I'll start with my favorite muse, Emily Dickinson, who said that wonder is not knowledge, neither is it ignorance. It's something which is suspended between what we believe we can be, and a tradition we may have forgotten. And I think, when I listen to these incredible people here, I've been so inspired -- so many incredible ideas, so many visions. And yet, when I look at the environment outside, you see how resistant architecture is to change. You see how resistant it is to those very ideas. We can think them out. We can create incredible things. And yet, at the end, it's so hard to change a wall. We applaud the well-mannered box. But to create a space that never existed is what interests me; to create something that has never been, a space that we have never entered except in our minds and our spirits. And I think that's really what architecture is based on.
我的缪斯,美国女诗人艾蜜莉狄金森这么说 她说:奇想不是来自知识,也不是来自无知 而是一种悬念 悬吊在在我们的自我认知 和我们已经遗忘的传统中 从屋子里的这些出色的演讲中 我得到了许多灵感,看到许多可能性 但是当我往外一看 我们看到的建筑是多么死板 多么抗拒这些新观点 我们创造了这些神奇的事物 但最终 连改变一道墙都是这么困难。 我们赞同这些一板一眼的盒子 但我只对创造那些前所未有的空间感兴趣 那些史无前例的 那些只存在我们的心灵和想象中的空间 我认为那才是建筑的本质
Architecture is not based on concrete and steel and the elements of the soil. It's based on wonder. And that wonder is really what has created the greatest cities, the greatest spaces that we have had. And I think that is indeed what architecture is. It is a story. By the way, it is a story that is told through its hard materials. But it is a story of effort and struggle against improbabilities. If you think of the great buildings, of the cathedrals, of the temples, of the pyramids, of pagodas, of cities in India and beyond, you think of how incredible this is that that was realized not by some abstract idea, but by people.
建筑不是建立在水泥 钢铁,和泥土 而是建立在奇想上。 是奇想创建了伟大的城市 和伟大的空间。 我认为建筑便是如此。建筑是一个故事 建筑是一个借着 实体来诉说的故事 它也是一个和不可能 拔河及挣扎的故事。 想想那些伟大的建筑,大教堂,庙宇 金字塔,宝塔 印度的那些城市之类 这些不可思议的城市和建筑不是来自 一个模糊的概念,而是人
So, anything that has been made can be unmade. Anything that has been made can be made better. There it is: the things that I really believe are of important architecture. These are the dimensions that I like to work with. It's something very personal. It's not, perhaps, the dimensions appreciated by art critics or architecture critics or city planners. But I think these are the necessary oxygen for us to live in buildings, to live in cities, to connect ourselves in a social space.
所有建立的都能被重建 所有矗立的都能更完美 这些是我认为对建筑来说 真正重要的事。 我期待能在这些概念范围下创作 这是非常个人的 这大概不是评论家会喜欢的概念 建筑评论家,城市设计者大概也不苟同 但我认为当我们生活在建筑里,城市里 和公共空间有所联系时 它们就像空气一样必要。
And I therefore believe that optimism is what drives architecture forward. It's the only profession where you have to believe in the future. You can be a general, a politician, an economist who is depressed, a musician in a minor key, a painter in dark colors. But architecture is that complete ecstasy that the future can be better. And it is that belief that I think drives society.
我认为乐观是建筑的推进力 建筑是唯一需要相信未来的专业 你可以做一个悲观的将军、政治家、或是经济学者 一个忧郁的音乐家、一个阴暗的画家 但建筑师应该狂喜地期盼着美好未来 我相信这就是社会进步的原因
And today we have a kind of evangelical pessimism all around us. And yet it is in times like this that I think architecture can thrive with big ideas, ideas that are not small. Think of the great cities. Think of the Empire State Building, the Rockefeller Center. They were built in times that were not really the best of times in a certain way. And yet that energy and power of architecture has driven an entire social and political space that these buildings occupy.
今日我们被悲观的说法包围 但就算在这样的时代 我仍然相信建筑可以为一个伟大的目的而奋斗 想想那些伟大的城市 想想帝国大厦、或是洛克菲勒中心 它们都是建立在 那些绝非最好的时机 但建筑的精神和力量 领导着这些社会和政治
So again, I am a believer in the expressive. I have never been a fan of the neutral. I don't like neutrality in life, in anything. I think expression. And it's like espresso coffee, you know, you take the essence of the coffee. That's what expression is. It's been missing in much of the architecture, because we think architecture is the realm of the neutered, the realm of the kind of a state that has no opinion, that has no value. And yet, I believe it is the expression -- expression of the city, expression of our own space -- that gives meaning to architecture.
我也相信建筑是一种表现 我从来不喜欢中立 我不喜欢在人生,或任何事情中中立 表现 就像蒸馏咖啡,它汲取咖啡的精髓 这就是表现。 很多建筑都缺少这种精神 因为我们认为建筑是一个中立的领域 一个没有看法的领域 也没有价值观 但我相信表现 一个城市和个人空间的表现 赋予建筑意义
And, of course, expressive spaces are not mute. Expressive spaces are not spaces that simply confirm what we already know. Expressive spaces may disturb us. And I think that's also part of life. Life is not just an anesthetic to make us smile, but to reach out across the abyss of history, to places we have never been, and would have perhaps been, had we not been so lucky.
那些表现空间不是哑的 表现空间不只是 表达那些我们已经知道的事情 表现空间可能会让我们不安 但我认为那也是生命中的一部分 人生不应该只是麻木的微笑 而是越过历史的深渊 到一些未竟之地 如果我们不试,可能也无法到达的境地。
So again, radical versus conservative. Radical, what does it mean? It's something which is rooted, and something which is rooted deep in a tradition. And I think that is what architecture is, it's radical. It's not just a conservation in formaldehyde of dead forms. It is actually a living connection to the cosmic event that we are part of, and a story that is certainly ongoing. It's not something that has a good ending or a bad ending. It's actually a story in which our acts themselves are pushing the story in a particular way.
激进和保守 激进是什么意思?这是有根据的 在建筑的传统里 我认为这就是建筑的意义,激进 而不是一些死去的形态 安全地包装在传统里 它是一个活生生的 与宇宙的关联性 一个正在进行的故事 不是一个好结局或是坏结局 而是我们正参与着的故事 我们的行为影响着故事
So again I am a believer in the radical architecture. You know the Soviet architecture of that building is the conservation. It's like the old Las Vegas used to be. It's about conserving emotions, conserving the traditions that have obstructed the mind in moving forward and of course what is radical is to confront them. And I think our architecture is a confrontation with our own senses. Therefore I believe it should not be cool.
我是个激进建筑的信徒 你们都见过苏联的建筑 那就是传统 那就像过去的拉斯韦加斯 保存情绪,保存传统 阻碍我们的思想进步 激进便是面对这些保守 建筑便是以我们的知觉 去面对 所以我认为它不该是冷酷的
There is a lot of appreciation for the kind of cool architecture. I've always been an opponent of it. I think emotion is needed. Life without emotion would really not be life. Even the mind is emotional. There is no reason which does not take a position in the ethical sphere, in the philosophical mystery of what we are. So I think emotion is a dimension that is important to introduce into city space, into city life.
许多人喜欢那种冷酷的建筑 我总是反对。我认为情绪是必须的 没有情绪的人生便不是人生 甚至我们的思想都是情绪化的 没理由它不能出现在我们的伦理观 或用以哲学地解释我们是谁 我认为情绪是一个次元 将它带进城市空间、城市生活非常重要
And of course, we are all about the struggle of emotions. And I think that is what makes the world a wondrous place. And of course, the confrontation of the cool, the unemotional with emotion, is a conversation that I think cities themselves have fostered. I think that is the progress of cities. It's not only the forms of cities, but the fact that they incarnate emotions, not just of those who build them, but of those who live there as well.
我们都在情绪中挣扎 我认为着也是世界神奇的地方 冷酷无感和情绪之间的对峙 便是一种城市 所兼容的对话。 城市的进步 不只是城市的形态 而是这些情绪的具体化 不只是那些盖这些建筑的人 更是那些居民的情绪。
Inexplicable versus understood. You know, too often we want to understand everything. But architecture is not the language of words. It's a language. But it is not a language that can be reduced to a series of programmatic notes that we can verbally write. Too many buildings that you see outside that are so banal tell you a story, but the story is very short, which says, "We have no story to tell you." (Laughter)
神秘,那些不言自明的。我们往往想了解所有事 但建筑不是一种有文字的语言 它是一个语言,但不是一种能被简化为 一些问题百出的文字的语言 外面有太多平庸的建筑 它诉说故事,故事很短 它说“我无话可说” (笑声)
So the important thing actually, is to introduce the actual architectural dimensions, which might be totally inexplicable in words, because they operate in proportions, in materials, in light. They connect themselves into various sources, into a kind of complex vector matrix that isn't really frontal but is really embedded in the lives, and in the history of a city, and of a people. So again, the notion that a building should just be explicit I think is a false notion, which has reduced architecture into banality.
重要的是 带进一种难以言喻的 建筑次元 这语言是以比例、面积 材质、光线组成的 它们以不同元素组成 像一种复杂的矢量矩阵 它不是平铺直述 但深入我们的生活 与一个城市的历史,居民的历史 那些认为建筑应该直截了当的想法 我认为是错误的 那只能把建筑简化为平庸
Hand versus the computer. Of course, what would we be without computers? Our whole practice depends on computing. But the computer should not just be the glove of the hand; the hand should really be the driver of the computing power. Because I believe that the hand in all its primitive, in all its physiological obscurity, has a source, though the source is unknown, though we don't have to be mystical about it. We realize that the hand has been given us by forces that are beyond our own autonomy. And I think when I draw drawings which may imitate the computer, but are not computer drawings -- drawings that can come from sources that are completely not known, not normal, not seen, yet the hand -- and that's what I really, to all of you who are working -- how can we make the computer respond to our hand rather than the hand responding to the computer.
手绘和电子计算 当然,今日谁能不用电子计算机呢? 我们依赖电子计算机来实践许多想法 但计算机应该像是手套 手才是真正赐予计算机力量的东西 因为我相信手 在它原始的、生理的难解下 仍然有种力量。虽然我们不知从何而来 虽然我们不需要故作神秘 我们知道手是由 一种超越我们能力的力量所赐予 我用手描绘的时候 它有可能在模拟计算机,但它仍不同与计算机所绘 它是来自于 一种未见,未知,无解的力量 我想告诉在这个领域工作的你们 如何让计算机根据手来描绘 而不是手根据计算机来描绘
I think that's part of what the complexity of architecture is. Because certainly we have gotten used to the propaganda that the simple is the good. But I don't believe it. Listening to all of you, the complexity of thought, the complexity of layers of meaning is overwhelming. And I think we shouldn't shy away in architecture, You know, brain surgery, atomic theory, genetics, economics are complex complex fields. There is no reason that architecture should shy away and present this illusory world of the simple. It is complex. Space is complex. Space is something that folds out of itself into completely new worlds. And as wondrous as it is, it cannot be reduced to a kind of simplification that we have often come to be admired. And yet, our lives are complex. Our emotions are complex. Our intellectual desires are complex. So I do believe that architecture as I see it needs to mirror that complexity in every single space that we have, in every intimacy that we possess.
我想这也是建筑复杂的一部分 因为我们都太习惯于 简单为上的束缚啊。但我不这么想 听你们演讲,这些复杂的思考 这些意义的多重层次是惊人的 我们不该在建筑上逃避 脑科手术、原子论 遗传学、经济学 都是一些非常复杂的领域 建筑不该逃避 去呈现一个虚假的简单世界 世界是复杂的。空间是复杂的。 空间将自己摺叠成一个新世界 它如此神奇 它不能被简化成那些 我们往往过分赞扬的作品。 我们的生活是复杂的 我们的情绪是复杂的 我们的智趣是复杂的 我相信建筑应该反应那些 环绕我们的复杂 在我们所有的亲密空间
Of course that means that architecture is political. The political is not an enemy of architecture. The politeama is the city. It's all of us together. And I've always believed that the act of architecture, even a private house, when somebody else will see it, is a political act, because it will be visible to others. And we live in a world which is connecting us more and more. So again, the evasion of that sphere, which has been so endemic to that sort of pure architecture, the autonomous architecture that is just an abstract object has never appealed to me. And I do believe that this interaction with the history, with history that is often very difficult, to grapple with it, to create a position that is beyond our normal expectations and to create a critique.
这代表着建筑是政治的 政治不是建筑的敌人 政治是城市,是我们所有人 我往往相信建筑本身 就算是私人住宅,当有人见到它,便成为一个政治行为 因为他人也可以看见 住在一个彼此越来越有关联的世界 逃避这个层面 而普遍的选择一种纯粹建筑 那种看上去像个抽象物件,出于自发的建筑, 我从来不感兴趣 我相信与历史产生的相互作用 和历史对话是困难的 尝试掌握它,创造一个 超越一般预设的立场,成为一种评判
Because architecture is also the asking of questions. It's not only the giving of answers. It's also, just like life, the asking of questions. Therefore it is important that it be real. You know we can simulate almost anything. But the one thing that can be ever simulated is the human heart, the human soul. And architecture is so closely intertwined with it because we are born somewhere and we die somewhere. So the reality of architecture is visceral. It's not intellectual. It's not something that comes to us from books and theories. It's the real that we touch -- the door, the window, the threshold, the bed -- such prosaic objects. And yet, I try, in every building, to take that virtual world, which is so enigmatic and so rich, and create something in the real world. Create a space for an office, a space of sustainability that really works between that virtuality and yet can be realized as something real.
因为建筑不只是给答案 同时也在发问 像人生一样。 重要的是保持真实 今日我们几乎可以模拟所有东西 但有一件事是永远不能模拟的 便是人心,便是人的灵魂 建筑和它们息息相关 因为我们生于建筑,死于建筑 真正的建筑出自内心,而不是来自学识 不是来自书本或理论 是我们可触碰的真实,一扇门,一扇窗 门槛,床 这些平凡的物件 我在每个作品中尝试把这个 深奥又多元的虚拟世界 带进真实世界中 创造一个办公环境 一个永续空间 存在于虚拟世界中 也能在真实世界中存在
Unexpected versus habitual. What is a habit? It's just a shackle for ourselves. It's a self-induced poison. So the unexpected is always unexpected. You know, it's true, the cathedrals, as unexpected, will always be unexpected. You know Frank Gehry's buildings, they will continue to be unexpected in the future. So not the habitual architecture that instills in us the false sort of stability, but an architecture that is full of tension, an architecture that goes beyond itself to reach a human soul and a human heart, and that breaks out of the shackles of habits.
意外和习惯 习惯是什么?不过是一个束缚 拿来饮鸩止渴的毒药 意外永远是意外 就像大教堂,它让人出乎意外 它永远让人意外 就像法蘭克蓋里的建筑,它们在未来也会继续出人意外 而不是那些我们早已习惯的建筑形态 以它们虚假的稳妥 而是一个充满张力的建筑, 一个超越自己的建筑 它亲近人心和灵魂 突破习惯的枷锁
And of course habits are enforced by architecture. When we see the same kind of architecture we become immured in that world of those angles, of those lights, of those materials. We think the world really looks like our buildings. And yet our buildings are pretty much limited by the techniques and wonders that have been part of them.
建筑加强了我们的习惯 当我们日复一日见到同样的建筑 我们习惯于从这个角度看世界 这些光线,这些材质 我们开始相信世界就像我们看到的这些建筑一样 但这些建筑却受限于创造者的 技术和想象力
So again, the unexpected which is also the raw. And I often think of the raw and the refined. What is raw? The raw, I would say is the naked experience, untouched by luxury, untouched by expensive materials, untouched by the kind of refinement that we associate with high culture. So the rawness, I think, in space, the fact that sustainability can actually, in the future translate into a raw space, a space that isn't decorated, a space that is not mannered in any source, but a space that might be cool in terms of its temperature, might be refractive to our desires. A space that doesn't always follow us like a dog that has been trained to follow us, but moves ahead into directions of demonstrating other possibilities, other experiences, that have never been part of the vocabulary of architecture.
意外也是原始 我时常想到原始和精练 原始是什么?原始就是 一种纯净的经验,不被奢华 和昂贵的材质影响 不被那些高度文明 所认同的那些精致影响。 空间里应用的原始 就像在未来可以 把永续的概念变成原始空间 一个不经装饰的空间 一个不经矫饰的空间 一个凉爽的空间 反应着我们所期望的。 一个不会像一条训练良好的狗 一样跟随着我们的空间 而是带领我们、示范着 其它的可能性,其它的经验 那些在建筑史上从未使用的字眼。
And of course that juxtaposition is of great interest to me because it creates a kind of a spark of new energy. And so I do like something which is pointed, not blunt, something which is focused on reality, something that has the power, through its leverage, to transform even a very small space.
交叉重叠也是我的兴趣 因为它创造一种新的能量 我喜欢尖锐,而不是迟钝的 那些专注于真实的 那些力量饱满的。借着它来影响 就算只是一个小地方。
So architecture maybe is not so big, like science, but through its focal point it can leverage in an Archimedian way what we think the world is really about. And often it takes just a building to change our experience of what could be done, what has been done, how the world has remained both in between stability and instability. And of course buildings have their shapes. Those shapes are difficult to change. And yet, I do believe that in every social space, in every public space, there is a desire to communicate more than just that blunt thought, that blunt technique, but something that pinpoints, and can point in various directions forward, backward, sideways and around. So that is indeed what is memory. So I believe that my main interest is to memory. Without memory we would be amnesiacs. We would not know which way we were going, and why we are going where we're going.
或许建筑不像科学的影响力这么大 但借着这个焦点 可以产生一种阿基米德式的杠杆效应 改变我们对世界的看法 往往我们只需要一个建筑 来改变我们的经验法则:我们对历史和可能性的看法 世界如何存在于稳定和震荡中 建筑都有它们各自的形态 这些形态是很难改变的 但我仍然相信在所有社会 在所有公共空间里 都有一种想要沟通的欲望 而不是模糊的想法,模糊的技术 一些能够指出不同方向的 前进、后退、左右或环绕着 这是一个共同的记忆 我相信我最大的兴趣便是记忆 没有记忆我们就成了失忆者 我们会忘记我们的前进的方向 以及我们选择这个方向的原因
So I've been never interested in the forgettable reuse, rehashing of the same things over and over again, which, of course, get accolades of critics. Critics like the performance to be repeated again and again the same way. But I rather play something completely unheard of, and even with flaws, than repeat the same thing over and over which has been hollowed by its meaninglessness. So again, memory is the city, memory is the world. Without the memory there would be no story to tell. There would be nowhere to turn.
所以我对那些过目即忘的复制从来不感兴趣 把那些做过的事反反复复地重新排列 当然,它们能得到评论家的赞扬 评论家总是喜欢那些一再重复的演出 但我宁可演奏一些 前所未有的音符 就算有瑕疵 也不要重复那些被反复演奏的乐章 它们因毫无意义而空洞 记忆组成城市,记忆组成世界 没有记忆,也就没有值得诉说的故事 也无路可走
The memorable, I think, is really our world, what we think the world is. And it's not only our memory, but those who remember us, which means that architecture is not mute. It's an art of communication. It tells a story. The story can reach into obscure desires. It can reach into sources that are not explicitly available. It can reach into millennia that have been buried, and return them in a just and unexpected equity.
那值得记忆的,是我们的世界,我们对世界的观感 那不只是我们的记忆 更是那些记忆我们的人 建筑不是沉默的 它是一门能够沟通的艺术 它诉说一个故事。故事深入我们模糊的欲望 深入那些平日接触不到的资源 深入那些被埋葬的 千年 让它们回到一个正确而平等的地位。
So again, I think the notion that the best architecture is silent has never appealed to me. Silence maybe is good for a cemetery but not for a city. Cities should be full of vibrations, full of sound, full of music. And that indeed is the architectural mission that I believe is important, is to create spaces that are vibrant, that are pluralistic, that can transform the most prosaic activities, and raise them to a completely different expectation. Create a shopping center, a swimming place that is more like a museum than like entertainment. And these are our dreams.
我想,我从来不被 “最好的建筑是沉默的建筑”吸引 一个沉默的坟场是好的,但沉默的城市是不好的 城市应该活跃,充满音乐和声音 这是一个建筑的任务 我相信创造这样一个 活跃的,多元的 空间 能够把寻常的活动 变得出乎意料 把一个购物商场、一个游泳池 做得像娱乐场所、像博物馆 这是我们的梦想
And of course risk. I think architecture should be risky. You know it costs a lot of money and so on, but yes, it should not play it safe. It should not play it safe, because if it plays it safe it's not moving us in a direction that we want to be. And I think, of course, risk is what underlies the world. World without risk would not be worth living. So yes, I do believe that the risk we take in every building. Risks to create spaces that have never been cantilevered to that extent. Risks of spaces that have never been so dizzying, as they should be, for a pioneering city. Risks that really move architecture even with all its flaws, into a space which is much better that the ever again repeated hollowness of a ready-made thing.
我认为建筑应该冒险 这要花很多金钱和精力,当然 但不应该保守 我们不应该保守因为保守 不能带我们前进去我们想去的方向 当然 冒险是世界的基础 没有冒险的世界是不值得活的 是的,我相信在每一个建筑里冒的险都是值得的。 冒险去做那些从未悬吊的这样远的空间 冒险去做一个前所未有的 迷人灿烂的 像所有城市的先驱。 那些真正让建筑进步的冒险 就算有它的缺陷,还是好过 一直重复的 空虚的现成品。
And of course that is finally what I believe architecture to be. It's about space. It's not about fashion. It's not about decoration. It's about creating with minimal means something which can not be repeated, cannot be simulated in any other sphere. And there of course is the space that we need to breathe, is the space we need to dream. These are the spaces that are not just luxurious spaces for some of us, but are important for everybody in this world.
这就是我所相信的,建筑的意义。 空间,而不是时尚 也不是装潢 只是希望创造一些 不能被重复的 不能在其它地方被模拟的。 我们在那里可以呼吸 可以梦想 这些空间 不只是一些人的奢侈享受 而是对世上每个人都有重要性
So again, it's not about the changing fashions, changing theories. It's about carving out a space for trees. It's carving out a space where nature can enter the domestic world of a city. A space where something which has never seen a light of day can enter into the inner workings of a density. And I think that is really the nature of architecture.
这无关时尚、或是改变理论 而是为树木创造一个空间 在空间中创造一个能够迎接大自然的地方 城市中的家居空间 一个从未见光的空间 可以进入城市的密度 这就是建筑的本质
Now I am a believer in democracy. I don't like beautiful buildings built for totalitarian regimes. Where people cannot speak, cannot vote, cannot do anything. We too often admire those buildings. We think they are beautiful. And yet when I think of the poverty of society which doesn't give freedom to its people, I don't admire those buildings. So democracy, as difficult as it is, I believe in it.
我支持民主 我不喜欢那些为极权国家 所建造的美丽建筑。 人民不能自由发言,不能投票,什么也不能做 我们太常赞扬那些建筑。我们认为它们很美丽 但当我想到这些社会的贫穷 它们无法还给人民自由的状况 我便无法赞扬这些建筑 虽然民主并不容易,我仍然支持它。
And of course, at Ground Zero what else? It's such a complex project. It's emotional. There is so many interests. It's political. There is so many parties to this project. There is so many interests. There's money. There's political power. There are emotions of the victims. And yet, in all its messiness, in all its difficulties, I would not have liked somebody to say, "This is the tabula rasa, mister architect -- do whatever you want." I think nothing good will come out of that.
911的归零地是一个很好的地标 这是一个很复杂的计划 很多情绪。很多人感兴趣 它也很政治。许多人参与这个计划。 有金钱和权力参与其中 有受害者家属的情绪 在这些困难和混乱中 我不希望有人说 “这是一张白纸,建筑师。自由发挥吧。” 我不认为这样能产出优秀的作品
I think architecture is about consensus. And it is about the dirty word "compromise." Compromise is not bad. Compromise, if it's artistic, if it is able to cope with its strategies -- and there is my first sketch and the last rendering -- it's not that far away. And yet, compromise, consensus, that is what I believe in. And Ground Zero, despite all its difficulties, it's moving forward. It's difficult. 2011, 2013. Freedom Tower, the memorial. And that is where I end.
建筑是一种共识 这都和“妥协”有关。其实妥协并不坏 妥协,如果那是艺术性的 如果那和配合策略有关 这是我的第一个草图,左边是手绘图 两者相差不大 但,妥协,共识 是我的信念 归零地,无论过程多么困难,它正在推进 这的确困难。2011,2013,自由塔,纪念馆 我就说到这里。
I was inspired when I came here as an immigrant on a ship like millions of others, looking at America from that point of view. This is America. This is liberty. This is what we dream about. Its individuality, demonstrated in the skyline. It's resilience. And finally, it's the freedom that America represents, not just to me, as an immigrant, but to everyone in the world. Thank you.
当我以移民身份像无数人一样坐船 来到这里的时候,这是我的灵感。 从这个角度看美国 这是美国。这是自由。 这就是我们的梦想。这是独立 从地平线描绘出来的。这是弹性。 这就是美国所代表的自由意义 不只是身为移民的我,还有世界上每个人。谢谢大家。
(Applause)
(掌声)
Chris Anderson: I've got a question. So have you come to peace with the process that happened at Ground Zero and the loss of the original, incredible design that you came up with?
Chris Anderson:我有一个问题 所以你已经不再在意 归零地的发展过程中所发生的一切吗 你不介意失去你原本出色的设计吗?
Daniel Libeskind: Look. We have to cure ourselves of the notion that we are authoritarian, that we can determine everything that happens. We have to rely on others, and shape the process in the best way possible. I came from the Bronx. I was taught not to be a loser, not to be somebody who just gives up in a fight. You have to fight for what you believe. You don't always win everything you want to win. But you can steer the process. And I believe that what will be built at Ground Zero will be meaningful, will be inspiring, will tell other generations of the sacrifices, of the meaning of this event. Not just for New York, but for the world.
Daniel Libeskind:我们必须要超越 我们自身的独裁 告诉自己我们不可能控制每件事情 我们必须互相信赖,然后找出最好的解决方法 我来自纽约的布朗克斯。我被教导:别做失败者 不要做一个轻言放弃的人 你必须为你的信念奋斗,虽然你不会百战百胜 但你可以影响这个过程 我相信归零地上的建筑 将会意义非凡,将会激励人心 并把这次事件的牺牲所带来的意义 生生世世的传扬下去 不只是纽约,而是全世界。
Chris Anderson: Thank you so much, Daniel Libeskind.
Chris Anderson:非常谢谢你。
(Applause)
(掌声)