本土设计Ⅱ

1.院士力作，集中体现中华传统文化和中国本土设计

 

    《本土设计II》是崔愷院士在2009年出版的《本土设计》学术著作之后的又一部兼有理论性和实践性的学术著作，国家科学技术学术著作出版基金资助出版。其中包括了近几年来崔愷院士在“本土设计”理论上的研究成果和在这一理论指导下的一批优秀建筑作品，通过连续的设计实践及学术演讲、研讨、对话与写作等方式交流，不断深化和完善本土设计理论。本书汉英双语对照，正文采用具有再生环保特性的超感纸印刷，封面采用有建筑材料质地的特种纸进行装帧，并以设计底图常用的硫酸纸印制创作过程中的手绘草图作插页，全书数百张精美图片，四色印刷。

     崔愷，1957生于北京，1984毕业于天津大学建筑系，获硕士学位。现任中国建筑设计研究院（集团）副院长、总建筑师，中国工程院院士，国家勘察设计大师,本土设计研究中心主任。 曾获得 “全国优秀科技工程者”（1997）、“国务院特殊津贴专家”（1998）、“国家人事部有突出贡献的中青年专家”（1999）、“国家百、千、万人工程”人选（1999）、“法国文学与艺术骑士勋章”（2003）、“梁思成建筑奖”（2007）、保加利亚国际建筑艺术院名誉教授（2014）等荣誉。    作为中国建筑学会常务理事、天津大学教授、清华大学双聘教授、中国科学院大学教授和多家专业杂志编委来推动学术研究。所主持的工程项目获得国家优秀工程设计金奖1项，银奖9项，铜奖5项；获得亚洲建协金奖2项，提名奖1项；中国建筑设计金奖2项，银奖2项；中国威海国际建筑设计大奖赛金奖2项，银奖1项，铜奖2项；国际铜业学会一等奖1项，三等奖1项等专业设计奖项；在新中国成立60周年中国建筑学会评选的三百多项建筑创作大奖中获得九项大奖。   近两年受邀参加香港“2011-12香港深圳城市建筑双城双年展”（2012）、“从北京到伦敦”——当代中国建筑展（2012）、西岸2013建筑与当代艺术双年展——2000-2013中国当代建筑回顾展（2013），并在北京举办“十年•耕耘——崔愷工作室十周年建筑创作展”（2013）,与《世界建筑》杂志共同举办“崔愷作品巡展”（2013）；出版著作《当代建筑师系列——崔愷》（2012）。

目
录

序 ………………………………………………………Ⅰ

关于本土 ……………………………………………….. 1

自然主题

敦煌莫高窟游客中心 ………………………………………. 9

中国杭帮菜博物馆 ……………………………………….. 19

中信金陵酒店
再造自然 …………………………………. 27

泰山桃花峪游客中心
“泰山石” ……………………………41

历史遗产

无锡鸿山遗址博物馆 ……………………………………… 51

蓬莱古船博物馆 …………………………………………..57

欧美同学会改扩建 ……………………………………….. 65

前门23号 ……………………………………………… 71

西安大华1935 ………………………………………….. 79

地域文化

玉树康巴艺术中心
似与不似之间：由现实理性而理想 ………….. 93

中华人民共和国驻南非大使馆、驻开普敦总领事馆
国家的门脸儿 ….109

中信泰富朱家角锦江酒店
园子·院子·框子 ………………….123

苏州火车站站房
浅谈火车站的地域特色 ……………………..135

北川文化中心
本土文化的重生 …………………………….147

重庆国泰艺术中心 ………………………………………..159

山东省广播电视中心
叠石释义 …………………………….167

有机更新

北京外国语大学校园改造 …………………………………..179

南京艺术学院校园改造
南艺的“难”“易” ………………….191

神华集团办公楼改扩建 …………………………………….213

城市生活

中间建筑B区、A、F区
中间建筑B区 ………………………..221

昆山市文化艺术中心 ………………………………………237

德阳市奥林匹克后备人才学校 ……………………………….245

江苏建筑职业技术学院图书馆
设计的逻辑 ……………………253

北京奥林匹克塔
我们的奥运后的奥运工程 …………………….261

北工大软件园二期B、C、D地块 …………………………….271

北京工业大学第四教学楼组团 ……………………………….277

思考·言论

中国建筑发展的伦理回归 …………………………………..289

搭建创新的平台 ………………………………………….291

浅谈建筑师教育 ………………………………………….293

1999—2009中国建筑创作回顾
……………………………..295

学坊随笔 ……………………………………………….298

本土设计的思考与实践—直白的真诚 ………………………..301

新型城镇化与绿色建筑新理念 ……………………………….304

关于北川新县城建设的点滴心得 ……………………………..305

文化的态度—在中国建筑学会深圳年会上的报告 ……………….307

留住乡愁 ……………………………………………….309

同行的评价

现代化与地域主义—对崔恺作品的一些思考
尤根·罗斯曼 ……….313

崔恺：抽象现实主义—来自当代中国的“本土”建筑
朱剑飞 ……..321

本土设计再思考—建筑同仁在崔愷、潘冀建筑思想对谈中的讨论 …..334

“两岸·追问·回潮”—崔恺、王维仁对谈 …………………..338

耕耘—十年展 ………………………………………….343

后记 …………………………………………………..345

年表

     关于本土 ABOUT LAND-BASED RATIONALISM2009 年初我出版了第二本作品集，取名“本土设计”，主要是表达设计应立足土地，建筑要接地气的意思。当然，这里所指的土地不仅仅是作为自然资源的大地，也泛指饱含人文历史信息的文化沃土。回顾自己过往这些年的作品，之所以有些特色，都是因为那里的自然和人文环境有特色；之所以被认可，也是因为那里的人们看到了他们所熟悉的形态语言。经过了30 年的思考与实践，我渐渐地悟出来：设计原本就应该是这样的啊！但现实中的情景并非如此。大量的千篇一律的平庸建筑使我们的城市很快就失去了特色，许多城市未来的愿景图中充斥着代表时尚潮流的玻璃塔楼，前者表现出重量轻质的短视需求，后者反映出求新追洋的不自信心态。在很多人眼里，建筑就像时尚商品一样可以随意挑选，随便消费，而不少建筑师也就投其所好，画出各式各样的造型供其挑选，完全没有理性的思考和原则，唯一的目的就是让甲方满意, 赚取设计费，这也许就是许多建筑没有“根”的根本原因吧!几年来，我以“本土设计”为题在国内外做过几十场演讲，得到了许多业内同行和高校学生的积极反响和欢迎，但也有一些质疑和不以为然的反应。我知道，任何一个学术观点的提出都有一个质疑、讨论、修正、完善的过程，我也认为，在当今信息爆炸的时代，多元化是一种必然和常态，很难让大家把关注点集中到这种比较宽泛的观点上来，但我还是想在此对一些比较集中的问题谈一下自己的看法。总有人问，本土设计与地域主义是什么关系?言外之意，既然有了地域主义的定义，是否还有必要提本土设计。我应该承认，自己提出的本土设计的概念其内涵有很多是与地域主义的观点一致的，或者说是学习地域主义设计理论的结果。但是，其中的确有很大的区别。其一，本土的意思是立足土地，这土地是很具体的建设场地，并不是泛指一个地域，换句话说，其解决方案只针对某个地段、某个环境和某个目的，并不试图代表这个地域的通用性。其二，本土设计强调的是一种立场，一种思考创作的路径，一种方法论，而不特指某类建筑，也就是说，并不想定义某类建筑是本土建筑。而地域主义是定义与某个地域文脉相关联的建筑作品或建筑倾向，它也比较强调对地域传统和文脉的传承。两者比较，前者强调立场和方法，后者强调结果。以前者的立场和方法可以创作出适合特定环境的建筑来，可能是有地域特色的，也可能呈现其他的特点。其三，在业内，弗兰姆普敦的“批判的地域主义”有很广泛的影响和认同感，它特指在地域文脉的传承上反对形式模仿，强调创新和与时俱进，这无疑是正确的，与我所说的立足本土的内涵是一致的，甚至说界限划得更明确。但对社会层面来讲，这个概念从字面上就较难理解，为什么说地域主义又要批判呢? 是反对还是赞成? 恐怕不看内涵、不详细解释便不容易理解。所以相对来讲，本土设计更容易理解。许多朋友担心，讲本土设计容易被理解为本土人设计，是市场保护的主张。我初时也有点儿纠结，因为开始翻译成英文用“Native”这个词的确有民族性的含义，而我又特别反对这种狭隘的立场。实际上，我一直认为建筑师的实践活动应该是开放的，虽然建筑师对自己生活的环境的熟悉会使自己在当地的创作活动有先天的优势，但这并不意味着这种关联性具有排他性，换句话说，非本地建筑师并不会由于没有这种优势便无法在这里设计出好的建筑来。其实关键在于建筑师对建筑所处环境是否有深入的了解，当然也取决于建筑师的职业水平和创造力。事实上，近些年来国内各地一批优秀的建筑作品的确出自外国建筑师之手，而大量毫无特色的平庸建筑的出现反而是我们本土建筑师的作为。出现这种令人尴尬的局面并不奇怪，只要客观地分析、比较中外建筑师在设计上投入的精力和时间、人力和物力的成本便可见一斑，更别说与他们在经验和水平上，尤其在创新能力上的差距了。当然，更重要的一点是，这些著名的国际大师们对我们的本土文化似乎更敏感，更尊重，也更善于用当代的、甚至他们个性化的建筑语言巧妙地表达，创造出让我们中国人也引以为豪的、代表中国文化的标志性建筑。这其实可能也是许多地方政府更愿意邀请外国名师来参加竞赛的原因。由此看来，我们常常抱怨的“崇洋媚外”现象也有一定的道理吧。其实，我个人更愿意把建筑师分为负责任的建筑师和不负责任的建筑师，负什么责任呢，就是社会的责任、文化的责任、生态环境的责任，当然也包括为客户服务的责任，这也是最起码的责任。所以，我认为本土设计不应该是本土人设计，事实上，我们大多数建筑师并非只在自己生活的城市做项目，更多的是在我们并非特别熟悉的其他地方做，甚至还要走向世界，因此市场保护主义并不是我们所情愿的。也有不少朋友有点儿疑虑，谈本土设计会不会把大家引回到已经争论很多年的“继承传承”“民族形式”的“形似和神似”的老话题上去，毕竟在今天全球化的语境下，这种保守的、怀旧的情结并不太容易被大家接受。其实我也是这么想的，如果我们总是在历史传统面前畏首畏尾、踌躇不前，势必影响我们的建筑创新，而且也不能对这个时代做出应有的解释。所以，我们说的本土设计或者说以土为本的设计，概念的内涵是远远大于“传统”“民族”的概念的，其中的要素既有人文的、又有自然的，既有历史的、也包括当代的，只要能影响到建筑所处的环境的要素都在其中。而本土设计就是要从这众多的要素中寻找思路，用当代的设计语言巧妙地将其表达出来，从而成为有本土特色的建筑作品。我们自己在不同的项目中一直坚持采用这种策略，从项目所处环境中提取有特点的要素作为切入点，然后选取恰当的建筑语汇去表达，也研究如何有效地控制结构和设备的技术系统，力图让建筑空间的形态与建筑功能的要求贴切地吻合，最后还要把握室内设计和景观设计与建筑的整体协调性，避免因为建筑的夸张语汇与功能相左，避免建筑设计与其他专业设计不协调，避免徒有其表的纯装修手法，避免里外两层皮的拼凑而成的面子工程。总之，我认为在本土中提取的要素不应被简单、直白地用在设计中，而应将其转化成建筑的语汇，最好与当代建筑美学还能接上轨。尽管含义宽泛的本土设计并不纠缠于传统、民族形式的传承问题，但显然这也是一个绕不开的话题，尤其是当今社会大众在批评我们的城乡建筑缺乏特色的时候，往往言下之意指的是我们的建筑缺乏大家所熟知的传统特色。于是，许多地方为了打造特色，也为了旅游的需求，往往大规模地复建或重建所谓的历史风貌街区，这种很普遍的造假历史的现象是我们担心的，也是不包括在我们所说的本土设计范畴之中的。那么，到底如何处理这类问题呢？我个人认为也可以采用本土设计的策略，依据具体场地环境的条件来定。比如，在历史遗存建筑较多的古城街区，设计就宜于采用比较传统的形式，或者以继承为主的手法去协调，但也要注意有所区别，避免造成历史真实性的混淆。而在历史遗存较少的地段上，就可以比较创新地、变异地、多元化地表现建筑的地域性，这中间还可以有对比的过渡式的手法，只要把握好度，一样可以形成统一中有变化的有机生长出来的混搭风貌，不仅不会影响总的特色，甚至更丰富、更精彩。这种因地制宜的方法使原来停留在标语口号上的泛泛而谈的民族形式可以因时因地的落地、具体化，而不是概念化、统一化、范式化，这其实也会更有利于传统的继承和发展，因为历史的本质是发展，而不是停滞或者回归。总的来说，在本土设计的概念里，传统文化不应再是个沉重的包袱，而应是我们的宝贵资源，适时适地地取用，适宜适度地发展，不断推陈出新，这是我们的历史责任。在本土概念的讨论中，也有朋友提出，本土包罗万象，有积极的一面，就一定有消极的一面。比方说，今天大家议论最多的那些标志性建筑往往反映出社会政治或经济生活中一些不健康的心态。还有许多徒有其表和廉价的装饰性古典建筑，也代表了我们今天社会的浮躁心态。那么，这些建筑也算是反映当下本土文化的建筑吗？的确，我完全同意这样的推断。事实上，就像那句老话“建筑是石头的史书”一样，任何一个时代的文化都会多多少少反映在那个时代的建筑上，不以人们的意志为转移。从本土设计的逻辑来说，真实、全面地表现当代文化状态也是自然的。这也就是说，本土设计出来的建筑也未必都是好作品，这是肯定的。这也是为什么我一直只说本土设计而不提本土建筑的原因，因为在不同的利益和价值观影响下，真是难以把由此产生于本土的建筑归纳为一个明确的定义，相反，强调本土设计的立场在概念上还是比较清晰的。虽然我们不得不承认，当下中国建筑水平不高与这个时代的某些消极影响有关，是真实地反映本土现实的结果，但我认为，深入挖掘我们脚下这片沃土中的积极、善良、和谐、务实的文化传统，创作出值得后代认同和珍惜的建筑，仍然是我们建筑师不能推脱的历史责任。所以，在汲取本土中的营养时，还是应该剔除糟粕、取其精华，对领导或业主的一些价值观和心态，要积极主动地引导而不是简单地迎合、追随。这里面有一个建筑伦理的问题。实际上，通过包括建筑师在内的各界有识之士的共同努力，在我们创造出属于这个时代的优秀作品的同时，也能反过来消除或减少渗入本土之中的毒素。我一直把本土设计的概念想象成一棵大树，它深深地扎根在饱含人文历史和自然生态要素的沃土中，通过立足本土的理性主义创作躯干，能够生发出不同的建筑流派的枝条，既可以有文脉建筑，也可以有乡土建筑；既有生态节能建筑，也有大地景观建筑，最终呈现出枝繁叶茂的繁荣景象。我觉得这样比较符合建筑的客观规律，是一条可以越走越宽的大道，而不必再去寻找所谓唯一正确的独木桥了。10 年来，我和我工作室的青年建筑师们一直在本土设计的方向上学习、研究、思考、实践。坦率地说，正如我们的作品不太成熟一样，我提出的本土设计理论也远不够成熟，甚至现在还只能说是一种立场和策略。但对我这个已过知天命年纪的建筑师来说，本土设计的理念的确像一颗定心丸，吃了下去心就平和多了。每每接到一个新项目，都用本土设计的立场去研究分析，找到合适的策略，选择适度的方法去解读问题。不用急躁，也不用有太多犹豫和压力，构思好像总能比较自然、合乎逻辑地呈现出来。而这样产生的构思方案拿出来与业主沟通，好像也比较容易得到理解和认可。这说明本土设计的立场和方法还是比较可行、实用的，而它的不成熟、不完整、不系统也在所难免，特别希望各位同行给予指教、补充。 —原载于《世界建筑》2013年第10期In 2009, I published my second portfolio, Native Design, or Bentusheji (base-earth-design) in Chinese. It is a design strategy that regards the resources of natural and cultural environment as ‘earth’, and as the ‘base’ for design. When I review my recent works, I found the sparkles in them are mostly derived from the remarkable natural and cultural environments. If my works are accepted by the local residents, what they accept is the familiar formal vocabularies. After 30 years practices, I gradually realized that it is the real nature of design.But the reality of social environment is not so ideal. On one hand, thousands of mediocre buildings have already wiped off the distinctive characteristics of our cities; on the other, the image of future cities are considered to be clusters of shining skyscrapers. If the former is a myopic requirement that overrates the quantity but ignores the quality, the latter will be recognized as an unconfident of our own culture. That is true, for most of people, architecture is a kind of goods that could be selected and purchased as fashion items. As a consequence, purely to satisfy the clients and earn money, not a few architects degraded their works to be a formal production without rational thinking and principles. Maybe that is the reason why lots of buildings are “rootless”. Last years, I made speeches on the topic of “Land-based Rationalism” at home and abroad, some colleges and students welcomed the idea, some questioned it. In my opinion, there is no academic viewpoint presented without query, discussion, correction and improvement. It is even harder in the era of information exploration to ask people focusing on such a loose viewpoint. But I still want to explain several issues questioned repeatedly.Someone will ask, is there any relation between Land-based Rationalism and Regionalism? In other words, since regionalism is an existing academic term, is there any need to bring out a new theory, the Land-based Rationalism? It should be acknowledged that the Land-based Rationalism shares some viewpoints with Regionalism, even comes out from the learning of Regionalism. But there is really a large difference between them. First of all, in the term of “Bentusheji”(Land-based Rationalism),“bentu” means based on the site, which is a specific place of the design, not a general region. In other words, a strategy of “Bentusheji” is concretely aim to certain site, certain environment and certain purpose, and it could not represent the universal design principles of a region. Secondly, the Land-based Rationalism is more of a positioning than a theory or a type of architecture. It has no attempt to define any building as a Land-based Rationalism architecture. In contrast, Regionalism is a definition of architecture works and thinking that associated with regional context. It pays more attention to the inheritance of local tradition and context. In a word, the former focuses on method and positioning, while the latter focuses on result. We can design a building suitable for its environment with methods and positioning of Land-based Rationalism, and the building could represent regional features or other features. And then, third, the Critical Regionalism, proposed by Kenneth Frampton, is a well-known academic concept in architecture field. It refers in particular to a non-imitative creation to present the heritage of regional context and keep pace with times. This is surely right, sharing the same position of Land-based Rationalism or even defining the situation more clearly. But maybe on public level, it is hard to understand this term. Why the Regionalism is critical? Does it oppose or approve Regionalism? Without particular explanation, People could not know its meaning literally. Comparatively speaking, Land-based Rationalism is a much more comprehensible concept. Beyond that, someone could concerns that Bentusheji, initially translated into “Native Design” is a proposition to protect native designers in the local market. Maybe in some scene the word “native” here could be understood with some exclusive meaning that is far away from my position for an opened architectural market. Of course, the familiar of his homeland will give native architect advantage in local projects, but this relativity should not be equaled with exclusiveness. In other words, we could not equal nonnative with unsuccessful design.For an architect, the key factors to create a successful design are his thorough understanding of the site and its environment and his professional ability. In fact, a good deal of excellent buildings emerged in China are designed by foreign architects, meanwhile numerous mediocre buildings are works of native architects. We could not consider the embarrassing situation a strange result, if we compare the efforts, time, resources the foreign and native architects input in design projects, not to mention the distance between their experiences, abilities and innovation capacities. Moreover, some famous international architects are more sensitive to our own culture. Not only respecting the traditional Chinese culture, they presented it by modern architectural languages with remarkable personalities to general landmarks even make Chinese proud. Maybe that is why many local governments prefer to invite foreign architect into international design competitions. By this taken, the “foreign worshipping” trend we usually blamed is quite reasonable. To divide architects into native and foreigner, I’d rather to divide them into responsible ones and irresponsible ones. The responsibilities an architect should admit including the social responsibility, cultural responsibility, ecological and environmental responsibility, and the most fundamental one, the responsibility to serve clients. So, in my opinion, the Land-based Rationalism or Bentusheji is not a claim for native architect. Most architects do their job outside their own hometowns where are not familiar to them or even alien. In this case, market protectionism would never be a choice of architects. Will the discuss of Land-based Rationalism reopen the old topics, such as “inheriting heritage”, “nationality style” and “the likeness of shape or spirit”, which are confused Chinese architects for more than half a century. In the context of globalization, such a nostalgic sentiment is obviously needless. I agree that if we always hang back to the old time, we could hardly do any innovation for architecture design or do any response that the era desired. The Land-based Rationalism we talked is a concept covers more than tradition and nationality. It contains all the factors of the environment where a certain building stands, including cultural and natural, historical and contemporary aspects and so on. What the Land-based Rationalism aim to do is to find the way to present valuable natures of them by modern design language and create the land-based architectural design. We always adopt this strategy in various design projects by selecting the characteristic factors of the environment, choosing the appropriate architectural vocabulary, researching the controllability of structure and service systems to integrate the form and function, even the interior and landscape design of a building together. It is an effective way to avoid the conflicts between the dramatic forms and the practical functions and between the architectural design and other professional designs. It also helps us to avoid making our works to be ornaments or decoration, to be a fake building covered with an attractive façade. In brief, I prefer the resources of the land should not be directly paste into our design, but be carefully translated into contemporary architectural language. Although it is a loosely defined term not absorbed in the inheriting of nationality forms, the Land-based Rationalism itself is hardly to keep out of the issue, especially when the public are still criticizing the lack of characteristics of our cities. In many cases, the lack is considered as an absence of the familiar traditional features that causes the trend of reconstruction of so-called “old look street” in a lot of cities. The common phenomenon of fake historical building is dangerous and not a strategy included in the realm of Land-based Rationalism.In my opinion, dealing with the traditional features also could follow the strategy of Land-based Rationalism to respect the conditions of certain sites. For historical neighborhoods in old towns or cities, the reconstruction and renovation should respect the traditional buildings of the sites with means derived from the old features. At the same time, distinctive appearances from the old ones must be required to avoid the confusion of historical authenticity. While for the region lack of historical remains, architect could apply more innovative, diversified means to represent the characteristics of the site. Sometimes, appropriate comparison of old and new also provides organic and hybrid texture that works more vividly. To inherit nationality form is not a slogan that restricts all the buildings?and designs to develop under same standards. It’s an effective and   reasonable way to adjust strategies to differing site conditions. Since   the nature of history is never stagnant or retrograde. In the concept of   Land-based Rationalism, traditional culture should not be considered   a heavy burden but remarkable resource by appropriate means   to employ and develop. Bringing forth the new through the old, is   historical responsibility of our generation.   In the discussion of Land-based Rationalism, someone said,   the factors of the “land”, of the natural and cultural environment   are various. Some of the factors are valuable and some are   disadvantageous. For example, those landmark buildings that cause   social disputes are somehow the reflection of ill attitude of our political   and economic lives, while those cheap and decorative western   classical buildings in China are also indication of the fickleness of the   society. Can we say they are architecture of local cultural? I couldn’t   agree more with this conclusion. As the old saying, “architecture   is stone book of history”, culture of any era may influence the   architecture of the era. It is a fact whether one likes it or not.   In the logic of Land-based Rationalism, it is necessary to present   the current situation of the local culture, honestly and thoroughly.   Maybe it’s not a principle to produce great building. I know it, and that   is why I prefer to emphasize the strategy not architecture of Land-  based Rationalism. Under the influence of different benefits and   values, architecture of a certain region is hard to define by a specific   conclusion, while to focus on the position of Land-based Rationalism   is much more feasible.   We have to admit that the current architectural design quality of   China is a real consequence of current China, of cause including the   negative factors. But if we try our best to excavate the positive, kind,   harmonious and practical spirit of our traditional culture, we can still   create buildings that deserve to be respected and cherished. For us   architects, it’s an obligatory historical responsibility. From the view   of architecture ethics, we should reject the dross and assimilate the   essence of native culture, to guide the client to healthy aesthetic   instead of following their unreasonable demands. And in turn, the   ?efforts of architects and others of our community to create excellent   works of our era will finally reduce or even eliminate the toxin of native   culture.   I prefer to consider the idea of land-based rationalism as a big tree   rooted in the fertile of cultural tradition and natural elements. Situated   in the land, with the trunk of rationalism creation, it burgeons out   various branches, including the branch of context architecture, branch   of vernacular architecture, branch of ecology architecture and branch   of landscape architecture and so on. Composed by all of these ideas,   a prosperous vision of architecture theory emerges, that is in line with   objective laws. In my view, a growing avenue is much better than an   exclusive only-correct way.   In recent decade, my young colleges in my studio and I have made   the effort to study, research, think and practice the land-based rational   design. Speaking frankly, the theory of land-based rational design is as   immature as our works. It is just a position or strategy, by far. But, as   an architect aged over 50 years, the age to know one’s fate, according   to Confucius’s motto, the theory is a pill to make myself mental calm.   Every time I undertake a new design project, I will research and   analysis it on the point of Land-based Rationalism, to find a proper   strategy and to resolve the problems with adequate methods. Without   testiness, hesitation or pressure, ideas emerge naturally and logically,   and are more acceptable for clients. In my opinion, the approaches   of Land-based Rationalism are feasible and practical, as well as there   are inherent immaturity and incompletion in it. Please oblige me with   your valuable comments.   —World Architecture, October, 2013

     当谈到古建筑保护人们就会想起梁思成，当看到卢浮宫就会想到贝聿铭，业界认为像崔愷这样的大师完全有实力在实践和理论上超越前人。崔愷院士提出的本土设计理论为当代中国建筑甚至当代世界建筑提供了“更为社会化，植根于当地；更注重文化多样性，让建筑与当地文化和谐对话”的科学理念，进一步引领中国走向高度的文化自觉与自信。

      成长环境——对设计的影响  崔愷：那个时候我对城市的观察是从爬景山开始的。每逢周末，我都  喜欢爬到景山顶上去看风景，实际山并不高，但那时城市很平，所以  可以看得很远。故宫、北海、鼓楼，向南可以看到人民大会堂，甚至  天坛。这些重要的建筑对我来说记忆深刻。还有些新建筑，包括当时  的电报大楼，北京展览馆，还有民航总局大楼，我还记得在60年代初  吊车吊着这个房子的墙板往上装，很神奇，当时是11层，在北京应该  是最高的楼了。一座古老的城市，同时又有现代化的发展，这对我也  是一种憧憬，后来我还承担了民航大楼的改造工程，还曾写过一篇短  文回忆儿时的印象。  这些对我后面的建筑道路到底有多少影响呢？现在想想影响还是比较  多的。  我现在做设计的时候，常常会回忆起自己的城市经验，比方说小时候  最愿意去的是什么地方，那些在四合院和胡同里玩的情景，还包括晚  上昏黄的路灯，那时城市有点儿像戏剧的场景，忽亮忽暗。公共汽车  来了就亮一阵，然后又暗淡了，影子拖得很长，很吓人。实际上是挺  生动的。我曾写了一篇文章回忆到这些，谈到今天的城市照明，我觉  得过于商业化，到处都被亮化，那种有意思的感觉反而都没了。举这  个例子，是想说小时候的东西实际上对今天的一些设计是很有启发性  的。