的建筑，或者说，是那些被建筑学主流所忽视的空间。这种满足感甚至远远超过了设计一座大型建筑的成就感。

Currently, at least for me personally, I particularly hope that my work can “seamlessly” connect across time, using time to address spatial issues. We should approach our work environment with a more organic mindset, which is closely linked to my years of research experience. Over the years, our focus has been on those humble buildings, or rather, the spaces often overlooked by mainstream architecture. The satisfaction I derive from this research far exceeds the sense of accomplishment from designing a large-scale building.

▼和平公园六号门暨天宝路入口更新改造，上海，Renovation of Peace Parks Gate 6 (Entrance on Tianbao Road), Hongkou, Shanghai © 杨敏

点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

而在长期的研究与实践过程中，我愈发坚定地认识到自己更关注的是建筑的“小写”化，或者说更专注于建筑如何被涂涂改改，即建筑如何能够被自由地调整、改造。当我评价自己的建筑作品时，我不再仅仅以早年个人化的完整性追求作为唯一衡量标准。这种设计上的完整度仍然重要，但它必须被置于一个更具平衡性的框架之中。与此同时，我更加关注如何调动用户的主动性，使建筑更加友好、易于适应现实生活，真正具备可消化性。

Through years of research and practice, I have grown increasingly focused on the “lowercase” aspects of architecture, or rather, on how buildings can be modified and adapted freely. When evaluating my own work, I no longer solely rely on the personalized pursuit of completeness that characterized my early approach. While this sense of design integrity remains important, it must now be placed within a more balanced context. Additionally, I am increasingly concerned with how to encourage users’ active involvement, making architecture more welcoming, adaptable to everyday life, and truly digestible.

▼东方明珠游船码头候船厅，上海，Waiting Lounge of Oriental Pearl Cruise Dock, Shanghai © 陈颢

点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

当我们有意识地去思考这些问题时，例如如何抓住场地的线索，我们自然也会关注人与人之间的社会关系投射，并尝试从这一方向进行缝合。同时，这也解释了为何建筑实践在本质上更倾向于一种关于时间性的操作——尽管其最终呈现的结果是空间，但其核心工作却是关于时间的。这一思考与前述逻辑始终保持着内在的联系。

经历了这两个阶段之后，我们仍然希望在实践中保持对自身工作的价值追问。必须在狭义的职业建筑师身份之外，保持一种价值层面的反思，以探寻自身工作的真正意义。然而，这种思考不仅仅停留在观念层面，而是需要被消化并融入日常工作之中。而在这一过程中，单凭个人力量无法完成，它必须成为团队的某种共识。这种共识促使我们在实践中抓住不同的机会——无论是大的、小的，甚至是微小的契机——不断进行投射，使这些价值观在具体的建筑工作中逐步实现。

When we consciously reflect on these issues, such as how to identify the clues of a site, we naturally begin to focus on the social relationships between people, striving to weave them together in our approach. This also explains why architectural practice, at its core, is more about temporality—while the end result is space, the essential work involves time. This thought process aligns with the logic I’ve mentioned earlier.

After going through these two phases, we still strive to maintain a critical reflection on the value of our work in practice. It is crucial to reflect beyond the narrow role of a professional architect to explore the true meaning of our work. However, this reflection must not remain conceptual; it needs to be absorbed and integrated into our daily practice. In this process, individual effort alone is insufficient—it requires becoming a shared consensus within the team. This consensus propels us to grasp every opportunity in practice—whether large, small, or even seemingly insignificant—and project our values, gradually realizing them through concrete architectural work.

我们必须在狭义的职业建筑师身份之外，保持一种价值层面的反思，以探寻自身工作的真正意义。然而，这种思考不仅仅停留在观念层面，而是需要被消化并融入日常工作之中。

We must maintain a reflection on values beyond the narrow identity of a professional architect, in order to explore the true meaning of our work. However, this reflection should not remain at the conceptual level; it needs to be absorbed and integrated into our daily practice.

近两年还有一个显著的现象，即我们的工作在类型上本就具有较大的差异，各种规模的项目交错并行，小至几十平方米，大至十几二十万平方米的项目均有涉及。与此同时，我们又拓展了新的可能性，开始深度参与基础设施类项目。例如，在杨树浦六厂滨江公共空间更新项目中，我们所介入的不仅仅是景观设计，还涵盖了水利工程、建筑遗产的利用、公共空间的再造等多个维度，构成了一个庞大的系统。

In recent years, another notable trend is the significant diversity in our work, with projects of varying scales running concurrently, ranging from just a few dozen square meters to several hundred thousand square meters. At the same time, we have expanded into new areas, starting to engage deeply in infrastructure-related projects. For example, in the Public Space Renewal of Six Factories Site in Yangshupu Riverside, our involvement extends beyond landscape design to include hydraulic engineering, the adaptive reuse of architectural heritage, and the transformation of public spaces, creating a comprehensive and intricate system.

▼杨树浦六厂滨江公共空间更新，Waterfront Public Space Renewal of Six Factories Site in Former Yangtzepoo Industrial Zone, Yangpu, Shanghai © 田方方

▼杨浦滨江公务码头陆域基地广德路临时办公用房，上海，Temporary Office Building on Guangde Road for Civil Service Dock Land Base, Yangpu, Shanghai © 田方方 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

▼东西通道东方路风塔及轨道交通14号线浦东大道站风井，上海，Ventilation Tower at Dongfang Road of East-West Passageway and Ventilation Shaft of Pudong Avenue Station on Metro Line 14, Pudong, Shanghai © 杨敏 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

此外，我们近年来还涉及桥梁设计，包括车行桥、步行桥，以及各类交通和水利设施的建设。在这一过程中，我们逐渐意识到，基础设施在中国已成为一个较为敏感的专业议题。在增量时代，基础设施往往因其纯技术导向而受到批评，它通常是以单向目标为核心，如高架桥的建设主要服务于车辆通行，却往往忽略了对环境的影响。然而，进入存量更新时代后，这些单一维度的技术系统所带来的问题已无法被忽视。如果基础设施仍然仅从技术角度出发，而缺乏对环境及社会效益的考量，便极有可能对城市生态和公共空间造成伤害。

Additionally, in recent years, we have expanded our work to include bridge design, such as vehicular bridges, pedestrian bridges, and various transportation and hydraulic infrastructure projects. Through this process, we have come to realize that infrastructure has become a sensitive issue in China. During the era of expansion, infrastructure was often criticized for being overly technical, typically focused on single objectives. For instance, elevated bridges are designed primarily to facilitate vehicular traffic, but the environmental impact is often overlooked. As we shift into the era of renovation and renewal, the limitations of these one-dimensional technical solutions have become increasingly apparent. If infrastructure continues to be treated purely from a technical perspective, without accounting for its environmental and social implications, it is likely to cause harm to urban ecosystems and public spaces.

▼东昌栈桥，上海，Dongchang Elevated Passage，Lujiazui CBD area, Shanghai © 陈颢 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

因此，如何让基础设施的效益更加多元化，使其在提供技术支持的同时，也能对环境和社会发展产生积极影响，逐渐成为行业内的共识。这种认识的转变，使建筑师在基础设施项目中的参与显得尤为重要，也推动了更具环境效益的基础设施设计理念的形成。从个人或事务所的发展角度来看，若要概括我们在实践中的某种阶段性特征，那么2015年之后的近十年，我们作为一家规模不大的事务所，确实在面对更加多样化的实践课题，并在这一过程中不断拓展我们的专业边界。

Therefore, how to make the benefits of infrastructure more diversified—ensuring that, while providing technical support, it also has a positive impact on the environment and social development—has gradually become a consensus within the industry. This shift in understanding has made the involvement of architects in infrastructure projects particularly important, and has fostered the development of infrastructure design concepts with greater environmental benefits. From the perspective of individual or firm development, if we were to summarize a certain phase of our practice, it would be that, in the nearly ten years since 2015, as a relatively small firm, we have indeed faced increasingly diverse practice challenges and have continuously expanded our professional boundaries in the process.

▼彬蔚致正建筑工作室部分代表作品，selected projects by Atelier Z+

回应场地“特殊性”

Responding to the Specificity

3.您们的多篇学术发表中提到对“特定场地”的“深度回应”，在实际项目中如何挖掘现状并呈现回应呢？

In several of your academic publications, you mention a “deep response” to the “specific site.” How do you excavate the existing conditions and present a response in your actual projects?

我之所以会使用Specificity这个词，实际上是90年代末开始受到了让努维尔的启发。让努维尔所展现的一种观念让我深有共鸣，即建筑不应被某种固定风格所界定，而是应当在每一个项目中抓住其具体的特殊性。这种特殊性既可以理解为“具体性”，也可以理解为“特异性”，但它并不仅仅是针对场地本身，而是面向整个项目的特质，涉及如何通过设计去回应这些特质。当然，这一特质的实现，并不是仅停留在概念层面，而是通过从概念到物质的操作过程加以组织和呈现。这一点当时对我而言极具启发性，我也十分认同这一方法论。

The reason I use the term “Specificity” is that I was inspired by Jean Nouvel in the late 1990s. One of the ideas Nouvel presented resonated deeply with me—that architecture should not be defined by a fixed style but should focus on capturing the particularity of each project. This particularity can be understood both as “concreteness” and “distinctiveness.” However, it is not just about the site itself but the characteristics of the entire project, addressing how design can respond to these characteristics. Of course, the realization of this characteristic does not remain only at the conceptual level but is organized and presented through the process of transforming concept into material. This approach was highly inspiring to me, and I fully agree with this methodology.

“建筑不应被某种固定风格所界定，而是应当在每一个项目中抓住其具体的特殊性。它并不仅仅是针对场地本身，而是面向整个项目的特质，涉及如何通过设计去回应这些特质。”

“Architecture should not be confined to a fixed style; rather, it should embrace the unique qualities of each project. This goes beyond the site itself, focusing on the distinctive characteristics of the entire project and how design caneffectively respond to them.”

C楼对我而言也是以我的方式在当时回应“特殊性”或“具体性”的实践。例如，在校园内狭窄的场地条件下，如何进行空间处理？在面向师生的建筑中，如何创造一种自由交流的氛围？这一项目的特殊之处在于，我不仅仅是以一般委托—被委托的关系参与设计，而是以学院成员的身份去思考和构建空间。我在设计过程中自然而然地设想，建筑完工后，师生们将在其中如何活动、如何使用、如何交流。C楼所呈现的空间形态，与传统的教学楼截然不同。它本质上并非一座单纯的教学楼，而是由多种灵活空间构成的开放性场所。这些空间的多义性，使得建筑在得房率较低的情况下，反而展现出更大的弹性。建筑内部包含了扩展的中庭与走道、屋顶花园、下层庭院等多种空间形式，其空间结构呈现出类似“即插即用”的特点，既符合教学和交流需求，又创造了一种校园生活的都市化场景，以垂直化的空间布局体现出更高的使用密度。

在C楼的物质系统构建上，我们采用了粗犷的混凝土系统与精细的金属系统的直接碰撞，而非将其完全包裹。这种处理方式不同于常见的高精度清水混凝土，我们使用的是小木模板浇筑的容错性混凝土，使其呈现出更具手工痕迹的肌理。同时，建筑的金属与玻璃部分则相对精细，以此形成鲜明对比，并且在充分了解当年国内金属建材工业备品潜力的基础上选用大量性现成制品来搭建适宜又有辨识度的建造系统。这种设计方式在后来的讨论中被一些专业朋友总结为一种“型材思维”。在型材思维的框架下，如何创造一种真正属于当代的校园空间——一个充满流动感、使用密度不断变化，同时能够接纳城市活力的场所——成为我在C楼项目中的核心探讨。这是我作为工作室第一个项目时所进行的一次高密度实验。

For me, Building C was also an exploration of responding to “specificity” or “concreteness” in my own way. For instance, how do you approach spatial planning on a narrow site in a campus environment? How do you foster a free exchange of ideas in a building designed for both students and faculty? The uniqueness of this project is that I was not just participating as a contractor, but as a member of the academic community, designing the space with that in mind. I naturally envisioned how the space would be used, how people would move through it, and how they would interact after it was completed. The spatial form of Building C is a stark departure from traditional teaching buildings. It is not simply a teaching space, but an open environment composed of flexible, multifunctional spaces. The multifunctionality of these spaces, despite the lower floor area ratio, allowed the building to offer greater flexibility. The interior includes extended courtyards and corridors, a rooftop garden, and lower-level courtyards, among other spatial elements. The structure’s design reflects a “plug-and-play” nature, accommodating both teaching and social interaction needs, while also creating an urbanized campus experience. Its vertical layout maximizes space efficiency and usage density.

In terms of the material system for Building C, we intentionally created a contrast between the raw, exposed concrete system and the refined metal elements, rather than enclosing the two. This approach differs from the typical high-precision fair-faced concrete; instead, we used fault-tolerant concrete cast in small wooden molds, which gives it a more tactile, handmade texture. The metal and glass portions of the building are more refined, forming a sharp contrast. Additionally, based on a deep understanding of the domestic metal materials industry at the time, we used numerous ready-made products to build a construction system that was both functional and visually distinctive. This design approach was later referred to by some colleagues as “profile thinking.” Within the framework of this thinking, the central question for me in the Building C project was how to create a truly contemporary campus space—one that flows, has varying densities of use, and incorporates urban energy. This was a high-density experiment in my studio’s first project.

▼同济大学建筑与城市规划学院 C 楼，Building C, College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai © 张嗣烨

从工作室实践伊始，我便将“Specificity”（具体性）作为核心抓手之一，C楼正是这一理念的体现。这种方式也与我对上海城市特征的理解相契合 —— 它不是一个自足的单一建筑，而是一个具有开放性、回应周边环境的空间体量。其四个立面各不相同，南面与北面截然不同，都依据特定的场地条件进行塑造，主动放弃了立面完整性的思维惯式。这正是我们对环境的一种回应态度。我从未将其设想为一个以单一逻辑自主呈现的建筑，而是希望通过这种方式与环境进行更多的对话。其中当然包含了对场地特殊性的思考。而近两年之所以将“Specificity”与“Site”更紧密地联系在一起，主要源于我们在诸多城市调研中的实践经验。随着我们的工作类型不断拓展，场地逐渐成为我们在项目处理中一个更为可靠的抓手。这一认知的形成，也经历了多个项目的实践过程，例如舟山虾峙客运站项目。该场地位于离岛的山与海之间，不远处有小岛拱卫。该码头自1990年代起便存在，且是整个岛屿的一个突出点，海堤曾在此转折，随着近年填海工程的推进，原有的海堤折角边界逐渐消失，但我们建筑的布位恰好位于这条边界之上。后来在项目发表前，我们又仔细回溯了地图，并发现尽管我们设计的建筑位置与消失的海塘略呈夹角，但整体布局仍然是符合场地特点并揭示了隐匿的场地潜力的。若我们在设计过程中做更细致的研究，或许能够让建筑边界与这段消失的海塘完全重合。这也提醒我们细致的场地调研与解读的重要性，因为看似沉默的场地永远能够告诉我们绵长而又清晰的时间回响。

Since the beginning of my studio practice, I have embraced “Specificity” as one of the core principles, and the C Building serves as an embodiment of this concept. This approach aligns with my understanding of the urban characteristics of Shanghai—it is not a self-contained, singular structure, but a space that is open and responsive to its surrounding environment. Its four facades are distinct, with the south and north facades being entirely different, each shaped according to specific site conditions, intentionally breaking away from the traditional approach of facade continuity. This reflects our attitude towards responding to the environment. I never envisioned it as a building that unfolds from a single, autonomous logic, but rather as a way to engage in a more dynamic dialogue with its surroundings. Naturally, this also involves a reflection on the site’s unique characteristics.

In recent years, I have increasingly tied “Specificity” to “Site,” driven largely by our practical experience in numerous urban studies. As our work expands, the site has become a more reliable anchor in our design process. This understanding has evolved through multiple projects, such as the Zhoushan Xiazhi Ferry Terminal. Situated between the mountain and the sea on an island, with small islands surrounding it, the terminal has been a landmark since the 1990s. The sea dike once turned here, but with ongoing land reclamation, the original boundary of the seawall’s bend has gradually disappeared. However, our building’s location is positioned precisely along this vanishing boundary. Before publication, we revisited the map and discovered that, although the building’s position forms a slight angle with the lost sea embankment, the overall layout still adheres to the site’s character and uncovers its latent potential. Had we conducted a more detailed study, the building’s edge might have perfectly aligned with the disappeared embankment. This serves as a reminder of the critical importance of thorough site research and interpretation, as even the most silent of sites can reveal rich, enduring echoes of time.

▼虾峙客运站，浙江舟山，Xiazhi Ferry Terminal, Xiazhi Island, Putuo, Zhoushan © 杨敏

点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

我们的建筑设计与这一历史背景之间依然存在对话的空间。尽管在这个项目中没有完全精确地将这一思考贯彻到设计中，但它促使我意识到，在每个项目的实际操作中，我都会回溯历史，去寻找那些可能看似不起眼但通过各种文献和现场对照能够找到的线索。这对建筑师来说尤为重要，正如社会学家可以处理复杂的访谈和数据一样，社会学家却无法深入理解物质空间证据，无论是场地还是建筑细节。这些建造的痕迹，建筑师能够从中解读出深层含义。因此，如果建筑学的视角与社会学、人类学的视野相结合，我相信建筑师的能力会更为强大。这里的强大并不意味着让我们可以随意进行所谓“创作”，而是指我们具备了一种从场地和建造痕迹中进行深刻反思的能力。

There remains a space for dialogue between our architectural design and the historical context. Although this thinking was not fully realized in the design of this project, it made me realize that in every project, I revisit history to uncover seemingly inconspicuous clues that, through research and site observations, can be revealed. This approach is particularly significant for architects. While sociologists can handle complex interviews and data, they cannot fully grasp the material evidence of space—whether it’s the site or architectural details. These traces of construction hold deeper meanings that architects can interpret. Thus, I believe that combining the perspective of architecture with the insights of sociology and anthropology would greatly enhance an architect’s capabilities. This strength doesn’t imply we are free to engage in arbitrary “creation,” but rather that we gain the ability to deeply reflect on the site and its built traces.

▼张马游客中心，上海，Tourist Centre of Zhangma Village, Qingpu, Shanghai © CreatAR Images 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

4.您为什么偏爱廉价工业材料？

Why do you prefer inexpensive industrial materials?

我自己曾经喜欢的建筑师大多反映了我对当代性的理解，这种理解体现在对固定的宏大建筑形式的拒绝。随着代际的积累，这种思考影响了我在自己设计中的尝试。我天然对工业材料产生了兴趣。例如，在C楼中，我们自己调动了钢构、铝型材和玻璃等大量性产品，形成了层层叠叠的关系。到了中法中心，我大面积使用了耐候钢板，这可能是全中国第二个使用耐候钢板的项目。当年，我也没有任何所谓的外墙顾问，所有的资料都由我们自己查找，我们自己研究了使用材料的厚度。在施工开始后，我们与一家幕墙公司合作，经过攻关才完成了这一过程。再比如幕墙，我比较不喜欢单纯意义上的全幕墙思考。在中国做项目时，通常最省事的做法是用幕墙全面包裹房子，这样土建部分可以做得不那么精细，交给一个靠谱的幕墙公司来解决，外墙问题解决后，项目就可以结束了。

而难度较大的项目是什么呢？是混合系统，即既有土建直接完成的部分，又有幕墙包裹的面，二者是相互碰撞的。这使我对工业与现场的混合感产生了兴趣，也让我思考如何去讨论工业材料的某种手工感。对我来说，全幕墙包裹并没有手工感，它是数字和机器的产物。当你在一个粗糙系统上叠加一个精良系统时，其中的对话便是一种手工感，而这种手工感自然也隐含了一个话题，那就是：我们能否用廉价的工业材料，创造出当代意义上的某种新的诗意？

The architects I once admired largely embody my understanding of contemporaneity, which is reflected in a rejection of fixed, monumental architectural forms. Over time, this thinking has influenced my own design approach. I’ve naturally developed an interest in industrial materials. For example, in the C Building, we used steel, aluminum profiles, and glass, creating complex, layered relationships between them. In the Sino-French Center, I used weathered steel extensively, which was probably the second project in China to do so. At that time, we didn’t have external wall consultants; we researched all the materials ourselves, including the thickness of the materials used. After construction began, we collaborated with a curtain wall company and worked through technical challenges to complete the project.

When it comes to curtain walls, I’m not a fan of treating them as a simple, all-encompassing solution. In China, the typical approach is to wrap the entire building in a curtain wall, allowing the structural work to be less refined, and leaving it to a trusted curtain wall company to handle. Once the exterior is done, the project is considered finished.

But what are the more challenging projects? They are the mixed systems, where part of the building is constructed with traditional methods, while other areas are wrapped in curtain walls, creating a clash between the two. This sparked my interest in blending industrial materials with site-specific elements, prompting me to consider how industrial materials can carry a sense of craftsmanship. For me, a fully enclosed curtain wall lacks this sense of craftsmanship—it is a product of digital processes and machines. When you layer a refined system on top of a rougher one, the dialogue between the two creates a certain craft-like quality. This naturally raises a key question: Can we use inexpensive industrial materials to create a form of contemporary poetry with new meaning?

▼致正建筑工作室西岸临时办公室，Temporary Office Building of Atelier Z+, Westbund, Xuhui, Shanghai © 陈颢

点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

对我来说，当代意义的诗意很大一部分来自于廉价、快速异变的材料，这些材料的不定性、反射、透视、折叠等各种处理方式。这样的处理方式通常与工业流水线的瓦楞板、不锈钢的反射面、玻璃的反射面、半透明的阳光板等相关，而这些材料充斥着我们的生活世界。因此，对廉价工业材料的偏好，一方面源于我个人的某种趣味，另一方面也可能代表了我对于自己所处的世界的某种理解。

我没有特别清晰的个人形式特征，因此我也不会在工作中特别依赖形式，尤其是表面意义上的形式。我更多的是依赖一种内在的特质，尤其是在建筑方面，因为我一直认为，对我来说，做建筑设计无非就是要达到所谓的贯穿性（Penetration）和咬合性（Articulation）。贯穿性是指我的思维是否能够将各个层面的问题串联起来，从概念到建造的过程。咬合性是指我是否能够将不同层面的事物紧密地结合在一起。这样的思维方式是我个人，以及我们团队多年来合作的方式，我们一直坚持这样思考建筑问题。

For me, the poetic quality of contemporaneity largely emerges from inexpensive, rapidly transforming materials—those that allow for unpredictability, reflections, perspectives, folding, and various other treatments. These techniques are often associated with industrial materials such as corrugated sheets, the reflective surfaces of stainless steel, glass, and semi-transparent sun panels, all of which are deeply embedded in our everyday lives. Thus, my preference for inexpensive industrial materials is, on one hand, a reflection of my personal taste, and on the other, may indicate my interpretation of the world I inhabit.

I don’t have a particularly distinct formal signature, which is why I don’t rely heavily on form in my work, especially when it comes to surface-level design. Instead, I place more emphasis on intrinsic qualities, particularly in architecture. I’ve always believed that for me, architectural design is fundamentally about achieving two things: “penetration” and “articulation.” Penetration refers to my ability to link different layers of issues, from concept to construction. Articulation refers to how well I can integrate different elements together. This is the way I think and the approach our team has maintained for years—always focused on this method when addressing architectural problems.

▼崇明东滩湿地宣教科研中心，上海，Wetland Research and Education Center, Dongtan, Chongming, Shanghai © 陈颢 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

5.在阿那亚北岸市集项目中，您将“广场”与“店铺”的空间体验比作美术馆的公区与展厅，这种体验是如何设计而成的？

In the Marketplace of North Coast Aranya project, you compared the spatial experience of the “square” and the “shops” to the public areas and exhibition halls of an art museum. How was this experience designed?

阿那亚北岸市集实际上是一个相当特殊的项目，项目本身具备了充分的自运营能力，他们自己运营食堂和超市两部分。我们在做方案调整和思路调整的过程中，同时与运营团队进行了沟通，逐步了解他们如何使用这个建筑。后来，我调整了自己的思路，想到了用聚落的方式来表达，使其成为董功设计的礼堂的配角。

The Marketplace of North Coast Aranya is quite a unique project, as it operates with a high degree of self-sufficiency, managing its own canteen and supermarket sections. During the process of refining the design and concept, I collaborated closely with the operations team to better understand how they would use the space. This led me to adjust my approach, envisioning the design as a settlement, with the marketplace acting as a complementary element to the auditorium designed by Dong Gong. This way, the spatial experience of the “square” and the “shops” was shaped to resemble the relationship between the public areas and exhibition halls of an art museum.

▼阿那亚北岸市集，秦皇岛，Marketplace of North Coast Aranya, Changli, Qinhuangdao © 杨敏

点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

专注于打造一个具有聚落感的空间。集市的概念也与聚落形成了呼应。当然，我们在其中也暗含了一个小小的野心，这个野心并非源自建筑形态，而是来源于运营。因为在这个项目之前，阿那亚的食堂和超市是分别建造的，而这是他们第一次尝试将两者合并，命名为市集。虽然它并不是真正的市集，因为它是单一主体的，而非多主体的，但我们看到了一个机会，即通过自营的方式创造出一种多主体的氛围。如果能够成功创造这种氛围，是否可以进一步探讨其自营的食堂和超市品牌的“子品牌化”的可能性呢？

这些小小的带有天窗的高耸锥顶房子作为一个个档口，每个档口的内容是与运营团队商量确定的。例如，有的是果蔬店，有的是酒水铺，有的是海鲜档，我们为每个档口配置了必要的专业厨具和设备，以确保它们符合运营标准。因此，我很快意识到，我们通过这种方式给了运营团队一个新的可能性：如果他们愿意的话，甚至可以创造阿亚自己的海鲜档品牌、酒水铺品牌、面包坊品牌。

在与运营团队沟通时，我们也提到过这一点，他们认同这一可能性。这种潜力的出现源于原本单一模式的食堂和超市，被我们转变为一个类似市集的布局，周围有一圈小店，中间是两个大空间，形成了一个共享的环境。这样，天然存在了服务内容“子品牌化”的可能性。

The focus was on creating a space with a sense of community. The concept of the marketplace echoed the idea of a settlement. Of course, we also embedded a subtle ambition into the design, but this ambition came not from the architectural form itself, but from the operational aspect. Prior to this project, Aranya’s canteen and supermarket were separate, but this was their first attempt at combining them into a single entity, named a marketplace. Although it isn’t a true marketplace—since it is a single entity rather than a multi-entity space—we saw an opportunity to foster a multi-entity atmosphere through self-operation. If successful, could this lead to exploring the possibility of “sub-branding” their self-operated canteen and supermarket brands?

These small, skylit, conical-roofed structures serve as individual stalls, with each stall’s content determined in collaboration with the operations team. For example, some are fruit and vegetable shops, others are wine shops, and some are seafood stalls. We equipped each stall with the necessary professional kitchen tools and equipment to meet operational standards. Through this approach, we realized we were offering the operations team a new opportunity: they could potentially create their own seafood stall brand, wine shop brand, or bakery brand.

During our discussions with the operations team, we shared this possibility, and they recognized its potential. This opportunity arose from transforming the original, single-function canteen and supermarket into a marketplace layout, where small shops surround two large central spaces, creating a shared environment. In this way, the possibility of “sub-branding” the service offerings naturally emerged.

▼阿那亚北岸市集，秦皇岛，Marketplace of North Coast Aranya, Changli, Qinhuangdao © 杨敏

点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

阿那亚对我来说，并不是真正意义上的社区，它更像是一个社群空间，我可能在这样一种命题下做出了一个本能性的回应：我讴歌了一个消费日常场景的氛围，热烈拥抱了日常的烟火气息。其实，我也在某种程度上套用了美术馆的主题。然后将这种崇高感赋予给了日常烟火。这其实是在某种程度上将美术馆“降格”，或者说我做了一个让人在美术馆里吃饭购物的空间。

To me, Aranya isn’t exactly a community in the traditional sense; it’s more of a shared space. My instinctive response to this idea was to celebrate the atmosphere of everyday consumption, warmly embracing the vibrant energy of daily life. In a way, I borrowed the theme of an art museum and infused that sense of the sublime into the everyday. Essentially, I was “downgrading” the art museum concept, creating a space where people can eat and shop as if within a museum.

▼阿那亚北岸市集，秦皇岛，Marketplace of North Coast Aranya, Changli, Qinhuangdao © 苏圣亮 点击这里查看更多，Click HERE for details

对行业的反思

Reflections

6.在目前的建筑环境您认为作为建筑师应当如何定位、如何自处？工作室的未来发展方向又是怎样的？

How do you think architects should position themselves in the current architectural environment, and what is the future development direction of your studio?

作为当代中国的建筑师，如果依旧以传统建筑师的视角来看待这个行业——尽管建筑师这一职业正经历快速变革，并涌现出各种新的可能性——我认为最为重要的一点在于对现实的反思能力。建筑师应当具备理解现实、认清现实的能力，同时明确自身的边界，清楚自身所具备的有效性以及可以运用的工具。

因此，关于自身的实践工作，需要探究其根本目的是什么？它能够产生何种作用？这些问题仍然需要保持清醒的思考。在当代多元化的社会中我更希望自己的工作能够回应当下的社会状况，而不仅仅是投射出一个单纯的物质结果。真正让我感到满足的，并不是单纯地建造出一座漂亮的房子，甚至在一定程度上，我对这种单纯追求视觉效果的建筑持保留态度。正是这种对“漂亮房子”的抵触，促使我反思自己的工作价值所在。

As a contemporary architect in China, if we still view the profession from a traditional perspective—despite rapid changes and the emergence of new possibilities—I believe the most important aspect is the ability to reflect on reality. Architects need to understand and recognize the reality around them, while being aware of their limitations and knowing what they can effectively contribute and the tools they can use.

Therefore, when it comes to our practice, we must explore its core purpose—what impact can it have? These are the questions that require careful thought. In today’s diverse society, I hope my work responds to the current social context, rather than merely reflecting a material result. What truly satisfies me is not simply constructing a beautiful house; in fact, I have reservations about architecture that solely seeks visual appeal. This resistance to the notion of the “beautiful house” prompts me to reflect on the value of my work.

中国的建筑师应该是充满创伤感的。对于一个从业者而言，创伤感或许是某种本质性的体验——它让人切身经历这一过程。

“Chinese architects should be imbued with a sense of trauma. For practitioners, trauma may be an essential experience—it allows one to live through the process.”

当代中国社会正经历着剧烈的转型与快速变迁，时间与空间的浓缩效应尤为显著。每一代人其实都承受着各自的痛苦。所谓的“痛苦”，或许可以这样理解——社会的高速变迁带来了前所未有的机遇，同时也伴随着深刻的挑战。这种剧烈的变化不仅是对现实的冲击，更是对个体生理和心理承受力的考验。人的生命节奏被急剧压缩，思维方式被不断重塑。从这个角度来看，浓缩的时代进程既是一种机遇，也是一种负担。它的好处在于，我们在一生之中能够经历前所未有的变革，但与此同时，这种变化的幅度远超常规的历史尺度。

这一背景无法简单地用“好”或“坏”来评价，它所呈现的，是一个容纳了极端剧烈变迁的现实。我曾经尝试将自己的经历划分为几个阶段，每个时期都伴随着不同的困惑，甚至可以说，并非单纯的不满或恐惧，而是一种更深层次的、近乎创伤性的感受。在多个场合的讨论中，我都提到过：中国的建筑师应该是充满创伤感的。我无法代表他人的感受，但对我而言，这确实是一种创伤性的历程——仿佛在这场巨变中，我们并未真正为社会的修补发挥多少作用。

在这个过程中，除非选择不做建筑师，否则作为建筑师，所经历的必然是一种创伤感。然而，这种创伤感并不意味着完全的负面影响。对于一个从业者而言，创伤感或许是某种本质性的体验——它让人切身经历这一过程。那么，创伤感本身是否也能转化为某种成就感？对此，我并不确定。或许，在中国从事建筑实践，始终是一种在创伤感与对成就感的追寻之间不断徘徊的过程。

Contemporary Chinese society is undergoing intense transformation, and the compression of time and space is especially noticeable. Each generation faces its own challenges, or “pain.” This “pain” can be understood as the profound challenges accompanying rapid societal change. It’s not only a shock to reality but also a test of individual endurance, both physically and mentally. People’s life rhythms are compressed, and their thinking reshaped. From this perspective, the era’s condensed timeline is both an opportunity and a burden. The advantage is that we experience unprecedented transformation in our lifetimes, but the scale of change far exceeds traditional historical proportions.

This backdrop cannot simply be labeled as “good” or “bad.” It presents a reality that encompasses extreme shifts. I’ve tried to categorize my experiences into phases, each marked by its own confusion. It’s not just dissatisfaction or fear, but a deeper, almost traumatic feeling. I’ve often said that Chinese architects should be imbued with a sense of trauma. While I cannot represent others, I personally find this journey to be one of trauma—like we’ve not truly contributed to society’s repair during this transformation.

In this process, unless one chooses not to be an architect, the experience of trauma is inevitable. However, this sense of trauma does not entirely have negative consequences. For practitioners, trauma may be an essential experience—it allows one to live through the process. Can trauma itself transform into a sense of achievement? I’m not sure. Perhaps, practicing architecture in China is always a process of navigating between trauma and the pursuit of achievement.

“建筑师最重要的是始终保持清醒，避免将自己置于救世主或上帝造物主的高度。我认为希望总是存在的，否则就真的无法面对辛苦的日常工作。对于我来说，在我们的工作室内，我有责任确保大家能够继续充满信心地工作下去。”

“I believe the most important thing for an architect is to remain clear-headed, avoiding the temptation to elevate oneself to the level of a savior or god-like creator.I believe hope always exists; without it, it would be impossible to face the daily challenges of our work. For me, in our studio, it is my responsibility to ensure that everyone continues to work with confidence.”

我认为，建筑师最重要的是始终保持清醒，避免将自己置于救世主或上帝造物主的高度。建筑师往往容易陷入一种造物的迷梦，而“Creation”一词本身就源自宗教语境，意味着上帝的创造。同样，我们今天所说的“创造”活动，实际上也是沿用了这一概念。早期现代主义时期，建筑师仍怀揣着理想，认为人的生活可以被建筑所塑造。然而，经历了多个时代的变迁，这种观念早已破产。那么，在这样的现实下，建筑师还能做什么？如果仍然坚持作为一个传统意义上的建筑师，我们仍然在从事这一实践，但真正的问题是——我们究竟还能做什么？

我觉得这个话题还是挺有思考价值的，我也没有标准答案，我只是分享这些年我从中体会到的感受。但反过来讲，可能这些年来的创伤也是我的最大收获，同时，我也被迫进行自我教育。自我教育是一个心理再平衡的过程，这种自我教育让我能够继续前行。如今行业的吸引力变得不再那么强，能够在这个行业生存下来的，肯定是热爱这个行业的人。幸运的是，我们的团队能够保持着某种希望，一起继续工作。尽管这种希望不一定那么强烈，但我认为希望总是存在的，否则就真的无法面对辛苦的日常工作。对于我来说，在我们的工作室内，我有责任确保大家能够继续充满信心地工作下去。

包括在有限的工作应对中，抓住一些机会，去共同努力完成一些事情，我不太会设定长远的目标，我始终坚信，只有当下是我能抓住的。其实这也符合建筑师的思考方式。你一直在做选择，关键在于如何选择。对我来说，无非就是在每次选择时保持对自己的信心，确保大方向正确，不偏离，最终能够到达目标。但是你不能等，也不能等自己完全想明白了再行动，我觉得这可能是建筑师这个行业固有的一个挑战。我并不认为这个行动一定会带来特别好的结果。尽管如此，我觉得我们还是要努力去行动，去面对这件事情。

I believe the most important thing for an architect is to remain clear-headed, avoiding the temptation to elevate oneself to the level of a savior or god-like creator. Architects often fall into the illusion of creation, and the term “Creation” itself originates from religious contexts, signifying divine creation. The creative activity we speak of today continues to follow this idea. In early modernism, architects still harbored the ideal that architecture could shape human life. However, after multiple eras, this idea has become obsolete. So, in this reality, what can architects still do? If we persist as traditional architects, we are still practicing, but the true question is—what can we still achieve?

This topic is worth reflecting on, and I don’t have a definitive answer. I am simply sharing the insights I’ve gained over the years. On the other hand, perhaps the trauma over these years has been my greatest gain, as it has forced me to engage in self-education. Self-education is a process of psychological rebalancing that enables me to move forward. Today, the appeal of the industry is no longer as strong. Those who remain are the ones who truly love it. Fortunately, our team continues to hold onto a certain hope and works together. While this hope may not be overwhelming, I believe hope always exists; without it, it would be impossible to face the daily challenges of our work. For me, in our studio, it is my responsibility to ensure that everyone continues to work with confidence.

Even within the constraints of limited work, we seize opportunities to collaborate on projects. I don’t set long-term goals, as I always believe that the present is the only time I can grasp. This aligns with the way architects think: you are always making choices, and the key is how to choose. For me, it’s about maintaining confidence in my decisions, ensuring the general direction is correct, and staying on course toward the goal. But you can’t wait for everything to make sense before acting. I believe this is an inherent challenge in the architectural profession. I don’t believe this action will always lead to particularly good results. Still, we must strive to act and face the challenges.

“我们不会用理想主义的方式去设定自己的目标，而是用一种防守的态度来设定目标，并以此努力去完成一些事情。我们永远需要在退却的过程中前行。”

“don’t set my goals idealistically but with a defensive attitude, striving to accomplish something. For our entire team, this may be an underlying mindset. We need to continue moving forward even as we retreat.”

这些年来，我们一直在拓展不同领域的工作，去触碰一些从未涉足的领域，保持面对未知问题的回应方式。而这个回应并不是依赖我个人，而是依靠我们整个团队。甚至几年前，我们曾经做过一个医院项目，面对这个项目时，我们从未涉足过此类工作，团队成员也没有相关经验，我们一起想办法去做，包括向许多同行请教，汲取他们的经验，在项目初期花了三个月时间编写任务书，查资料，算面积，做类似于气泡图的工作，尽管这种工作有些枯燥，但大家还是坚持做了下来。我觉得，作为建筑师，日常工作中常常会遇到类似的情况。这些过程难以忍受，但支撑这一切向前推进的，是我们依然有一个愿景。我认为，这个愿景并不意味着我一定要成功，才能心安理得。有时，哪怕未能完成，也无需过于焦虑。我们甚至永远需要在退却的过程中前行。

我们常常说，一旦项目启动，就要设定一个防线。防线的意义在于确定一个不容逾越的最低限度，一旦超过这个限度，这个项目就不再做了。我们有时也会选择放弃，但关键是如何设定防线，并在防线之上尽可能争取更多的进展，这往往依赖于机缘，但更重要的还是要依靠一种行动。我不会用理想主义的方式去设定自己的目标，而是用一种防守的态度来设定目标，并以此努力去完成一些事情。对我们整个团队而言，这可能也是某种底层思维。

我认为目前建筑师这一群体相对保守。我希望年轻人能够更激进一些，以更激进的视角审视专业和行业，尤其是在当下这一传统发展方式已被叫停、行业进入大调整的时代。在这样的背景下，维持以往的思考惯性已不再足够。即使是我们这一代人，都已感受到某种危机感，甚至可以说，我自己经历了十几年以上的持续危机感。这十几年来，相较于成就感，我的危机感始终更强烈。面对当下与未来，年轻建筑师如何能够明确自身的目标？在这一点上，我仍然期待更多可能性的出现。

Over the years, we have expanded into different fields, exploring areas we hadn’t ventured into before. We maintain a responsive approach to the unknown, and this response depends on our entire team, not just me. A few years ago, we worked on a hospital project—an area we had never explored before. The team lacked relevant experience, but we tackled it together, consulting peers, gathering their insights, and spending three months at the project’s start to create the brief, research materials, calculate areas, and do similar tasks. Though tedious, the team persevered. As architects, we frequently encounter similar situations. These processes can be grueling, but what drives us forward is the vision we hold. I believe this vision doesn’t require success to feel at ease. Sometimes, even if we fail to complete something, there’s no need to be overly anxious. Sometimes, we need to continue moving forward even as we retreat.

We often say that once a project starts, we must set a defense line. The defense line establishes a minimum limit, and if that limit is exceeded, the project stops. Sometimes, we choose to give up, but the key is in how we set that defense line and push for progress within that limit. This often depends on chance, but more importantly, it relies on action. I don’t set my goals idealistically but with a defensive attitude, striving to accomplish something. For our entire team, this may be an underlying mindset.

Currently, the architect community seems relatively conservative. I hope younger architects can be more radical, looking at the profession and industry from a more aggressive perspective, especially in this era where traditional development models have been halted, and the industry is undergoing major adjustments. Maintaining previous ways of thinking is no longer enough. Even my generation feels a sense of crisis. I’ve experienced continuous crisis for over ten years. Over these years, my sense of crisis has always been stronger than my sense of achievement. Facing the present and the future, how can young architects define their goals? In this regard, I still look forward to more possibilities emerging.

▼创始人张斌与周蔚近照