I'm going to speak to you today about architectural agency. What I mean by that is that it's time for architecture to do things again, not just represent things. This is a construction helmet that I received two years ago at the groundbreaking of the largest project I, and my firm, have ever been involved in. I was thrilled to get it. I was thrilled to be the only person standing on the stage with a shiny silver helmet. I thought it represented the importance of the architect.
今天我來和大家聊聊建築事務所。 這裏的“建築”是指建築再現的過程, 而不是簡簡單單的視覺表現。 這是兩年前我在我和事務所參加的有史以來 最具開拓性的項目中 得到的一隻建築頭盔。 當時得到它我興奮極了。能成為唯一一個頭戴銀光閃閃的頭盔 站上舞臺的人,實在讓我激動不已。 我覺得它就代表了那座建築的重要性。
I stayed thrilled until I got home, threw the helmet onto my bed, fell down onto my bed and realized inside there was an inscription. (Laughter) Now, I think that this is a great metaphor for the state of architecture and architects today. We are for decorative purposes only. (Laughter)
直到回到家裏,我還激動得不行 我把頭盔扔到床上, 在床上躺下,這才發現頭盔裏還刻了字。 (警告:這個特製的鍍銀頭盔只能作裝飾用途,無實際保護功能) (笑) 現在,我覺得這是一個深刻的隱喻 正傳達了當今建築師與建築的情況。 我們都只是裝飾品而已。 (笑)
Now, who do we have to blame? We can only blame ourselves. Over the last 50 years the design and construction industry has gotten much more complex and has gotten much more litigious. And we architects are cowards. So, as we have faced liability, we have stepped back and back, and unfortunately, where there is liability, guess what there is: power. So, eventually we have found ourselves in a totally marginalized position, way over here.
那麼,這都怪誰呢? 只能怪我們自己。過去的這五十年來, 設計和營造業變得如此複雜 如此爭強好勝。 而我們建築師卻成了膽小鬼。 當我們面對責任, 就步步後退 但不幸的是,哪里有責任, 哪里就有權力。 結果就是,我們最終發現自己 已經完全退到了最邊緣的地方。
Now, what did we do? We're cowards, but we're smart cowards. And so we redefined this marginalized position as the place of architecture. And we announced, "Hey, architecture, it's over here, in this autonomous language we're going to seed control of processes." And we were going to do something that was horrible for the profession. We actually created an artificial schism between creation and execution, as if you could actually create without knowing how to execute and as if you could actually execute without knowing how to create.
現在,我們又該怎麼辦呢?我們確實是膽小鬼, 但又是其中最聰明的。 所以我們得將這塊邊緣地帶重新設定成建築的存在空間。 我們大聲招呼,「嗨,建築,看這兒! 只有這種獨立宣言才能 讓我們掌握整個過程。」 然後我們要對這個職業進行駭人的改造 我們實際上人為地讓創造和執行 分立為二, 在創意的時候完全不用考慮執行的問題 在執行的時候也不需要 知道該如何創新。
Now, something else happened. And that's when we began to sell the world that architecture was created by individuals creating genius sketches. And that the incredible amount of effort to deliver those sketches for years and years and years is not only something to be derided, but we would merely write it off as merely execution. Now I'd argue that that is as absurd as stating that 30 minutes of copulation is the creative act, and nine months of gestation, and, God forbid, 24 hours of child labor is merely execution.
現在情況發生了變化。 以前我們告訴世界 建築是由描繪出的天才的草圖的建築師 創造出來的。 許多年來,為了實現這些草圖 所付出難以想像的努力 不僅僅被嘲笑作白費力氣 而且我們來說,這只是 執行問題而已。 但是這幾乎和把三十分鐘的交媾稱作創造, 將十月懷胎過程 以及二十四小時的生產過程 僅僅作為執行過程 一樣荒謬。
So, what do we architects need to do? We need to stitch back creation and execution. And we need to start authoring processes again instead of authoring objects. Now, if we do this, I believe we can go back 50 years and start reinjecting agency, social engineering, back into architecture. Now, there are all kinds of things that we architects need to learn how to do, like managing contracts, learning how to write contracts, understanding procurement processes, understanding the time value of money and cost estimation.
所以我們建築師到底要做些什麼?我們要將 創造和執行一步步地重新縫合。 我們要掌控整個過程, 而不是零碎的部件。 如果我們能做到這些,我相信就能回到五十年前 將事務所和社會工程 重新注入建築過程。 現在,建築師們有太多東西需要學了 比如說管理契約,寫契約 甚至要搞清採購流程 知道時間就是金錢,還要懂得成本估算。
But I'm going to reduce this to the beginning of the process, into three very pedantic statements. The first is: Take core positions with your client. I know it's shocking, right, that architecture would actually say that.
但我要把這些“重任”都卸去,回到整個過程的原點, 三條不得不遵循的規則。 首先,要在與客戶的接觸中占核心地位。 我知道,這聽來不是很妥當,但這正是“建築”需要的。
The second position is: Actually take positions. Take joint positions with your client. This is the moment in which you as the architect and your client can begin to inject vision and agency. But it has to be done together. And then only after this is done are you allowed to do this, begin to put forward architectural manifestations that manifest those positions. And both owner and architect alike are empowered to critique those manifestations based on the positions that you've taken.
第二條,堅定立場,並且 要和客戶達成一致 這個時候作為建築師, 就可以和客戶一同注入各自的 創想和作用。 這必須由你們共同參與完成。 只有在這一步完成之後, 你才能開始拿出你的 建築設計 來展現你的立場。 建築師和客戶雙方 都可以在你們達成的共識的基礎上 對設計進行評價。
Now, I believe that one really amazing thing will happen if you do this. I'd like to call it the lost art of productively losing control. You do not know what the end result is. But I promise you, with enough brain power and enough passion and enough commitment, you will arrive at conclusions that will transcend convention, and will simply be something that you could not have initially or individually conceived of.
現在,我敢說你如果按我說的做,一定會達到意想不到的效果 我傾向於把它稱作一門幾近失傳的用鬆散管理來提高效率的藝術 你不知道結果會怎樣 但我保證,只要彙集足夠的智慧, 足夠的熱情和決心 就能得到超越傳統 的最終方案 那絕對是 在專案開始時 每個人都無法想像的成功。
Alright, now I'm going to reduce all of this to a series of simple dumb sketches. This is the modus operandi that we have today. We roll 120-foot Spartan, i.e. our vision, up to our clients' gates of Troy. And we don't understand why they won't let us in. Right? Well, how about instead of doing that, we roll up to the gates something they want.
好了,我現在就用一些簡單的圖畫 來說明以上的過程。 這是我們現在慣用的伎倆。 我們推出一個一百二十英尺高的斯巴達人 現在,我們的目標就是打開顧客的特洛伊城門 我們還不曉得為什麼他們不給我們開門,對吧? 那為什麼不這樣, 我們給他們送上他們想要的東西
Now this is a little bit of a dangerous metaphor, because of course we all know that inside of the Trojan Horse were a bunch of people with spears. So, we can change the metaphor. Let's call the Trojan Horse the vessel by which you get through the gate, get through the constraints of a project. At which point, you and your client have the ability to start considering what you're going to put inside that vessel, the agency, the vision. And if you do that, you do that responsibly, I believe that instead of delivering Spartans, you can deliver maidens.
這就是有點危險性的偽裝了 因為我們都知道特洛伊木馬裏面 有一干拿了長矛的戰士 那麼,我們就改變原來容易識破的偽裝。 讓我們把特洛伊木馬稱做 讓你攻克大門的容器 攻克一個項目的種種限制。 這時候,你和你的客戶 就可以開始考慮在這個容器中 要放些什麼 事務所的作用,還有你們的創想 如果你那麼做,盡職盡責地進行 我相信你完全可以將斯巴達人換成創想 傳遞給客戶。
And if I could summarize that all up into one single sketch it would be this. If we are so good at our craft shouldn't we be able to conceive of an architectural manifestation that slides seamlessly through the project's and the client's constraints? Now, with that in mind, I'm going to show a project that's very dear to many people in this room-- well, maybe not dear, but certainly close to many people in this room. And that's a project that is just about to open next week, the new home for the Dallas Theater Center, the Dee and Charles Wyly Theatre.
要把剛才說的都總結一下,變成一張圖,就會使這樣。 如果我們都那麼心靈手巧 為什麼就不能讓我們的建築構思 天衣無縫地 契合上專案和客戶 的種種要求呢? 有了這些鋪墊,我準備向你們展示一個 對很多在做觀眾都很親切熟悉的項目 可能不那麼親切,但至少它就在你們身邊。 這個項目下周就要正式對外開放了 它是達拉斯表演藝術中心 迪和查理斯•威利劇院
Now, I'm going to present it on the same terms: issue, position and architectural manifestation. Now, the first issue that we faced was that the Dallas Theater Center had a notoriety that was beyond what you would expect of some place outside of the triumvirate of New York, Chicago and Seattle. And this had to do with the ambitions of the leadership. But it also had to do with something rather unusual, and that was this horrible little building that they'd been performing in.
現在,我就要把它置於同樣的條件, 核心問題,立場和建築表現中來。 我們遇到的第一個問題 就是達拉斯表演藝術中心 雖然在紐約,芝加哥和西雅圖 組成的三角區域之外, 卻一直“惡名昭著”。 這與政治野心和領導勢力有關。 但同時,另一個不同尋常的原因 就是這個以前的表演場所,一幢極其醜陋的小房子
Why was this horrible little building so important to their renown and their innovation? Because they could do whatever they wanted to to this building. When you're on Broadway, you cannot tear the proscenium down. This building, when an artistic director wanted to do a "Cherry Orchard" and wanted people and wanted people to come out of a well on the stage, they brought a backhoe in, and they simply dug the hole. Well, that's exciting. And you can start to get the best artistic directors, scenic designers and actors from around the country to come to perform here because you can do things you can't do elsewhere.
為什麼這棟不起眼的小房子 對他們的名聲和革新那麼重要? 因為在這裏,他們可以放肆大膽地表演。 如果是在百老匯,你就不能把幕前舞臺整個拆了。 但在這裏,如果哪個藝術指導 想要做一場《櫻桃園》,並希望人們 能直接從舞臺上出現, 他們就能找來挖土機,在舞臺上挖個洞。 聽起來很刺激吧 這樣你就可以請全國最好的藝術指導, 佈景設計,和演員 來這裏表演 因為在這兒他們可以任意發揮,不受限制。
So, the first position we took was, "Hey, we as architects had better not show up and do a pristine building that doesn't engender the same freedoms that this old dilapidated shed provided the company." The second issue is a nuance of the first. And that's that the company and the building was multiform. That meant that they were able to perform, as long as they had labor they were able to go between proscenium, thrust, flat floor, arena, traverse, you name it. All they needed was labor.
我們的第一個立場就是 “哎,我們建築師可不是來 做什麼仿古建築的。 那不能保證現在的自由, 只是能夠提供遮蔽的做舊的棚子而已。 第二個重要議題和第一個稍有不同 就是表演人員和場地是多用途的 就是說只要他們還有力氣 就可以在幕前,樓板 舞臺,橫斷 各個地方表演,隨你挑。 他們需要的就是人力。
Well, something happened. In fact something happened to all institutions around the world. It started to become hard to raise operational costs, operational budgets. So, they stopped having inexpensive labor. And eventually they had to freeze their organization into something called a bastardized thruscenium.
嗯...事情在變化。事實上世界各地的各個機構 都在發生改變。 現在越來越難籌集運營資金, 運營預算。 所以,他們連廉價勞動力也不要了。 最終,他們乾脆把整個機構凍結成了 他們口中所謂的“劣質場地”。
So, the second position we took is that the freedoms that we provided, the ability to move between stage configurations, had better be able to be done without relying on operational costs. Alright? Affordably. The architectural manifestation was frankly just dumb. It was to take all the things that are known as front of house and back of house and redefine them as above house and below house.
由此,我們的第二個立場就是我們要提供一種自由, 可以讓舞臺結構任意變化 一定要做到這點 使得演出不用擔心運營成本。對不?控制在可承受範圍內。 建築展示 是事實的呈現,無需語言。 其中需要的就是把我們知道的房子的前部和後部 換成上部和下部。
At first blush you think, "Hey it's crazy, what could you possibly gain?" We created what we like to call superfly. (Laughter) Now, superfly, the concept is you take all the freedoms you normally associate with the flytower, and you smear them across flytower and auditorium. Suddenly the artistic director can move between different stage and audience configurations. And because that flytower has the ability to pick up all the pristine elements, suddenly the rest of the environment can be provisional. And you can drill, cut, nail, screw paint and replace, with a minimum of cost.
說到這兒你肯定會想,“哎呀,真是瘋了 這能得出什麼玩意兒啊?” 我們把我們的創造叫做“超級蒼蠅” (笑) 現在,這個概念是這樣 你可以想像舞臺升降塔的各種自由 然後讓這種種便利散佈到觀眾席中。 突然間藝術指導 可以在不同的舞臺和觀眾區 自由移動 因為舞臺升降塔可以實現各種 基本需要,忽然間剩下的其他部分 都成了臨時的。你可以鑽洞,切割,固定,擰轉, 油漆和替換, 用最小的花費就能實現。
But there was a third advantage that we got by doing this move that was unexpected. And that was that it freed up the perimeter of the auditorium in a most unusual way. And that provided the artistic director suddenly the ability to define suspension of disbelief. So, the building affords artistic directors the freedom to conceive of almost any kind of activity underneath this floating object. But also to challenge the notion of suspension of disbelief such that in the last act of Macbeth, if he or she wants you to associate the parable that you're seeing with Dallas, with your real life, he or she can do so.
這麼做還有一個好處 還是出乎我們意料的。 這種做法以最獨特的方式 將觀眾區的周長釋放開了。 這種釋放忽然間給了藝術指導 定義“解除懷疑”的力量。 於是,這棟建築成全了藝術指導們, 讓他們可以在這個懸浮的物體下方 設計各種可以想像的活動。 同時挑戰“接觸懷疑”的理念 比如說在《馬克白》的最後一幕, 如果哪個藝術指導想讓你把這一幕的故事 與達拉斯,與你的真實生活聯繫起來, 他(她)就能做到。
Now, in order to do this we and the clients had to do something fairly remarkable. In fact it really was the clients who had to do it. They had to make a decision, based on the positions we took to redefine the budget being from two thirds capital-A architecture and one-third infrastructure, to actually the inverse, two-thirds infrastructure and one-third capital-A architecture. That's a lot for a client to commit to before you actually see the fruition of the concept. But based on the positions, they took the educated leap of faith to do so. And effectively we created what we like to call a theater machine.
為了實現這個目標,我們和我們的客戶 必須要做一件相當不同尋常的事兒。 事實上是客戶需要做這事兒。 他們要在我們採取的立場上做一個決斷, 把原來三分之一基礎建設,三分之二建築設計 的預算分工 完全顛倒 三分之二基礎建設和三分之一建築設計。 對於客戶來說,這是不小的決定 尤其是在你能看到概念轉換成“成果”之前。 但在我們的那些立場的基礎上, 他們邁出了極有借鑒意義的一步。 作為回應,我們也做出了我們的 “劇院機器”。
Now, that theater machine has ability to move between a whole series of configurations at the push of a button and a few stagehands in a short amount of time. But it also has the potential to not only provide multiform but multi-processional sequences. Meaning: The artistic director doesn't necessarily need to go through our lobby.
現在,這台機器的各個結構 都可以進行重新組合 只要按一個鈕,加上少量的工作人員, 很短的時間內就可以完成。 不僅如此, 它在提供各種形式的變換之餘還能改變觀眾的入場順序。 就是說,藝術指導 不一定非要經過大廳。
One of the things that we learned when we visited various theaters is they hate us architects, because they say the first thing they have to do, the first five minutes of any show, is they have to get our architecture out of the mind of their patron. Well now there are potentials of this building to allow the artistic director to actually move into the building without using our architecture. So, in fact, there is the building, there is what we call the draw. You're going down into our lobby, go through the lobby with our own little dangly bits, whether you like them or not, up through the stair that leads you into the auditorium.
在我們還在參觀各個劇院的時候,學到的一點 就是他們對建築師恨之入骨, 因為他們說在任何一場演出的前五分鐘, 他們要做的頭等重要的事 就是把整個建築趕出 資助人的腦海。 而現在,這棟房子可以 讓藝術指導 在劇院裏自由活動 而不受到建築本身的限制。 這就是我們的劇院,這裏是一個坡道, 從這裏進入大廳 穿過大廳,這裏有我們懸掛的小物件,不論你喜歡與否 然後上樓,進入觀眾區。
But there is also the potential to allow people to move directly from the outside, in this case suggesting kind of Wagnerian entrance, into the interior of the auditorium. And here is the fruition of that in actuality. These are the two large pivoting doors that allow people to move directly from the outside, in or from the inside, out, performers or audience alike.
但它還可以 將人們直接從外面帶入內部。 就是說這是一種華格納式的入口 可以直接進入觀眾區。 這就是我們的成果。 這是兩扇大轉門 可以讓人們直接從外面進到 裏面,自由進出 表演者、觀眾都可以。
Now, imagine what that could be. I have to say honestly this is not something yet the building can do because it takes too long. But imagine the freedoms if you could take this further, that in fact you could consider a Wagnerian entry, a first act in thrust, an intermission in Greek, a second act in arena, and you leave through our lobby with dangly bits. Now that, I would say, is architecture performing. It is taking the hand of the architect to actually remove the hand of the architect in favor of the hand of the artistic director.
現在,想像一下那是多麼有趣。我必須誠實的說 現在這棟建築還不能做到這步,因為整個過程太長了。 但是想像一下那種自由 如果你能更進一步,可以想像一下 華格納式的入口 第一幕在開始, 幕間休息在希臘,然後第二幕在競技場, 然後你離開的時候再次穿過大廳。 我想說,這簡直就是建築的表演。 它在用建築師的方式 將建築本身的局限打破, 來實現藝術指導的需要。
I'll go through the three basic configurations. This is the flat floor configuration. You notice that there is no proscenium, the balconies have been raised up, there are no seats, the floor in the auditorium is flat.
下面我來帶你們看一下三種不同結構構造。 這是一整塊的平面構造。 你可以看到沒有舞臺, 包廂被移到上方了,也沒有觀眾座位 觀眾區的地面是平的。
The first configuration is easy to understand. The balconies come down, you see that the orchestra begins to have a rake that's frontal towards the end stage, and the seats come in.
第一個構造很容易看懂。 現在包廂下來了,適合交響樂演奏 觀眾區有了傾斜,正對著舞臺 觀眾座椅也加進來了。
The third configuration is a little harder to understand. Here you see that the balconies actually have to move out of the way in order to bring a thrust into the space. And some of the seats need to actually change their direction, and change their rake, to allow that to happen.
第三個結構有點難懂 你可以看到包廂幾乎被完全移走了 空出來的地方成為舞臺的眼神 有些座位的方向也需要改變 相應的,坡度也要發生變化。
I'll do it again so you can see it. There you see it's the side balconies for the proscenium. And there it is in the thrust configuration.
我再放一遍,讓你們看得清楚點 你可以看到邊上的包廂給舞臺讓出了位置 舞臺的突出部分形成了。
In order to do that, again, we needed a client who was willing to take educational risks. And they told us one important thing: "You shall not beta-test." Meaning, nothing that we do can we be the first ones to do it. But they were willing for us to apply technologies from other areas that already had failsafe mechanisms to this building.
要想做到這種效果 我們同樣需要敢於冒險的客戶 他們告訴我們非常重要的一點: “你們可別成為試驗品。” 也就是說,我們最好 不要成為第一個吃螃蟹的人。 但是他們很願意我們將其他領域的技術 已經經過安全試驗的裝置運用到這個專案中去。
And the solution in terms of the balconies was to use something that we all know as a scoreboard lift. Now, if you were to take a scoreboard and drop it on dirt and whiskey, that would be bad. If you were not able to take the scoreboard out of the arena and be able to do the Ice Capades the next night, that would also be bad. And so this technology already had all the failsafe mechanisms and allowed the theater and our client to actually do this with confidence that they would be able to change over their configurations at will.
解決移動包廂的問題, 我們用了一種“記分板升降機” 現在,如果你把一塊記分板 丟在土堆上, 結果會慘不忍睹。 如果你沒能把記分板拿出體育場, 第二天又有“白雪溜冰團”的表演, 結果也會很糟糕。 而這項技術已經經過了安全保險驗證, 可以保證劇院和我們的客戶 在移動包廂的時候信心十足 根據自己的意願改變表演區的結構。
The second technology that we applied was actually using things that you know from the stage side of an opera house. In this case what we're doing is we're taking the orchestra floor, lifting it up, spinning it, changing the rake, taking it back to flat floor, changing the rake again. In essence, you can begin to define rakes and viewing angles of people in the orchestra seating, at will.
我們用到的第二項技術 其實是從大家都知道的 劇院的舞臺兩側的側舞臺。 我們將交響樂舞臺 抬起來,旋轉 改變坡度,放在平地上, 再一次改變坡度。簡單地說,就是 你可以任意調整觀眾席的 坡度和視角。
Here you see the chairs being spun around to go from proscenium or end stage to thrust configuration. The proscenium, also. As far as we know this is the first building in the world in which the proscenium can entirely fly out of the space. Here you see the various acoustic baffles as well as the flying mechanisms and catwalks over the auditorium. And ultimately, up in the flytower, the scene sets that allow the transformations to occur.
這是座椅的方向從面對舞臺變成 側對舞臺,第二種凸出舞臺的構造。 據我們所知,這是世界上第一個可以 自由變換的舞臺。 這裏既有各種音樂會需要的降噪板,也有 懸空的構造 懸空的構造和延伸至觀眾席的T台。 還有最重要的,舞臺塔上的 佈景可以任意變化。
As I said, all that was in service of creating a flexible yet affordable configuration. But we got this other benefit, and that was the ability of the perimeter to suddenly engage Dallas on the outside. Here you see the building in its current state with blinds closed. This is a trompe l'oeil. Actually this is not a curtain. These are vinyl blinds that are integrated into the windows themselves, again with failsafe mechanisms that can be lifted such that you can completely demystify, if you chose, the operations of the theater going on behind, rehearsals and so forth. But you also have the ability to allow the audience to see Dallas, to perform with Dallas as the backdrop of your performance.
正如我所說,這一切都是為了創造一個靈活多變 造價又可控的結構。 我們還有另一個收穫, 即在釋放了演出廳的空間後它可以將 外面的達拉斯城參與進來。 你現在看到的是建築當前的狀態, 窗簾都拉上了。這是一張模擬圖 其實這並不是窗簾,而是與玻璃窗合一的 塑膠百葉窗 這也是絕對安全的技術。 如果你想看得清楚點,可以把它收起來 劇場內部進行的一切, 排練之類的都可以看到。 同時還能讓裏面的觀眾 看到達拉斯的城市, 將達拉斯當做表演的舞臺。
Now, if I'll take you through -- this is an early concept sketch -- take you through kind of a mixture of all these things together. Effectively you would have something like this. You would be allowed to bring objects or performers into the performing chamber: "Aida," their elephants, you can bring the elephants in. You would be able to expose the auditorium to Dallas or vice versa, Dallas to the auditorium. You'd be able to open portions in order to change the procession, allow people to come in and out for an intermission, or to enter for the beginning or the end of a performance.
現在,我想讓你們看一看 很早的一張概念性的草圖 是這些元素的混合 是這樣子的 你可以把各種東西帶入演出廳。 《阿依達》中的大象你真的可以把它帶進去。 你可以將觀眾區展現給達拉斯, 反之亦然。 你還可以打開各個部分 來改變觀眾入場的方向、順序 觀眾可以在休息時自由進出劇院 或者是從頭到尾都待在劇院裏
As I said, all the balconies can move, but they can also be disappeared completely. The proscenium can fly. You can bring large objects into the chamber itself. But most convincingly when we had to confront the idea of changing costs from architecture to infrastructure, is something that is represented by this. And again, this is not all the flexibilities of the building that is actually built, but at least suggests the ideas.
我剛說過,所有包廂都是可以移動的 甚至可以讓它們徹底消失。 舞臺可以懸空 可以讓各種大件物品自己進入展廳 但是最讓人稱道的就是我們成功挑戰了將建築設計的花費 轉移到基礎建設上 這就是這所建築的代表性。 這裏所說到的還並不能涵蓋這座建築的所有靈活功能 但至少能展現我們的基本意圖。
This building has the ability, in short order, to go back to a flat floor organization such that they can rent it out. Now, if there is anyone here from American Airlines, please consider doing your Christmas party here. (Laughter) That allows the company to raise operational budgets without having to compete with other venues with much larger auditoriums. That's an enormous benefit.
這棟建築可以迅速地 變成完全平面的空樓層 需要的話可以租出去。 如果在座有在美國航空工作的, 可以考慮一下在這裏舉行你們的聖誕派對。 (笑) 那可以給公司籌集運營預算 完全不需要 再和其他場地比較了 在這兒辦活動的好處太多了。
So, the theater company has the ability to do totally hermetic, light-controlled, sound-controlled, great acoustics, great intimacy Shakespeare, but can also do Beckett with the skyline of Dallas sitting behind it. Here it is in a flat floor configuration. The theater has been going through its kind of paces.
在這裏,劇團可以進行 完全封閉的演出, 有可控的燈光、音效、一流的音響效果 可以演出一流的莎士比亞戲劇。 這裏還可以演貝克特, 背景就用達拉斯的天際。 這是第一種平面結構。 劇院可以大展身手。
Here it is in an end stage configuration. It's actually beautiful. There was a rock band. We stood outside trying to see if the acoustics worked, and you could see the guys doing this but you couldn't hear them. It was very unusual. Here it is in a thrust configuration. And last but not least, you see this already has the ability to create events in order to generate operational budgets to overcome the building in fact performing to allow the company to overcome their biggest problem.
這是第二種結構, 看上去非常漂亮,可以進行搖滾樂演出。 我們在外面測試了它的音響系統 你可以看到裏面的人的活動,但完全聽不到他們。 這非常不同尋常。 這是第三種延伸出來的結構。 它很重要 不僅可以在這裏進行 籌集資金的活動 這棟建築還可以幫助 公司解決它們最大的困難。
I'm going to show you a brief time lapse. As I said, this can be done with only two people, and with a minimum amount of time. This is the first time that actually the changeover was done and so there is literally thousands of people because everyone was excited and wanted to be a part of it. So, in a way try to disregard all the thousands of ants running around. And think of it being done with just a few people. Again, just a couple people are required. (Laughter) I promise. Et voila. (Applause)
我還要給你們展示一下整個建造的快進過程。 我說過,兩個人就能完成 用最少的時間完成。 這是第一個變化完成的時候 那裏大概聚了幾千人 大家都非常興奮,想要參與到其中去。 所以為了把那密密麻麻的幾千隻螞蟻去掉 影片進行了處理,只留下幾個人。 是,幾個人就夠了 (笑) 我保證。 就是這樣。 (鼓掌)
So, just in conclusion, a few shots. This is the AT&T Performing Arts Center's Dee and Charles Wyly Theater. There it is at night. And last but not least the entire AT&T Performing Arts Center. You can see the Winspear Opera House on the right and the Dee and Charles Wyly Theater on the left.
所以,總的來說,不用費多大事兒。 這是AT&T(美國電信電話公司)表演藝術中心的 迪和查理斯•懷利劇院 今天晚上就到這兒了 最後,但同樣重要的是在整個AT&T表演藝術中心 你可以看到右邊是溫斯皮爾歌劇院, 左邊是迪和查理斯•威利劇院
And to remind you that here is an example in which architecture actually did something. But we got to that conclusion without understanding where we were going, what we knew were a series of issues that the company and the client was confronted with. And we took positions with them, and it was through those positions that we began to take architectural manifestations and we arrived at a conclusion that none of us, really none of us could ever have conceived of initially or individually. Thank you. (Applause)
要提示你們的是這幢建築 確實有它存在的意義。 但我們是在不知道 到底在往哪里發展的情況下得到了這個結果。 我們只知道一系列公司和客戶想要 解決的問題。 我們在各個問題中找到自己的立場,然後通過它們 漸漸看到了建築的形狀 我們得到的最終結論就是 我們中間沒有任何一個人 可以單獨或者在眾人之前完成這個構想。 謝謝。 (掌聲)