WHAT IS A HOUSE FOR住宅所为何
WHAT IS A HOUSE FOR住宅所为何House byTalk withInfo

Yasushi Horibe: My teacher, Yoshihiro Masuko, held a great admiration for Aalto and told me to travel to Finland to see his works. To be honest, upon my initial visit, I was not particularly impressed with Aalto’s own house; I remember thinking, “It’s just an average house.” However, the natural features of Finland and the interaction with the reserved and gentle Finnish people – akin to the Japanese – evoked a deep sense of personal empathy towards Finland. Since then, I have returned to the country on four or five occasions and recently, come to appreciate Aalto’s work, particularly his own house. I attribute this to my experiences, my age, and my growing understanding of architecture.

IN YOUR TEXT (“MY ADMIRATION AND DESPAIR FOR ARCHITECTURE IN JA 90/2013”), YOU NOTED AN INTERESTING ANECDOTE: A KING ASKING A PAINTER WHAT WAS THE MOST DIFFICULT THING TO PAINT. THE PAINTER REPLIED THAT IT WAS EASY TO PAINT A DEMON BUT NOT A DOG—WE WOULD IMMEDIATELY RECOGNISE MISTAKES IN THE REPRESENTATIONS OF WHAT WE KNOW VERY WELL. YOU ALLUDE TO ARCHITECTURE, SAYING THAT DESIGNING A CALM-LOOKING BUILDING IS LIKE PAINTING A DOG. IS ALVAR AALTO’S HOUSE MORE LIKE A DOG OR RATHER LIKE A DEMON?

I think it has changed over time. Probably, when it was initially constructed, there was a very demon-like appearance to it. However, due to changes in both social and architectural techniques and culture, I think the dog-like aspect became more prominent. 

In many cases of good architecture, this process usually happens; what once was very radical and avant-garde soon becomes soft and more relaxed in expression. An important factor in Aalto’s house becoming dog-like with time is that Aalto understood a life-size person’s body and mind. 

If the expression is demon-like and insincere to the human body and mind, it will not last long, and people will become fatigued with it.

Generally speaking, I think architecture has two primary roles. One is like launching fireworks, which raises people’s spirits; a celebratory role of architecture that encourages and inspires. On the other hand, there must also be architecture like Chinese herbal medicine, which shows its effects over time and which is not overpowering or burdensome to any physical or mental condition; it is quiet.

AALTO’S RESIDENCE IS MODEST IN ITS SIZE, EMBODYING A MODEL OF HIGHLY EFFICIENT SUSTAINABILITY, AND CONSEQUENTLY LOWER DAILY ENERGY EXPENDITURE. DOES THIS HOUSE REFLECT YOUR VIEWS ON HOW DOMESTIC SPACES SHOULD BE BUILT?

I think that the size of architecture is intimately tied to the concept of distance from others. The dimensions of Aalto’s own house are a fitting example of his ideas about the appropriate distance between individuals. Furthermore, Aalto had a keen ability to not only design the interiors of buildings but also carefully consider and create appropriate distances between the inhabitants, whether they be within the building or in the surrounding community. 

For example, the Villa Mairea is a large house; however, it was designed with an eye to the social dynamics that occur when many people congregate in one place, and how the distance between people should be maintained in the idyllic atmosphere of the area. 

Rather than considering only numerical measurements, such as square meters, he conceptualized architecture as a means of measuring the distance between individuals, between people and nature, and between the man-made and natural world. I think Aalto had a very refined sense of balance in that regard. 

IS THE FEELING OF A SUITABLE SIZE SUBJECTIVE OR OBJECTIVE? 

An example of this is a machiya townhouse in Kyoto, where the lintel is so low that a person of about 175 cm in height must bend to enter, which may not be comfortable for individuals of all body types. However, it is not necessarily true that those taller than 180 cm would feel uncomfortable or ill-at-ease. This is because the space embodies the sincerity and honesty of those who created it, along with their cultural patterns and systems of sizes. This atmosphere can be sensed throughout the entire city. I believe that humans can instantly sense that the size of the building or its interior is appropriate for the context, tradition, and culture of that particular town or area, while feeling the scale of surrounding area, the width of roads, and the sense of distance between neighbouring houses. Humans have a certain receptivity to understand unfamiliar scale or size.

What is important is not whether the door height of 180 cm is international or universal, but rather, whether the atmosphere and scale of a specific building align with the scale and atmosphere of the region, climate, history, and other relevant factors. If we were to visit the house of an Arab oil tycoon, despite the unfamiliar dimensions and scale, we would likely sense that the people who built it were sincere and followed the sense of scale derived from the culture and customs of the region. 

Instead of forcing something, it is better to let oneself be guided by those flows and learn from something beyond one’s creation. This kind of humility is important.

FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF A JAPANESE ARCHITECT, WHAT ARE YOUR IMPRESSIONS AND INSIGHTS ON MODERN WESTERN CULTURE?

I believe that there is a significant difference between the ways of thinking prevalent in monotheistic and polytheistic countries. It is not about which one is better or worse; these are simply different ways of thinking that affect how people view themselves and how they build relationships with their surroundings.

I just can’t think in a monotheistic way. It has already been ingrained in my body that there are various existences that watch over me or support me in the interaction with nature, friends, or in any place. For me, it is almost impossible to get over this way of thinking. 

I feel that Finland is a country that traditionally shares our Eastern sense. There is a belief that there are multiple spirits in nature, and examples of this can be seen in Bryggman’s Resurrection Chapel or Siren’s Otaniemi Chapel. Celebrating the feeling that there is also a god in the forest makes me feel very calm; I find joy when I come across such things in the West.

It has a certain impact on how we think of time. I believe there are two primary ways in which time flows. The first is linear, with technology continually advancing and society progressing. The second is cyclical, akin to the rising and setting of the sun, with no progression or evolution. To simplify, people working in sciences tend to subscribe to the idea of a historical trajectory of progress, wherein technology and human intelligence are constantly improving. For instance, an iPhone from 10 years ago is not as functional as the present-day models. Conversely, people in human studies do not believe that a piece of music composed by Mozart or a literary work written by Dostoevsky over 200 years ago is inferior to contemporary creations. 

I believe that we are currently in an era where individuals in the West are beginning to question this linear manner of time applied to all aspects of life. I hope that the West will begin to embrace the cyclical idea of time and that the world will become a place where individuals can connect and resonate with one another regardless of their nationalities or races.

I am using the terms “East” and “West” deliberately, but it would be more accurate to say “linear” or “cyclical” without using such pronouns.

WHILE EXPRESSING SYMPATHY FOR POLYTHEISM AND FINNISH ARCHITECTURE, YOUR WORKS SEEM TO HAVE STRONG WESTERN RIGOUR OF GEOMETRY. WHY IS THAT?

The most Eastern thing I saw in America was the Kimbell Art Museum. I felt that it was a far more Eastern building than any other building I had visited. The Kimbell Art Museum is a realm of organisation and order, but that order or geometry is not evolutionary, but rather rotational or cyclical; going somewhere and coming back again. I felt that it had an incredible profundity. 

A mandala represents circularity, but it also uses very strict geometry. There is a sense of circulation by using its unique tempo, rhythm, and repetition within the geometry. I am very interested in that kind of thing. 

I think it is not simple; rather, it is very complex, with various ambivalent elements coexisting. The mandala and the Kimbell Art Museum represent this complexity in a three or four dimensional way, and prove that geometric rigour is not necessarily in conflict with the cyclical world. Although Khan’s building has vaults constructed on cycloids, and a mandala is a circle, I would like to emphasise that this is not about merely using circles in plans or sections. 

Good architecture cannot be described in just one word. It is really difficult to express the four-dimensional cyclical world using words. I think it can only be experienced. The designer’s thoughts also go back and forth, return to the origin, and traverse through many unnecessary things. I think that this is how depth is built up; it is a result of complex non-linear thinking.

CONCERNING ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ENVIRONMENT, VILLA MAIREA HAS AN L-SHAPED STRUCTURE THAT ENCLOSES A COURTYARD, SIMILAR TO AALTO’S OWN HOUSE. IN YOUR BOOK „THINKING ABOUT ARCHITECTURE WITH FEELING” YOU SUGGEST THAT HAVING THE COURTYARD OPENED TOWARDS THE SOUTH WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE APPROPRIATE AS IT FOLLOWS THE PATH OF SUNLIGHT.  INSTEAD OF ORIENTING THE HOUSE TOWARDS THE DIRECTION OF THE SUN, HE CREATED A COURTYARD IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE APPROACH THAT ALLOWED HIM TO INTERACT WITH NATURE IN A MORE PROTECTED WAY. WHAT COULD HAVE MOTIVATED AALTO TO PRIORITISE TURNING HIS BACK ON SURROUNDING NATURE?

I think the very reason why Aalto’s architecture is hard to put into words and can’t be explained by simple words is because of the complexity and subtlety of his designs. Two conflicting ways of interacting with nature coexist: on one hand, there is an awareness of continuity with nature and an inclination to take advantage of the local natural features, and on the other hand, there is a need to create a sanctuary where individuals can feel secure in the face of nature’s harshness. The most conspicuous example is his experimental house, which is firmly rooted in the natural ground but encased by tall walls to protect people from nature. I think Aalto has continued to think deeply about such complex approaches to nature and the relationship between humans and their surroundings in his architecture. 

In any case, Finland is cold and unwelcome animals roam, so the importance of blocking off nature is certainly something that needs to be considered.

STANDING IN FRONT OF AALTO’S HOUSE, ONE NOTICES THE ABSENCE OF MANY OPENINGS ON THE STREET-FACING FACADE. THE BLACK-AND-WHITE EXTERIOR MAY SEEM UNWELCOMING AND IMPENETRABLE FROM THIS ANGLE.

Yes, yet let’s not overlook the absence of walls on the perimeter unlike in Japan. There are no walls along the road or at the boundary of the neighbouring property; just a log fence like on a farm, reflecting Finnish land’s continuity. 

Nowadays particularly in Japan, there seems to be a strong desire for possession of land and housing. People often excessively express that an area from here to there is their possession. I think this is a reaction to the scarcity of land and space. 

However, whatever we believe or feel, it is never true that an individual owns 100% of the land. The wind that blows through there belongs to everyone, and the sun that shines on it also belongs to everyone. The soil there is also connected on all sides to the neighbouring plots. It is not easy to draw a line. Underground or above the ground, when you go beyond a certain distance, it is no longer considered owned by anyone. Aalto did not create houses or neighbourhoods that were exclusive, he was very conscious of the continuity of the land. I think this is very evident in his own house.

YOU TOLD ME THAT  “ONLY THOSE WHOSE FEELINGS ARE DIRECTED TOWARD THE FUTURE AND WHOSE IMAGINATIONS ARE FERTILE CAN SEE THE BEAUTY IN THE LIGHT HITTING A BLANK, ABSTRACT WALL.” WHY DID AALTO BREAK THE RULES OF ABSTRACT AESTHETICS IN MODERNISM IN HIS OWN HOUSE?

I think modernism was heavily rooted in a design-centric ideal of architects, and adhered to a notion of human infallibility. There was a sort of human arrogance in assuming that if an ideal blueprint for an ideal city or society were devised, it would be realised exactly as it was intended. Such conceit, which would only nowadays be considered conceited, was the belief that the designer could control everything from a god-like perspective and that it was possible to construct houses and architecture in a similar style anywhere in the world. 

I think they possessed great faith in the strength of human beings. However, even if architecture and the background of the time were created based on that kind of human strength, people age, at one point lose health, power and wealth. There will always come a time when one loses everything.

From this perspective, I feel that Finland has a climate where people come to terms with human vulnerability. It is very cold; there are very few sunny days. In such a harsh environment, we are forced to confront our vulnerability both physically and mentally, often becoming depressed just by being there. The struggle is somehow intrinsic. I sense that Finnish architecture and culture originated from such a situation and I empathise with it greatly. This is likely the reason for the high quality of Finnish architecture, which embraces body and soul in both good and bad times.

Sometimes a country is energetic, and sometimes it is not. When a society loses its energy, the things that were created during times of faith and hope can seem crazy or even terrifying.

IN ONE OF YOUR PAST WRITINGS, I RECALL YOU LAMENTED THE MODERN MOVEMENT’S ERADICATION OF DARKNESS, CAUSING FLAT AND BANAL SPACES. AALTO’S HOUSE IS A PART THE MODERN MOVEMENT ENTHRALLED BY NEATNESS, HYGIENE AND FITNESS. COULD YOU TELL ME HOW MUCH SHADOW OR AMBIGUITY IS PRESENT IN THIS RESIDENCE? WHERE CAN THEY STILL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE BUILDING?

I just mentioned the problems of modernism; however, I also believe that modernism opened up a lot of possibilities that could be used in a very positive way. In Aalto’s work, they are studied and bring many benefits. As an example, big glass panes are a product of modernity – and in Finland specifically, prove beneficial during the wintertime due to the significant amount of sunlight and heat they enable into buildings. I find it fascinating that there is a good fusion of the warmth of handwork, the use of natural materials, and the high performance in functionality by the invention of modernism in the details.

I think that the darkness, or the presence of mystery in Aalto’s work, is evident in the sauna. Many of Aalto’s houses have saunas, which are very traditional in form. These are indigenous, dark, and mystical places that are detached from the spirit of modernism.

AALTO’S RESIDENCE HAS A UNIQUE PECULIARITY THAT MAKES IT DISTINCT FROM OTHER HOMES—IT SERVES AS BOTH A LIVING SPACE AND AN OFFICE. THE LIVING ROOM, LOCATED ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE, WAS FREQUENTLY USED FOR OFFICE MEETINGS. HOW DO YOU ENVISION RESIDENTIAL SPACES INTERACTING WITH WORK AREAS?

I chose Aalto’s own house due to my attraction to his sense of fairness. Aalto’s approach is consistent, no matter if it is his own house or someone else’s. Many architects create highly experimental houses for others while keeping their own houses conservative, but Aalto does not. I feel that he must have a sense of liberalism and fairness. This attitude probably appears in the the integration of home and work spaces.

I think that Alvar Aalto believed in designing all types of buildings based on the principles of housing; namely, that the workplace should also be a home, a nest for humans, and a place where people belong. Whether it is a church, a music hall, a university, or a village hall, the starting point for all of these is indeed a house, that warmly welcomes both the body and soul of people. I believe that Aalto must have understood the significance and value of aspects such as human presence, warmth, and craftsmanship in a harsh environment. In modernism, people often emphasise the efficacy of industrialisation or mass production; however, I believe that while understanding importance of such inventions, Aalto developed details, construction methods, and planning to evoke a sense of human warmth.

As for the integration of home and workspace, I believe it is related to the fact that people cannot live alone. People are a kind of herd animal, and when they gather together, they become warmer. In Finland, where population density is low, not being able to feel the presence of others can be quite frightening.

Under one roof of his house, there is a place for everyone to do something: make dumplings, read, draw architecture, and feel the presence of others. I think that at the time Finnish society was more tolerant and willing to share space more than we are today.

The atmosphere and use of the house in combination with the office are not solely the result of Aalto’s personality. I believe that the presence of his wife, Aino, was also very important at the time. It seems that Aalto had an understanding of gender equality; he believed that women could advance in society and work in architecture no differently than men. This is another example of Aalto’s feature. You can see his socially progressive perspective when you visit that house. It truly tells us about Aalto’s human fairness.

29.12.2022

堀部安嗣： 我的老师益子义弘非常钦佩阿尔托，并告诉我要去芬兰看他的作品。老实说，我初次拜访时，并没有对阿尔托的自宅特别印象深刻；我记得当时想，“这只是一个普通的住宅。” 但是，芬兰的自然风光以及与保守、温和的芬兰人（类似于日本人）的互动，唤起了我对芬兰的深刻共鸣。从那时起，我已经回到这个国家四五次，并最近开始欣赏阿尔托的作品，尤其是他的自宅。我把这归因于我的经历、年龄和对建筑学的逐渐理解。

在您的文章《建筑的敬佩和绝望》(JA 90/2013)中，您提到了一个有趣的轶事：一个国王问一个画家最难画的是什么。画家回答说，画恶魔很容易，但画狗却不容易——我们会立刻意识到熟悉的事物的表现错误。您提到了建筑，说设计一个看起来平静的建筑就像画一只狗。阿尔瓦客阿尔托的住宅更像一只狗，还是更像一个恶魔呢？

我认为随着时间的推移，它发生了变化。可能在最初建造时，它有一个非常像恶魔的外观。然而，由于社会文化和建筑技术的变化，我认为狗的一面变得更加突出了。

在许多优秀的建筑案例中，通常会发生这样的过程；曾经非常激进和前卫的东西很快就会变得柔和、更放松地表现出来。阿尔托的住宅在时间的推移中变得更加狗一般的重要因素之一是，阿尔托了解人的真实体验，包括身体和心灵的体验。

如果建筑的表达方式像恶魔一样不真诚并且与人类身体和心灵的体验相矛盾，它不会持续太久，人们会对其感到疲劳。

一般来说，我认为建筑有两个主要的作用。一种像烟花一样，能够提升人们的精神；建筑的庆祝角色会鼓励和激励人们。另一方面，还必须有像中药一样的建筑，它的效果会随着时间的推移而显现出来，不会对任何身体或心理状况产生过度压力或负担；它是安静的。。

阿尔托的住宅面积不大，体现了高效可持续性的模式，并因此降低了日常能源消耗。这座住宅是否反映了您对于如何建造家庭空间的看法呢？

我认为建筑的大小与人们之间距离的概念密切相关。阿尔托自宅的尺寸是他对于个体间适当距离概念的一个很好的例子。此外，阿尔托不仅有设计建筑内部的能力，还能仔细考虑并创建居住者之间的适当距离，无论是在建筑内部还是周围社区。

例如，玛丽娅别墅是一座大型住宅；然而，在设计时，它的设计着眼于许多人聚集在一个地方时发生的社会动态，以及在该地区田园诗般的氛围中如何保持人与人之间的适当距离。

他并不仅仅考虑数值尺寸，例如平方米，而是将建筑概念化为衡量个体之间、人与自然之间、人造和自然世界之间距离的一种手段。我认为，在这方面阿尔托有着非常精致的平衡感。

合适尺寸的感觉是主观的还是客观的？

这方面的一个例子是京都的一个町屋，门楣非常低，身高约175厘米的人必须弯腰才能进入，这可能对所有体型的个体都不舒适。然而，身高超过180厘米的人也不一定会感到不舒服或不自在。这是因为该空间体现了创造者的真诚和诚实，以及他们的文化模式和尺寸系统。这种氛围在整个城市中都能感受到。我相信，人们可以立即感觉到建筑或其内部的大小适合特定城镇或地区的语境、传统和文化，同时感受到周围区域的规模、道路的宽度和相邻房屋之间的距离感。人类有一定的接受能力来理解陌生的规模或尺寸。

重要的不是180厘米的门高是否具有国际性或普遍性，而是一个具体建筑的氛围和尺度是否与地区、气候、历史和其他相关因素的尺度和氛围相符。如果我们去参观一位阿拉伯石油大亨的住宅，尽管尺寸和尺度不熟悉，但我们很可能会感觉到建造它的人是真诚的，并遵循了从该地区的文化和习俗中得出的尺度感。

与其强求一些东西，不如让自己被这些流动所引导，从超越自己创造的东西中学习。这种谦逊是很重要的。

从一个日本建筑师的角度来看，你对现代西方文化有什么印象和见解？

我认为，一神论和多神论国家的思维方式存在显著的差异。这不是哪种方式更好或更差；这些只是不同的思维方式，影响到人们如何看待自己，以及如何与周围环境建立关系。

我就不能用一神论的方式思考。它已经在我的身体里根深蒂固，在与自然、朋友或任何地方的互动中，有各种存在看护我或支持我。对我来说，几乎不可能摆脱这种思维方式。

我觉得芬兰是一个传统上与我们的东方意识相通的国家。有一种信仰认为自然界中有多种精灵，例如在布里格曼的复活教堂或西伦的奥塔尼米教堂中可以看到这种信仰。庆祝森林中也有神灵存在的感觉让我感到非常平静；当我在西方遇到这种事情时，我会感到欣喜。

这对我们如何思考时间有一定影响。我认为时间有两种主要的流动方式。第一种是线性的，科技不断发展，社会不断进步。第二种是循环的，类似于太阳的升起和落下，没有进步或演化。简而言之，从事科学工作的人倾向于认同历史性的进步轨迹，即技术和人类的智慧在不断提高。例如，十年前的苹果手机功能不如现在的型号。相反，从事人类研究的人不认为莫扎特创作的音乐或者两百多年前陀思妥耶夫斯基所写的文学作品不如当代创作。

我认为我们目前正处于一个西方个体开始质疑线性时间应用于生活各个方面的时代。我希望西方能开始接受时间的周期性概念，让这个世界成为一个人们可以相互连接和共鸣的地方，而不受其国籍或种族的影响。

我特意使用了 "东方 "和 "西方 "这两个词，但如果不使用这样的代名词，说 "线性 "或 "周期性 "会更准确。

虽然你表达了对多神论和芬兰建筑的共情，但你的作品似乎具有强烈的西方几何学严谨性。为什么会这样？

我在美国看到的最东方的建筑是金伯尔美术馆。我感到它比我参观过的任何其他建筑都更具有东方建筑的特点。金伯尔美术馆是一个组织和秩序的领域，但这种秩序或几何形式并不是进化的，而是旋转或循环的；去了某处又回来了。我感到它具有难以想象的深度。

曼陀罗代表循环，但它也使用非常严格的几何学。通过使用其独特的节奏、韵律和几何学中的重复，有一种循环的感觉。我对这种东西非常感兴趣。

我认为它并不简单；相反，它非常复杂，有各种矛盾的元素并存。曼陀罗和金伯尔美术馆以三维或四维的方式表现了这种复杂性，并证明了几何学的严谨性并不一定与周期性世界相冲突。虽然康的建筑有以圆锥线为基础构造的拱顶，曼陀罗是一个圆圈，但我想强调的是，这并不仅仅是在平面或截面中使用圆形。

好的建筑不仅仅是一个词可以描述的。用语言来表达四维循环世界非常困难。我认为只有亲身体验才能理解。设计师的思想也会来回反复，回归原点，并穿越许多不必要的东西。我认为深度就是这样建立起来的，它是复杂的非线性思维的结果。

关于它与环境的关系，玛丽娅别墅采用了L形的结构，围绕着一个庭院，类似于阿尔托的自宅。在您的书《感性思考建筑》中，你建议将庭院朝南打开会更合适，因为它顺着阳光的路径。但是，他没有将房子朝向太阳方向，而是在相反的方向上创造了一个庭院，以更受保护的方式与自然互动。是什么促使阿尔托优先考虑背弃周围的自然？

我认为，阿尔托的建筑之所以难以用简单的语言表达并解释，正是因为他的设计非常复杂而微妙。两种相互冲突的与自然互动的方式并存：一方面，人们意识到与自然的连续性，倾向于利用当地的自然特征；另一方面，人们需要创造一个避难所，让个人在面对自然的严酷时感到安全。最明显的例子是他的实验室住宅，它牢固地扎根于自然地面，但被高墙包围，以保护人们免受自然的侵害。我认为阿尔托在他的建筑中一直在深入思考这种复杂的自然与人类及其周围环境之间的关系。

无论如何，芬兰非常寒冷，不受欢迎的动物也在游荡，所以当然需要考虑阻隔自然的重要性。

站在阿尔托的住宅前，人们注意到面向街道的外墙上没有太多开口。从这个角度看，黑白色的外墙可能会给人一种不受欢迎和难以穿透的印象。

是的，但我们不要忽视周边没有墙，这与日本不同。道路两旁和邻近房产的边界都没有墙；只有像农场一样的原木栅栏，反映了芬兰土地的连续性。

如今尤其是在日本，人们似乎非常渴望拥有土地和住房。他们经常过度表达从这里到那里的区域是他们的所有物。我认为这是对土地和空间稀缺性的一种反应。

然而，无论我们相信或感觉如何，个人永远不可能拥有100%的土地。吹过那里的风属于所有人，照耀那里的阳光也属于所有人。那里的土壤也与邻近地块的所有边缘相连。划定界限并不容易。在地下或地上，当你超过一定距离时，它就不再被认为是任何人的所有物。阿尔托没有创造独占性的房屋或社区，他非常注重土地的连续性。我认为这在他的自宅中非常明显。

你告诉我，"只有那些感情指向未来、想象力丰富的人，才能看到光线照射在空白、抽象的墙壁上的美感。" 为什么阿尔托在他自己的房子里打破了现代主义的抽象美学规则呢？

我认为现代主义在很大程度上根植于建筑师设计为中心的理念，并坚持一种人类无懈可击的观念。人类有一种傲慢，认为如果设计出了一个理想的城市或社会的理想蓝图，它将完全按照其意图实现。这种傲慢，在现在被认为是自负的，他们认为设计者可以从神的角度控制一切，并且有可能在世界任何地方建造类似风格的房屋和建筑。

我认为他们对人类的力量拥有极大的信心。然而，即使建筑和当时的背景基于这种人类力量的构建，人们也会衰老，某一时刻失去健康、力量和财富。人总会有失去一切的时候。

从这个角度来看，我觉得芬兰的气候让人不得不面对人类的脆弱性。那里非常寒冷，阳光很少。在这样一个严酷的环境中，我们被迫面对自己身体和精神上的脆弱性，往往仅仅因为身处其中而变得沮丧。这种挣扎在某种程度上是内在的。我感觉芬兰的建筑和文化源于这种情况，我对此深受共鸣。这可能是芬兰建筑高质量的原因，它在顺境和逆境中都能拥抱身体和灵魂。

一个国家有时是有活力的，有时是没有活力的。当一个社会失去活力时，那些在信仰和希望时期创造的东西会显得疯狂甚至可怕。

在你过去的一篇文章中，我记得你感叹现代运动对黑暗的根除，造成了平坦和平庸的空间。阿尔托的住宅是现代主义运动中迷恋整洁、卫生和健康的一部分。你能告诉我这个住宅里还有多少阴影或模糊性吗？在建筑内部它们还可以在哪里被发现？

我刚才提到了现代主义的问题；但是，我也相信现代主义开辟了很多可能性，可以用非常积极的方式来使用。在阿尔托的作品中，它们得到了研究并带来了很多益处。举个例子，大玻璃板是现代主义的产物——在芬兰，由于它们能使大量的阳光和热量进入建筑物，具体来说，在冬季证明是有益的。我觉得有趣的是，在细节中，现代主义的发明很好地融合了手工制作的温暖、天然材料的应用和功能的高性能。

我认为，在阿尔托的作品中，黑暗或神秘的存在体现在桑拿房中。阿尔托的许多住宅都有桑拿房，它们的形式非常传统。这些都是本土的、黑暗的、神秘的地方，脱离了现代主义的精神。

阿尔托的自宅有一个独特的特点，使其有别于其他住宅，它既是一个生活空间，又是一个办公室。位于房子一楼的起居室，经常被用来进行办公会议。你是如何设想住宅空间与工作区域的互动的？

我选择阿尔托的自宅，是因为我被他的公平感所吸引。阿尔托的设计理念是一致的，不管是他自己的住宅还是别人的。许多建筑师在为别人设计高度实验性的住宅的同时，却保持自己的住宅较为保守，但阿尔托没有这样做。我觉得，他一定有一种自由主义和公平的意识。这种态度可能出现在家庭和工作空间的融合上。

我认为阿尔瓦-阿尔托相信以住房原则设计所有类型的建筑物；即工作场所也应该是一个家，一个人类居住的巢穴，是人们归属的地方。无论是教堂、音乐厅、大学还是村委会，所有这些建筑的起点都是一个温暖地欢迎人的身心的家。我相信，阿尔托一定明白，在恶劣的环境中，人的存在、温暖和工艺等方面的意义和价值。在现代主义中，人们常常强调工业化或大规模生产的功效；然而，我相信，在理解这些发明的重要性的同时，阿尔托也开发了细节、施工方法和规划，以唤起人类的温暖感。

至于家庭和工作空间的融合，我认为这与人们不能孤单生活的事实有关。人是一种群居动物，当他们聚集在一起时，会变得更加温暖。在人口密度较低的芬兰，无法感受到他人的存在可能是相当可怕的。

在他家的一个屋檐下，每个人都有一个地方可以做一些事情：包饺子、读书、画建筑图，感受他人的存在。我认为，当时的芬兰社会比我们今天更宽容，更愿意分享空间。

住宅的氛围和使用与办公室的结合，并不完全是阿尔托的个性使然。我相信，他的妻子艾诺的存在在当时也是非常重要的。阿尔托似乎有性别平等的意识，他相信女性可以像男性一样在社会和建筑业中取得进展。这是阿尔托的另一个特点。当你参观那座住宅时，你可以看到他社会进步的观点。它真正告诉我们阿尔托的人道主义公平。

2022年12月29日

Yasushi Horibe: My teacher, Yoshihiro Masuko, held a great admiration for Aalto and told me to travel to Finland to see his works. To be honest, upon my initial visit, I was not particularly impressed with Aalto’s own house; I remember thinking, “It’s just an average house.” However, the natural features of Finland and the interaction with the reserved and gentle Finnish people – akin to the Japanese – evoked a deep sense of personal empathy towards Finland. Since then, I have returned to the country on four or five occasions and recently, come to appreciate Aalto’s work, particularly his own house. I attribute this to my experiences, my age, and my growing understanding of architecture.

IN YOUR TEXT (“MY ADMIRATION AND DESPAIR FOR ARCHITECTURE IN JA 90/2013”), YOU NOTED AN INTERESTING ANECDOTE: A KING ASKING A PAINTER WHAT WAS THE MOST DIFFICULT THING TO PAINT. THE PAINTER REPLIED THAT IT WAS EASY TO PAINT A DEMON BUT NOT A DOG—WE WOULD IMMEDIATELY RECOGNISE MISTAKES IN THE REPRESENTATIONS OF WHAT WE KNOW VERY WELL. YOU ALLUDE TO ARCHITECTURE, SAYING THAT DESIGNING A CALM-LOOKING BUILDING IS LIKE PAINTING A DOG. IS ALVAR AALTO’S HOUSE MORE LIKE A DOG OR RATHER LIKE A DEMON?

I think it has changed over time. Probably, when it was initially constructed, there was a very demon-like appearance to it. However, due to changes in both social and architectural techniques and culture, I think the dog-like aspect became more prominent. 

In many cases of good architecture, this process usually happens; what once was very radical and avant-garde soon becomes soft and more relaxed in expression. An important factor in Aalto’s house becoming dog-like with time is that Aalto understood a life-size person’s body and mind. 

If the expression is demon-like and insincere to the human body and mind, it will not last long, and people will become fatigued with it.

Generally speaking, I think architecture has two primary roles. One is like launching fireworks, which raises people’s spirits; a celebratory role of architecture that encourages and inspires. On the other hand, there must also be architecture like Chinese herbal medicine, which shows its effects over time and which is not overpowering or burdensome to any physical or mental condition; it is quiet.

AALTO’S RESIDENCE IS MODEST IN ITS SIZE, EMBODYING A MODEL OF HIGHLY EFFICIENT SUSTAINABILITY, AND CONSEQUENTLY LOWER DAILY ENERGY EXPENDITURE. DOES THIS HOUSE REFLECT YOUR VIEWS ON HOW DOMESTIC SPACES SHOULD BE BUILT?

I think that the size of architecture is intimately tied to the concept of distance from others. The dimensions of Aalto’s own house are a fitting example of his ideas about the appropriate distance between individuals. Furthermore, Aalto had a keen ability to not only design the interiors of buildings but also carefully consider and create appropriate distances between the inhabitants, whether they be within the building or in the surrounding community. 

For example, the Villa Mairea is a large house; however, it was designed with an eye to the social dynamics that occur when many people congregate in one place, and how the distance between people should be maintained in the idyllic atmosphere of the area. 

Rather than considering only numerical measurements, such as square meters, he conceptualized architecture as a means of measuring the distance between individuals, between people and nature, and between the man-made and natural world. I think Aalto had a very refined sense of balance in that regard. 

IS THE FEELING OF A SUITABLE SIZE SUBJECTIVE OR OBJECTIVE? 

An example of this is a machiya townhouse in Kyoto, where the lintel is so low that a person of about 175 cm in height must bend to enter, which may not be comfortable for individuals of all body types. However, it is not necessarily true that those taller than 180 cm would feel uncomfortable or ill-at-ease. This is because the space embodies the sincerity and honesty of those who created it, along with their cultural patterns and systems of sizes. This atmosphere can be sensed throughout the entire city. I believe that humans can instantly sense that the size of the building or its interior is appropriate for the context, tradition, and culture of that particular town or area, while feeling the scale of surrounding area, the width of roads, and the sense of distance between neighbouring houses. Humans have a certain receptivity to understand unfamiliar scale or size.

What is important is not whether the door height of 180 cm is international or universal, but rather, whether the atmosphere and scale of a specific building align with the scale and atmosphere of the region, climate, history, and other relevant factors. If we were to visit the house of an Arab oil tycoon, despite the unfamiliar dimensions and scale, we would likely sense that the people who built it were sincere and followed the sense of scale derived from the culture and customs of the region. 

Instead of forcing something, it is better to let oneself be guided by those flows and learn from something beyond one’s creation. This kind of humility is important.

FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF A JAPANESE ARCHITECT, WHAT ARE YOUR IMPRESSIONS AND INSIGHTS ON MODERN WESTERN CULTURE?

I believe that there is a significant difference between the ways of thinking prevalent in monotheistic and polytheistic countries. It is not about which one is better or worse; these are simply different ways of thinking that affect how people view themselves and how they build relationships with their surroundings.

I just can’t think in a monotheistic way. It has already been ingrained in my body that there are various existences that watch over me or support me in the interaction with nature, friends, or in any place. For me, it is almost impossible to get over this way of thinking. 

I feel that Finland is a country that traditionally shares our Eastern sense. There is a belief that there are multiple spirits in nature, and examples of this can be seen in Bryggman’s Resurrection Chapel or Siren’s Otaniemi Chapel. Celebrating the feeling that there is also a god in the forest makes me feel very calm; I find joy when I come across such things in the West.

It has a certain impact on how we think of time. I believe there are two primary ways in which time flows. The first is linear, with technology continually advancing and society progressing. The second is cyclical, akin to the rising and setting of the sun, with no progression or evolution. To simplify, people working in sciences tend to subscribe to the idea of a historical trajectory of progress, wherein technology and human intelligence are constantly improving. For instance, an iPhone from 10 years ago is not as functional as the present-day models. Conversely, people in human studies do not believe that a piece of music composed by Mozart or a literary work written by Dostoevsky over 200 years ago is inferior to contemporary creations. 

I believe that we are currently in an era where individuals in the West are beginning to question this linear manner of time applied to all aspects of life. I hope that the West will begin to embrace the cyclical idea of time and that the world will become a place where individuals can connect and resonate with one another regardless of their nationalities or races.

I am using the terms “East” and “West” deliberately, but it would be more accurate to say “linear” or “cyclical” without using such pronouns.

WHILE EXPRESSING SYMPATHY FOR POLYTHEISM AND FINNISH ARCHITECTURE, YOUR WORKS SEEM TO HAVE STRONG WESTERN RIGOUR OF GEOMETRY. WHY IS THAT?

The most Eastern thing I saw in America was the Kimbell Art Museum. I felt that it was a far more Eastern building than any other building I had visited. The Kimbell Art Museum is a realm of organisation and order, but that order or geometry is not evolutionary, but rather rotational or cyclical; going somewhere and coming back again. I felt that it had an incredible profundity. 

A mandala represents circularity, but it also uses very strict geometry. There is a sense of circulation by using its unique tempo, rhythm, and repetition within the geometry. I am very interested in that kind of thing. 

I think it is not simple; rather, it is very complex, with various ambivalent elements coexisting. The mandala and the Kimbell Art Museum represent this complexity in a three or four dimensional way, and prove that geometric rigour is not necessarily in conflict with the cyclical world. Although Khan’s building has vaults constructed on cycloids, and a mandala is a circle, I would like to emphasise that this is not about merely using circles in plans or sections. 

Good architecture cannot be described in just one word. It is really difficult to express the four-dimensional cyclical world using words. I think it can only be experienced. The designer’s thoughts also go back and forth, return to the origin, and traverse through many unnecessary things. I think that this is how depth is built up; it is a result of complex non-linear thinking.

CONCERNING ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ENVIRONMENT, VILLA MAIREA HAS AN L-SHAPED STRUCTURE THAT ENCLOSES A COURTYARD, SIMILAR TO AALTO’S OWN HOUSE. IN YOUR BOOK „THINKING ABOUT ARCHITECTURE WITH FEELING” YOU SUGGEST THAT HAVING THE COURTYARD OPENED TOWARDS THE SOUTH WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE APPROPRIATE AS IT FOLLOWS THE PATH OF SUNLIGHT.  INSTEAD OF ORIENTING THE HOUSE TOWARDS THE DIRECTION OF THE SUN, HE CREATED A COURTYARD IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE APPROACH THAT ALLOWED HIM TO INTERACT WITH NATURE IN A MORE PROTECTED WAY. WHAT COULD HAVE MOTIVATED AALTO TO PRIORITISE TURNING HIS BACK ON SURROUNDING NATURE?

I think the very reason why Aalto’s architecture is hard to put into words and can’t be explained by simple words is because of the complexity and subtlety of his designs. Two conflicting ways of interacting with nature coexist: on one hand, there is an awareness of continuity with nature and an inclination to take advantage of the local natural features, and on the other hand, there is a need to create a sanctuary where individuals can feel secure in the face of nature’s harshness. The most conspicuous example is his experimental house, which is firmly rooted in the natural ground but encased by tall walls to protect people from nature. I think Aalto has continued to think deeply about such complex approaches to nature and the relationship between humans and their surroundings in his architecture. 

In any case, Finland is cold and unwelcome animals roam, so the importance of blocking off nature is certainly something that needs to be considered.

STANDING IN FRONT OF AALTO’S HOUSE, ONE NOTICES THE ABSENCE OF MANY OPENINGS ON THE STREET-FACING FACADE. THE BLACK-AND-WHITE EXTERIOR MAY SEEM UNWELCOMING AND IMPENETRABLE FROM THIS ANGLE.

Yes, yet let’s not overlook the absence of walls on the perimeter unlike in Japan. There are no walls along the road or at the boundary of the neighbouring property; just a log fence like on a farm, reflecting Finnish land’s continuity. 

Nowadays particularly in Japan, there seems to be a strong desire for possession of land and housing. People often excessively express that an area from here to there is their possession. I think this is a reaction to the scarcity of land and space. 

However, whatever we believe or feel, it is never true that an individual owns 100% of the land. The wind that blows through there belongs to everyone, and the sun that shines on it also belongs to everyone. The soil there is also connected on all sides to the neighbouring plots. It is not easy to draw a line. Underground or above the ground, when you go beyond a certain distance, it is no longer considered owned by anyone. Aalto did not create houses or neighbourhoods that were exclusive, he was very conscious of the continuity of the land. I think this is very evident in his own house.

YOU TOLD ME THAT  “ONLY THOSE WHOSE FEELINGS ARE DIRECTED TOWARD THE FUTURE AND WHOSE IMAGINATIONS ARE FERTILE CAN SEE THE BEAUTY IN THE LIGHT HITTING A BLANK, ABSTRACT WALL.” WHY DID AALTO BREAK THE RULES OF ABSTRACT AESTHETICS IN MODERNISM IN HIS OWN HOUSE?

I think modernism was heavily rooted in a design-centric ideal of architects, and adhered to a notion of human infallibility. There was a sort of human arrogance in assuming that if an ideal blueprint for an ideal city or society were devised, it would be realised exactly as it was intended. Such conceit, which would only nowadays be considered conceited, was the belief that the designer could control everything from a god-like perspective and that it was possible to construct houses and architecture in a similar style anywhere in the world. 

I think they possessed great faith in the strength of human beings. However, even if architecture and the background of the time were created based on that kind of human strength, people age, at one point lose health, power and wealth. There will always come a time when one loses everything.

From this perspective, I feel that Finland has a climate where people come to terms with human vulnerability. It is very cold; there are very few sunny days. In such a harsh environment, we are forced to confront our vulnerability both physically and mentally, often becoming depressed just by being there. The struggle is somehow intrinsic. I sense that Finnish architecture and culture originated from such a situation and I empathise with it greatly. This is likely the reason for the high quality of Finnish architecture, which embraces body and soul in both good and bad times.

Sometimes a country is energetic, and sometimes it is not. When a society loses its energy, the things that were created during times of faith and hope can seem crazy or even terrifying.

IN ONE OF YOUR PAST WRITINGS, I RECALL YOU LAMENTED THE MODERN MOVEMENT’S ERADICATION OF DARKNESS, CAUSING FLAT AND BANAL SPACES. AALTO’S HOUSE IS A PART THE MODERN MOVEMENT ENTHRALLED BY NEATNESS, HYGIENE AND FITNESS. COULD YOU TELL ME HOW MUCH SHADOW OR AMBIGUITY IS PRESENT IN THIS RESIDENCE? WHERE CAN THEY STILL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE BUILDING?

I just mentioned the problems of modernism; however, I also believe that modernism opened up a lot of possibilities that could be used in a very positive way. In Aalto’s work, they are studied and bring many benefits. As an example, big glass panes are a product of modernity – and in Finland specifically, prove beneficial during the wintertime due to the significant amount of sunlight and heat they enable into buildings. I find it fascinating that there is a good fusion of the warmth of handwork, the use of natural materials, and the high performance in functionality by the invention of modernism in the details.

I think that the darkness, or the presence of mystery in Aalto’s work, is evident in the sauna. Many of Aalto’s houses have saunas, which are very traditional in form. These are indigenous, dark, and mystical places that are detached from the spirit of modernism.

AALTO’S RESIDENCE HAS A UNIQUE PECULIARITY THAT MAKES IT DISTINCT FROM OTHER HOMES—IT SERVES AS BOTH A LIVING SPACE AND AN OFFICE. THE LIVING ROOM, LOCATED ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE, WAS FREQUENTLY USED FOR OFFICE MEETINGS. HOW DO YOU ENVISION RESIDENTIAL SPACES INTERACTING WITH WORK AREAS?

I chose Aalto’s own house due to my attraction to his sense of fairness. Aalto’s approach is consistent, no matter if it is his own house or someone else’s. Many architects create highly experimental houses for others while keeping their own houses conservative, but Aalto does not. I feel that he must have a sense of liberalism and fairness. This attitude probably appears in the the integration of home and work spaces.

I think that Alvar Aalto believed in designing all types of buildings based on the principles of housing; namely, that the workplace should also be a home, a nest for humans, and a place where people belong. Whether it is a church, a music hall, a university, or a village hall, the starting point for all of these is indeed a house, that warmly welcomes both the body and soul of people. I believe that Aalto must have understood the significance and value of aspects such as human presence, warmth, and craftsmanship in a harsh environment. In modernism, people often emphasise the efficacy of industrialisation or mass production; however, I believe that while understanding importance of such inventions, Aalto developed details, construction methods, and planning to evoke a sense of human warmth.

As for the integration of home and workspace, I believe it is related to the fact that people cannot live alone. People are a kind of herd animal, and when they gather together, they become warmer. In Finland, where population density is low, not being able to feel the presence of others can be quite frightening.

Under one roof of his house, there is a place for everyone to do something: make dumplings, read, draw architecture, and feel the presence of others. I think that at the time Finnish society was more tolerant and willing to share space more than we are today.

The atmosphere and use of the house in combination with the office are not solely the result of Aalto’s personality. I believe that the presence of his wife, Aino, was also very important at the time. It seems that Aalto had an understanding of gender equality; he believed that women could advance in society and work in architecture no differently than men. This is another example of Aalto’s feature. You can see his socially progressive perspective when you visit that house. It truly tells us about Aalto’s human fairness.

29.12.2022

堀部安嗣： 我的老师益子义弘非常钦佩阿尔托，并告诉我要去芬兰看他的作品。老实说，我初次拜访时，并没有对阿尔托的自宅特别印象深刻；我记得当时想，“这只是一个普通的住宅。” 但是，芬兰的自然风光以及与保守、温和的芬兰人（类似于日本人）的互动，唤起了我对芬兰的深刻共鸣。从那时起，我已经回到这个国家四五次，并最近开始欣赏阿尔托的作品，尤其是他的自宅。我把这归因于我的经历、年龄和对建筑学的逐渐理解。

在您的文章《建筑的敬佩和绝望》(JA 90/2013)中，您提到了一个有趣的轶事：一个国王问一个画家最难画的是什么。画家回答说，画恶魔很容易，但画狗却不容易——我们会立刻意识到熟悉的事物的表现错误。您提到了建筑，说设计一个看起来平静的建筑就像画一只狗。阿尔瓦客阿尔托的住宅更像一只狗，还是更像一个恶魔呢？

我认为随着时间的推移，它发生了变化。可能在最初建造时，它有一个非常像恶魔的外观。然而，由于社会文化和建筑技术的变化，我认为狗的一面变得更加突出了。

在许多优秀的建筑案例中，通常会发生这样的过程；曾经非常激进和前卫的东西很快就会变得柔和、更放松地表现出来。阿尔托的住宅在时间的推移中变得更加狗一般的重要因素之一是，阿尔托了解人的真实体验，包括身体和心灵的体验。

如果建筑的表达方式像恶魔一样不真诚并且与人类身体和心灵的体验相矛盾，它不会持续太久，人们会对其感到疲劳。

一般来说，我认为建筑有两个主要的作用。一种像烟花一样，能够提升人们的精神；建筑的庆祝角色会鼓励和激励人们。另一方面，还必须有像中药一样的建筑，它的效果会随着时间的推移而显现出来，不会对任何身体或心理状况产生过度压力或负担；它是安静的。。

阿尔托的住宅面积不大，体现了高效可持续性的模式，并因此降低了日常能源消耗。这座住宅是否反映了您对于如何建造家庭空间的看法呢？

我认为建筑的大小与人们之间距离的概念密切相关。阿尔托自宅的尺寸是他对于个体间适当距离概念的一个很好的例子。此外，阿尔托不仅有设计建筑内部的能力，还能仔细考虑并创建居住者之间的适当距离，无论是在建筑内部还是周围社区。

例如，玛丽娅别墅是一座大型住宅；然而，在设计时，它的设计着眼于许多人聚集在一个地方时发生的社会动态，以及在该地区田园诗般的氛围中如何保持人与人之间的适当距离。

他并不仅仅考虑数值尺寸，例如平方米，而是将建筑概念化为衡量个体之间、人与自然之间、人造和自然世界之间距离的一种手段。我认为，在这方面阿尔托有着非常精致的平衡感。

合适尺寸的感觉是主观的还是客观的？

这方面的一个例子是京都的一个町屋，门楣非常低，身高约175厘米的人必须弯腰才能进入，这可能对所有体型的个体都不舒适。然而，身高超过180厘米的人也不一定会感到不舒服或不自在。这是因为该空间体现了创造者的真诚和诚实，以及他们的文化模式和尺寸系统。这种氛围在整个城市中都能感受到。我相信，人们可以立即感觉到建筑或其内部的大小适合特定城镇或地区的语境、传统和文化，同时感受到周围区域的规模、道路的宽度和相邻房屋之间的距离感。人类有一定的接受能力来理解陌生的规模或尺寸。

重要的不是180厘米的门高是否具有国际性或普遍性，而是一个具体建筑的氛围和尺度是否与地区、气候、历史和其他相关因素的尺度和氛围相符。如果我们去参观一位阿拉伯石油大亨的住宅，尽管尺寸和尺度不熟悉，但我们很可能会感觉到建造它的人是真诚的，并遵循了从该地区的文化和习俗中得出的尺度感。

与其强求一些东西，不如让自己被这些流动所引导，从超越自己创造的东西中学习。这种谦逊是很重要的。

从一个日本建筑师的角度来看，你对现代西方文化有什么印象和见解？

我认为，一神论和多神论国家的思维方式存在显著的差异。这不是哪种方式更好或更差；这些只是不同的思维方式，影响到人们如何看待自己，以及如何与周围环境建立关系。

我就不能用一神论的方式思考。它已经在我的身体里根深蒂固，在与自然、朋友或任何地方的互动中，有各种存在看护我或支持我。对我来说，几乎不可能摆脱这种思维方式。

我觉得芬兰是一个传统上与我们的东方意识相通的国家。有一种信仰认为自然界中有多种精灵，例如在布里格曼的复活教堂或西伦的奥塔尼米教堂中可以看到这种信仰。庆祝森林中也有神灵存在的感觉让我感到非常平静；当我在西方遇到这种事情时，我会感到欣喜。

这对我们如何思考时间有一定影响。我认为时间有两种主要的流动方式。第一种是线性的，科技不断发展，社会不断进步。第二种是循环的，类似于太阳的升起和落下，没有进步或演化。简而言之，从事科学工作的人倾向于认同历史性的进步轨迹，即技术和人类的智慧在不断提高。例如，十年前的苹果手机功能不如现在的型号。相反，从事人类研究的人不认为莫扎特创作的音乐或者两百多年前陀思妥耶夫斯基所写的文学作品不如当代创作。

我认为我们目前正处于一个西方个体开始质疑线性时间应用于生活各个方面的时代。我希望西方能开始接受时间的周期性概念，让这个世界成为一个人们可以相互连接和共鸣的地方，而不受其国籍或种族的影响。

我特意使用了 "东方 "和 "西方 "这两个词，但如果不使用这样的代名词，说 "线性 "或 "周期性 "会更准确。

虽然你表达了对多神论和芬兰建筑的共情，但你的作品似乎具有强烈的西方几何学严谨性。为什么会这样？

我在美国看到的最东方的建筑是金伯尔美术馆。我感到它比我参观过的任何其他建筑都更具有东方建筑的特点。金伯尔美术馆是一个组织和秩序的领域，但这种秩序或几何形式并不是进化的，而是旋转或循环的；去了某处又回来了。我感到它具有难以想象的深度。

曼陀罗代表循环，但它也使用非常严格的几何学。通过使用其独特的节奏、韵律和几何学中的重复，有一种循环的感觉。我对这种东西非常感兴趣。

我认为它并不简单；相反，它非常复杂，有各种矛盾的元素并存。曼陀罗和金伯尔美术馆以三维或四维的方式表现了这种复杂性，并证明了几何学的严谨性并不一定与周期性世界相冲突。虽然康的建筑有以圆锥线为基础构造的拱顶，曼陀罗是一个圆圈，但我想强调的是，这并不仅仅是在平面或截面中使用圆形。

好的建筑不仅仅是一个词可以描述的。用语言来表达四维循环世界非常困难。我认为只有亲身体验才能理解。设计师的思想也会来回反复，回归原点，并穿越许多不必要的东西。我认为深度就是这样建立起来的，它是复杂的非线性思维的结果。

关于它与环境的关系，玛丽娅别墅采用了L形的结构，围绕着一个庭院，类似于阿尔托的自宅。在您的书《感性思考建筑》中，你建议将庭院朝南打开会更合适，因为它顺着阳光的路径。但是，他没有将房子朝向太阳方向，而是在相反的方向上创造了一个庭院，以更受保护的方式与自然互动。是什么促使阿尔托优先考虑背弃周围的自然？

我认为，阿尔托的建筑之所以难以用简单的语言表达并解释，正是因为他的设计非常复杂而微妙。两种相互冲突的与自然互动的方式并存：一方面，人们意识到与自然的连续性，倾向于利用当地的自然特征；另一方面，人们需要创造一个避难所，让个人在面对自然的严酷时感到安全。最明显的例子是他的实验室住宅，它牢固地扎根于自然地面，但被高墙包围，以保护人们免受自然的侵害。我认为阿尔托在他的建筑中一直在深入思考这种复杂的自然与人类及其周围环境之间的关系。

无论如何，芬兰非常寒冷，不受欢迎的动物也在游荡，所以当然需要考虑阻隔自然的重要性。

站在阿尔托的住宅前，人们注意到面向街道的外墙上没有太多开口。从这个角度看，黑白色的外墙可能会给人一种不受欢迎和难以穿透的印象。

是的，但我们不要忽视周边没有墙，这与日本不同。道路两旁和邻近房产的边界都没有墙；只有像农场一样的原木栅栏，反映了芬兰土地的连续性。

如今尤其是在日本，人们似乎非常渴望拥有土地和住房。他们经常过度表达从这里到那里的区域是他们的所有物。我认为这是对土地和空间稀缺性的一种反应。

然而，无论我们相信或感觉如何，个人永远不可能拥有100%的土地。吹过那里的风属于所有人，照耀那里的阳光也属于所有人。那里的土壤也与邻近地块的所有边缘相连。划定界限并不容易。在地下或地上，当你超过一定距离时，它就不再被认为是任何人的所有物。阿尔托没有创造独占性的房屋或社区，他非常注重土地的连续性。我认为这在他的自宅中非常明显。

你告诉我，"只有那些感情指向未来、想象力丰富的人，才能看到光线照射在空白、抽象的墙壁上的美感。" 为什么阿尔托在他自己的房子里打破了现代主义的抽象美学规则呢？

我认为现代主义在很大程度上根植于建筑师设计为中心的理念，并坚持一种人类无懈可击的观念。人类有一种傲慢，认为如果设计出了一个理想的城市或社会的理想蓝图，它将完全按照其意图实现。这种傲慢，在现在被认为是自负的，他们认为设计者可以从神的角度控制一切，并且有可能在世界任何地方建造类似风格的房屋和建筑。

我认为他们对人类的力量拥有极大的信心。然而，即使建筑和当时的背景基于这种人类力量的构建，人们也会衰老，某一时刻失去健康、力量和财富。人总会有失去一切的时候。

从这个角度来看，我觉得芬兰的气候让人不得不面对人类的脆弱性。那里非常寒冷，阳光很少。在这样一个严酷的环境中，我们被迫面对自己身体和精神上的脆弱性，往往仅仅因为身处其中而变得沮丧。这种挣扎在某种程度上是内在的。我感觉芬兰的建筑和文化源于这种情况，我对此深受共鸣。这可能是芬兰建筑高质量的原因，它在顺境和逆境中都能拥抱身体和灵魂。

一个国家有时是有活力的，有时是没有活力的。当一个社会失去活力时，那些在信仰和希望时期创造的东西会显得疯狂甚至可怕。

在你过去的一篇文章中，我记得你感叹现代运动对黑暗的根除，造成了平坦和平庸的空间。阿尔托的住宅是现代主义运动中迷恋整洁、卫生和健康的一部分。你能告诉我这个住宅里还有多少阴影或模糊性吗？在建筑内部它们还可以在哪里被发现？

我刚才提到了现代主义的问题；但是，我也相信现代主义开辟了很多可能性，可以用非常积极的方式来使用。在阿尔托的作品中，它们得到了研究并带来了很多益处。举个例子，大玻璃板是现代主义的产物——在芬兰，由于它们能使大量的阳光和热量进入建筑物，具体来说，在冬季证明是有益的。我觉得有趣的是，在细节中，现代主义的发明很好地融合了手工制作的温暖、天然材料的应用和功能的高性能。

我认为，在阿尔托的作品中，黑暗或神秘的存在体现在桑拿房中。阿尔托的许多住宅都有桑拿房，它们的形式非常传统。这些都是本土的、黑暗的、神秘的地方，脱离了现代主义的精神。

阿尔托的自宅有一个独特的特点，使其有别于其他住宅，它既是一个生活空间，又是一个办公室。位于房子一楼的起居室，经常被用来进行办公会议。你是如何设想住宅空间与工作区域的互动的？

我选择阿尔托的自宅，是因为我被他的公平感所吸引。阿尔托的设计理念是一致的，不管是他自己的住宅还是别人的。许多建筑师在为别人设计高度实验性的住宅的同时，却保持自己的住宅较为保守，但阿尔托没有这样做。我觉得，他一定有一种自由主义和公平的意识。这种态度可能出现在家庭和工作空间的融合上。

我认为阿尔瓦-阿尔托相信以住房原则设计所有类型的建筑物；即工作场所也应该是一个家，一个人类居住的巢穴，是人们归属的地方。无论是教堂、音乐厅、大学还是村委会，所有这些建筑的起点都是一个温暖地欢迎人的身心的家。我相信，阿尔托一定明白，在恶劣的环境中，人的存在、温暖和工艺等方面的意义和价值。在现代主义中，人们常常强调工业化或大规模生产的功效；然而，我相信，在理解这些发明的重要性的同时，阿尔托也开发了细节、施工方法和规划，以唤起人类的温暖感。

至于家庭和工作空间的融合，我认为这与人们不能孤单生活的事实有关。人是一种群居动物，当他们聚集在一起时，会变得更加温暖。在人口密度较低的芬兰，无法感受到他人的存在可能是相当可怕的。

在他家的一个屋檐下，每个人都有一个地方可以做一些事情：包饺子、读书、画建筑图，感受他人的存在。我认为，当时的芬兰社会比我们今天更宽容，更愿意分享空间。

住宅的氛围和使用与办公室的结合，并不完全是阿尔托的个性使然。我相信，他的妻子艾诺的存在在当时也是非常重要的。阿尔托似乎有性别平等的意识，他相信女性可以像男性一样在社会和建筑业中取得进展。这是阿尔托的另一个特点。当你参观那座住宅时，你可以看到他社会进步的观点。它真正告诉我们阿尔托的人道主义公平。

2022年12月29日

Yasushi Horibe: My teacher, Yoshihiro Masuko, held a great admiration for Aalto and told me to travel to Finland to see his works. To be honest, upon my initial visit, I was not particularly impressed with Aalto’s own house; I remember thinking, “It’s just an average house.” However, the natural features of Finland and the interaction with the reserved and gentle Finnish people – akin to the Japanese – evoked a deep sense of personal empathy towards Finland. Since then, I have returned to the country on four or five occasions and recently, come to appreciate Aalto’s work, particularly his own house. I attribute this to my experiences, my age, and my growing understanding of architecture.

IN YOUR TEXT (“MY ADMIRATION AND DESPAIR FOR ARCHITECTURE IN JA 90/2013”), YOU NOTED AN INTERESTING ANECDOTE: A KING ASKING A PAINTER WHAT WAS THE MOST DIFFICULT THING TO PAINT. THE PAINTER REPLIED THAT IT WAS EASY TO PAINT A DEMON BUT NOT A DOG—WE WOULD IMMEDIATELY RECOGNISE MISTAKES IN THE REPRESENTATIONS OF WHAT WE KNOW VERY WELL. YOU ALLUDE TO ARCHITECTURE, SAYING THAT DESIGNING A CALM-LOOKING BUILDING IS LIKE PAINTING A DOG. IS ALVAR AALTO’S HOUSE MORE LIKE A DOG OR RATHER LIKE A DEMON?

I think it has changed over time. Probably, when it was initially constructed, there was a very demon-like appearance to it. However, due to changes in both social and architectural techniques and culture, I think the dog-like aspect became more prominent. 

In many cases of good architecture, this process usually happens; what once was very radical and avant-garde soon becomes soft and more relaxed in expression. An important factor in Aalto’s house becoming dog-like with time is that Aalto understood a life-size person’s body and mind. 

If the expression is demon-like and insincere to the human body and mind, it will not last long, and people will become fatigued with it.

Generally speaking, I think architecture has two primary roles. One is like launching fireworks, which raises people’s spirits; a celebratory role of architecture that encourages and inspires. On the other hand, there must also be architecture like Chinese herbal medicine, which shows its effects over time and which is not overpowering or burdensome to any physical or mental condition; it is quiet.

AALTO’S RESIDENCE IS MODEST IN ITS SIZE, EMBODYING A MODEL OF HIGHLY EFFICIENT SUSTAINABILITY, AND CONSEQUENTLY LOWER DAILY ENERGY EXPENDITURE. DOES THIS HOUSE REFLECT YOUR VIEWS ON HOW DOMESTIC SPACES SHOULD BE BUILT?

I think that the size of architecture is intimately tied to the concept of distance from others. The dimensions of Aalto’s own house are a fitting example of his ideas about the appropriate distance between individuals. Furthermore, Aalto had a keen ability to not only design the interiors of buildings but also carefully consider and create appropriate distances between the inhabitants, whether they be within the building or in the surrounding community. 

For example, the Villa Mairea is a large house; however, it was designed with an eye to the social dynamics that occur when many people congregate in one place, and how the distance between people should be maintained in the idyllic atmosphere of the area. 

Rather than considering only numerical measurements, such as square meters, he conceptualized architecture as a means of measuring the distance between individuals, between people and nature, and between the man-made and natural world. I think Aalto had a very refined sense of balance in that regard. 

IS THE FEELING OF A SUITABLE SIZE SUBJECTIVE OR OBJECTIVE? 

An example of this is a machiya townhouse in Kyoto, where the lintel is so low that a person of about 175 cm in height must bend to enter, which may not be comfortable for individuals of all body types. However, it is not necessarily true that those taller than 180 cm would feel uncomfortable or ill-at-ease. This is because the space embodies the sincerity and honesty of those who created it, along with their cultural patterns and systems of sizes. This atmosphere can be sensed throughout the entire city. I believe that humans can instantly sense that the size of the building or its interior is appropriate for the context, tradition, and culture of that particular town or area, while feeling the scale of surrounding area, the width of roads, and the sense of distance between neighbouring houses. Humans have a certain receptivity to understand unfamiliar scale or size.

What is important is not whether the door height of 180 cm is international or universal, but rather, whether the atmosphere and scale of a specific building align with the scale and atmosphere of the region, climate, history, and other relevant factors. If we were to visit the house of an Arab oil tycoon, despite the unfamiliar dimensions and scale, we would likely sense that the people who built it were sincere and followed the sense of scale derived from the culture and customs of the region. 

Instead of forcing something, it is better to let oneself be guided by those flows and learn from something beyond one’s creation. This kind of humility is important.

FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF A JAPANESE ARCHITECT, WHAT ARE YOUR IMPRESSIONS AND INSIGHTS ON MODERN WESTERN CULTURE?

I believe that there is a significant difference between the ways of thinking prevalent in monotheistic and polytheistic countries. It is not about which one is better or worse; these are simply different ways of thinking that affect how people view themselves and how they build relationships with their surroundings.

I just can’t think in a monotheistic way. It has already been ingrained in my body that there are various existences that watch over me or support me in the interaction with nature, friends, or in any place. For me, it is almost impossible to get over this way of thinking. 

I feel that Finland is a country that traditionally shares our Eastern sense. There is a belief that there are multiple spirits in nature, and examples of this can be seen in Bryggman’s Resurrection Chapel or Siren’s Otaniemi Chapel. Celebrating the feeling that there is also a god in the forest makes me feel very calm; I find joy when I come across such things in the West.

It has a certain impact on how we think of time. I believe there are two primary ways in which time flows. The first is linear, with technology continually advancing and society progressing. The second is cyclical, akin to the rising and setting of the sun, with no progression or evolution. To simplify, people working in sciences tend to subscribe to the idea of a historical trajectory of progress, wherein technology and human intelligence are constantly improving. For instance, an iPhone from 10 years ago is not as functional as the present-day models. Conversely, people in human studies do not believe that a piece of music composed by Mozart or a literary work written by Dostoevsky over 200 years ago is inferior to contemporary creations. 

I believe that we are currently in an era where individuals in the West are beginning to question this linear manner of time applied to all aspects of life. I hope that the West will begin to embrace the cyclical idea of time and that the world will become a place where individuals can connect and resonate with one another regardless of their nationalities or races.

I am using the terms “East” and “West” deliberately, but it would be more accurate to say “linear” or “cyclical” without using such pronouns.

WHILE EXPRESSING SYMPATHY FOR POLYTHEISM AND FINNISH ARCHITECTURE, YOUR WORKS SEEM TO HAVE STRONG WESTERN RIGOUR OF GEOMETRY. WHY IS THAT?

The most Eastern thing I saw in America was the Kimbell Art Museum. I felt that it was a far more Eastern building than any other building I had visited. The Kimbell Art Museum is a realm of organisation and order, but that order or geometry is not evolutionary, but rather rotational or cyclical; going somewhere and coming back again. I felt that it had an incredible profundity. 

A mandala represents circularity, but it also uses very strict geometry. There is a sense of circulation by using its unique tempo, rhythm, and repetition within the geometry. I am very interested in that kind of thing. 

I think it is not simple; rather, it is very complex, with various ambivalent elements coexisting. The mandala and the Kimbell Art Museum represent this complexity in a three or four dimensional way, and prove that geometric rigour is not necessarily in conflict with the cyclical world. Although Khan’s building has vaults constructed on cycloids, and a mandala is a circle, I would like to emphasise that this is not about merely using circles in plans or sections. 

Good architecture cannot be described in just one word. It is really difficult to express the four-dimensional cyclical world using words. I think it can only be experienced. The designer’s thoughts also go back and forth, return to the origin, and traverse through many unnecessary things. I think that this is how depth is built up; it is a result of complex non-linear thinking.

CONCERNING ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ENVIRONMENT, VILLA MAIREA HAS AN L-SHAPED STRUCTURE THAT ENCLOSES A COURTYARD, SIMILAR TO AALTO’S OWN HOUSE. IN YOUR BOOK „THINKING ABOUT ARCHITECTURE WITH FEELING” YOU SUGGEST THAT HAVING THE COURTYARD OPENED TOWARDS THE SOUTH WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE APPROPRIATE AS IT FOLLOWS THE PATH OF SUNLIGHT.  INSTEAD OF ORIENTING THE HOUSE TOWARDS THE DIRECTION OF THE SUN, HE CREATED A COURTYARD IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE APPROACH THAT ALLOWED HIM TO INTERACT WITH NATURE IN A MORE PROTECTED WAY. WHAT COULD HAVE MOTIVATED AALTO TO PRIORITISE TURNING HIS BACK ON SURROUNDING NATURE?

I think the very reason why Aalto’s architecture is hard to put into words and can’t be explained by simple words is because of the complexity and subtlety of his designs. Two conflicting ways of interacting with nature coexist: on one hand, there is an awareness of continuity with nature and an inclination to take advantage of the local natural features, and on the other hand, there is a need to create a sanctuary where individuals can feel secure in the face of nature’s harshness. The most conspicuous example is his experimental house, which is firmly rooted in the natural ground but encased by tall walls to protect people from nature. I think Aalto has continued to think deeply about such complex approaches to nature and the relationship between humans and their surroundings in his architecture. 

In any case, Finland is cold and unwelcome animals roam, so the importance of blocking off nature is certainly something that needs to be considered.

STANDING IN FRONT OF AALTO’S HOUSE, ONE NOTICES THE ABSENCE OF MANY OPENINGS ON THE STREET-FACING FACADE. THE BLACK-AND-WHITE EXTERIOR MAY SEEM UNWELCOMING AND IMPENETRABLE FROM THIS ANGLE.

Yes, yet let’s not overlook the absence of walls on the perimeter unlike in Japan. There are no walls along the road or at the boundary of the neighbouring property; just a log fence like on a farm, reflecting Finnish land’s continuity. 

Nowadays particularly in Japan, there seems to be a strong desire for possession of land and housing. People often excessively express that an area from here to there is their possession. I think this is a reaction to the scarcity of land and space. 

However, whatever we believe or feel, it is never true that an individual owns 100% of the land. The wind that blows through there belongs to everyone, and the sun that shines on it also belongs to everyone. The soil there is also connected on all sides to the neighbouring plots. It is not easy to draw a line. Underground or above the ground, when you go beyond a certain distance, it is no longer considered owned by anyone. Aalto did not create houses or neighbourhoods that were exclusive, he was very conscious of the continuity of the land. I think this is very evident in his own house.

YOU TOLD ME THAT  “ONLY THOSE WHOSE FEELINGS ARE DIRECTED TOWARD THE FUTURE AND WHOSE IMAGINATIONS ARE FERTILE CAN SEE THE BEAUTY IN THE LIGHT HITTING A BLANK, ABSTRACT WALL.” WHY DID AALTO BREAK THE RULES OF ABSTRACT AESTHETICS IN MODERNISM IN HIS OWN HOUSE?

I think modernism was heavily rooted in a design-centric ideal of architects, and adhered to a notion of human infallibility. There was a sort of human arrogance in assuming that if an ideal blueprint for an ideal city or society were devised, it would be realised exactly as it was intended. Such conceit, which would only nowadays be considered conceited, was the belief that the designer could control everything from a god-like perspective and that it was possible to construct houses and architecture in a similar style anywhere in the world. 

I think they possessed great faith in the strength of human beings. However, even if architecture and the background of the time were created based on that kind of human strength, people age, at one point lose health, power and wealth. There will always come a time when one loses everything.

From this perspective, I feel that Finland has a climate where people come to terms with human vulnerability. It is very cold; there are very few sunny days. In such a harsh environment, we are forced to confront our vulnerability both physically and mentally, often becoming depressed just by being there. The struggle is somehow intrinsic. I sense that Finnish architecture and culture originated from such a situation and I empathise with it greatly. This is likely the reason for the high quality of Finnish architecture, which embraces body and soul in both good and bad times.

Sometimes a country is energetic, and sometimes it is not. When a society loses its energy, the things that were created during times of faith and hope can seem crazy or even terrifying.

IN ONE OF YOUR PAST WRITINGS, I RECALL YOU LAMENTED THE MODERN MOVEMENT’S ERADICATION OF DARKNESS, CAUSING FLAT AND BANAL SPACES. AALTO’S HOUSE IS A PART THE MODERN MOVEMENT ENTHRALLED BY NEATNESS, HYGIENE AND FITNESS. COULD YOU TELL ME HOW MUCH SHADOW OR AMBIGUITY IS PRESENT IN THIS RESIDENCE? WHERE CAN THEY STILL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE BUILDING?

I just mentioned the problems of modernism; however, I also believe that modernism opened up a lot of possibilities that could be used in a very positive way. In Aalto’s work, they are studied and bring many benefits. As an example, big glass panes are a product of modernity – and in Finland specifically, prove beneficial during the wintertime due to the significant amount of sunlight and heat they enable into buildings. I find it fascinating that there is a good fusion of the warmth of handwork, the use of natural materials, and the high performance in functionality by the invention of modernism in the details.

I think that the darkness, or the presence of mystery in Aalto’s work, is evident in the sauna. Many of Aalto’s houses have saunas, which are very traditional in form. These are indigenous, dark, and mystical places that are detached from the spirit of modernism.

AALTO’S RESIDENCE HAS A UNIQUE PECULIARITY THAT MAKES IT DISTINCT FROM OTHER HOMES—IT SERVES AS BOTH A LIVING SPACE AND AN OFFICE. THE LIVING ROOM, LOCATED ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE, WAS FREQUENTLY USED FOR OFFICE MEETINGS. HOW DO YOU ENVISION RESIDENTIAL SPACES INTERACTING WITH WORK AREAS?

I chose Aalto’s own house due to my attraction to his sense of fairness. Aalto’s approach is consistent, no matter if it is his own house or someone else’s. Many architects create highly experimental houses for others while keeping their own houses conservative, but Aalto does not. I feel that he must have a sense of liberalism and fairness. This attitude probably appears in the the integration of home and work spaces.

I think that Alvar Aalto believed in designing all types of buildings based on the principles of housing; namely, that the workplace should also be a home, a nest for humans, and a place where people belong. Whether it is a church, a music hall, a university, or a village hall, the starting point for all of these is indeed a house, that warmly welcomes both the body and soul of people. I believe that Aalto must have understood the significance and value of aspects such as human presence, warmth, and craftsmanship in a harsh environment. In modernism, people often emphasise the efficacy of industrialisation or mass production; however, I believe that while understanding importance of such inventions, Aalto developed details, construction methods, and planning to evoke a sense of human warmth.

As for the integration of home and workspace, I believe it is related to the fact that people cannot live alone. People are a kind of herd animal, and when they gather together, they become warmer. In Finland, where population density is low, not being able to feel the presence of others can be quite frightening.

Under one roof of his house, there is a place for everyone to do something: make dumplings, read, draw architecture, and feel the presence of others. I think that at the time Finnish society was more tolerant and willing to share space more than we are today.

The atmosphere and use of the house in combination with the office are not solely the result of Aalto’s personality. I believe that the presence of his wife, Aino, was also very important at the time. It seems that Aalto had an understanding of gender equality; he believed that women could advance in society and work in architecture no differently than men. This is another example of Aalto’s feature. You can see his socially progressive perspective when you visit that house. It truly tells us about Aalto’s human fairness.

29.12.2022

堀部安嗣： 我的老师益子义弘非常钦佩阿尔托，并告诉我要去芬兰看他的作品。老实说，我初次拜访时，并没有对阿尔托的自宅特别印象深刻；我记得当时想，“这只是一个普通的住宅。” 但是，芬兰的自然风光以及与保守、温和的芬兰人（类似于日本人）的互动，唤起了我对芬兰的深刻共鸣。从那时起，我已经回到这个国家四五次，并最近开始欣赏阿尔托的作品，尤其是他的自宅。我把这归因于我的经历、年龄和对建筑学的逐渐理解。

在您的文章《建筑的敬佩和绝望》(JA 90/2013)中，您提到了一个有趣的轶事：一个国王问一个画家最难画的是什么。画家回答说，画恶魔很容易，但画狗却不容易——我们会立刻意识到熟悉的事物的表现错误。您提到了建筑，说设计一个看起来平静的建筑就像画一只狗。阿尔瓦客阿尔托的住宅更像一只狗，还是更像一个恶魔呢？

我认为随着时间的推移，它发生了变化。可能在最初建造时，它有一个非常像恶魔的外观。然而，由于社会文化和建筑技术的变化，我认为狗的一面变得更加突出了。

在许多优秀的建筑案例中，通常会发生这样的过程；曾经非常激进和前卫的东西很快就会变得柔和、更放松地表现出来。阿尔托的住宅在时间的推移中变得更加狗一般的重要因素之一是，阿尔托了解人的真实体验，包括身体和心灵的体验。

如果建筑的表达方式像恶魔一样不真诚并且与人类身体和心灵的体验相矛盾，它不会持续太久，人们会对其感到疲劳。

一般来说，我认为建筑有两个主要的作用。一种像烟花一样，能够提升人们的精神；建筑的庆祝角色会鼓励和激励人们。另一方面，还必须有像中药一样的建筑，它的效果会随着时间的推移而显现出来，不会对任何身体或心理状况产生过度压力或负担；它是安静的。。

阿尔托的住宅面积不大，体现了高效可持续性的模式，并因此降低了日常能源消耗。这座住宅是否反映了您对于如何建造家庭空间的看法呢？

我认为建筑的大小与人们之间距离的概念密切相关。阿尔托自宅的尺寸是他对于个体间适当距离概念的一个很好的例子。此外，阿尔托不仅有设计建筑内部的能力，还能仔细考虑并创建居住者之间的适当距离，无论是在建筑内部还是周围社区。

例如，玛丽娅别墅是一座大型住宅；然而，在设计时，它的设计着眼于许多人聚集在一个地方时发生的社会动态，以及在该地区田园诗般的氛围中如何保持人与人之间的适当距离。

他并不仅仅考虑数值尺寸，例如平方米，而是将建筑概念化为衡量个体之间、人与自然之间、人造和自然世界之间距离的一种手段。我认为，在这方面阿尔托有着非常精致的平衡感。

合适尺寸的感觉是主观的还是客观的？

这方面的一个例子是京都的一个町屋，门楣非常低，身高约175厘米的人必须弯腰才能进入，这可能对所有体型的个体都不舒适。然而，身高超过180厘米的人也不一定会感到不舒服或不自在。这是因为该空间体现了创造者的真诚和诚实，以及他们的文化模式和尺寸系统。这种氛围在整个城市中都能感受到。我相信，人们可以立即感觉到建筑或其内部的大小适合特定城镇或地区的语境、传统和文化，同时感受到周围区域的规模、道路的宽度和相邻房屋之间的距离感。人类有一定的接受能力来理解陌生的规模或尺寸。

重要的不是180厘米的门高是否具有国际性或普遍性，而是一个具体建筑的氛围和尺度是否与地区、气候、历史和其他相关因素的尺度和氛围相符。如果我们去参观一位阿拉伯石油大亨的住宅，尽管尺寸和尺度不熟悉，但我们很可能会感觉到建造它的人是真诚的，并遵循了从该地区的文化和习俗中得出的尺度感。

与其强求一些东西，不如让自己被这些流动所引导，从超越自己创造的东西中学习。这种谦逊是很重要的。

从一个日本建筑师的角度来看，你对现代西方文化有什么印象和见解？

我认为，一神论和多神论国家的思维方式存在显著的差异。这不是哪种方式更好或更差；这些只是不同的思维方式，影响到人们如何看待自己，以及如何与周围环境建立关系。

我就不能用一神论的方式思考。它已经在我的身体里根深蒂固，在与自然、朋友或任何地方的互动中，有各种存在看护我或支持我。对我来说，几乎不可能摆脱这种思维方式。

我觉得芬兰是一个传统上与我们的东方意识相通的国家。有一种信仰认为自然界中有多种精灵，例如在布里格曼的复活教堂或西伦的奥塔尼米教堂中可以看到这种信仰。庆祝森林中也有神灵存在的感觉让我感到非常平静；当我在西方遇到这种事情时，我会感到欣喜。

这对我们如何思考时间有一定影响。我认为时间有两种主要的流动方式。第一种是线性的，科技不断发展，社会不断进步。第二种是循环的，类似于太阳的升起和落下，没有进步或演化。简而言之，从事科学工作的人倾向于认同历史性的进步轨迹，即技术和人类的智慧在不断提高。例如，十年前的苹果手机功能不如现在的型号。相反，从事人类研究的人不认为莫扎特创作的音乐或者两百多年前陀思妥耶夫斯基所写的文学作品不如当代创作。

我认为我们目前正处于一个西方个体开始质疑线性时间应用于生活各个方面的时代。我希望西方能开始接受时间的周期性概念，让这个世界成为一个人们可以相互连接和共鸣的地方，而不受其国籍或种族的影响。

我特意使用了 "东方 "和 "西方 "这两个词，但如果不使用这样的代名词，说 "线性 "或 "周期性 "会更准确。

虽然你表达了对多神论和芬兰建筑的共情，但你的作品似乎具有强烈的西方几何学严谨性。为什么会这样？

我在美国看到的最东方的建筑是金伯尔美术馆。我感到它比我参观过的任何其他建筑都更具有东方建筑的特点。金伯尔美术馆是一个组织和秩序的领域，但这种秩序或几何形式并不是进化的，而是旋转或循环的；去了某处又回来了。我感到它具有难以想象的深度。

曼陀罗代表循环，但它也使用非常严格的几何学。通过使用其独特的节奏、韵律和几何学中的重复，有一种循环的感觉。我对这种东西非常感兴趣。

我认为它并不简单；相反，它非常复杂，有各种矛盾的元素并存。曼陀罗和金伯尔美术馆以三维或四维的方式表现了这种复杂性，并证明了几何学的严谨性并不一定与周期性世界相冲突。虽然康的建筑有以圆锥线为基础构造的拱顶，曼陀罗是一个圆圈，但我想强调的是，这并不仅仅是在平面或截面中使用圆形。

好的建筑不仅仅是一个词可以描述的。用语言来表达四维循环世界非常困难。我认为只有亲身体验才能理解。设计师的思想也会来回反复，回归原点，并穿越许多不必要的东西。我认为深度就是这样建立起来的，它是复杂的非线性思维的结果。

关于它与环境的关系，玛丽娅别墅采用了L形的结构，围绕着一个庭院，类似于阿尔托的自宅。在您的书《感性思考建筑》中，你建议将庭院朝南打开会更合适，因为它顺着阳光的路径。但是，他没有将房子朝向太阳方向，而是在相反的方向上创造了一个庭院，以更受保护的方式与自然互动。是什么促使阿尔托优先考虑背弃周围的自然？

我认为，阿尔托的建筑之所以难以用简单的语言表达并解释，正是因为他的设计非常复杂而微妙。两种相互冲突的与自然互动的方式并存：一方面，人们意识到与自然的连续性，倾向于利用当地的自然特征；另一方面，人们需要创造一个避难所，让个人在面对自然的严酷时感到安全。最明显的例子是他的实验室住宅，它牢固地扎根于自然地面，但被高墙包围，以保护人们免受自然的侵害。我认为阿尔托在他的建筑中一直在深入思考这种复杂的自然与人类及其周围环境之间的关系。

无论如何，芬兰非常寒冷，不受欢迎的动物也在游荡，所以当然需要考虑阻隔自然的重要性。

站在阿尔托的住宅前，人们注意到面向街道的外墙上没有太多开口。从这个角度看，黑白色的外墙可能会给人一种不受欢迎和难以穿透的印象。

是的，但我们不要忽视周边没有墙，这与日本不同。道路两旁和邻近房产的边界都没有墙；只有像农场一样的原木栅栏，反映了芬兰土地的连续性。

如今尤其是在日本，人们似乎非常渴望拥有土地和住房。他们经常过度表达从这里到那里的区域是他们的所有物。我认为这是对土地和空间稀缺性的一种反应。

然而，无论我们相信或感觉如何，个人永远不可能拥有100%的土地。吹过那里的风属于所有人，照耀那里的阳光也属于所有人。那里的土壤也与邻近地块的所有边缘相连。划定界限并不容易。在地下或地上，当你超过一定距离时，它就不再被认为是任何人的所有物。阿尔托没有创造独占性的房屋或社区，他非常注重土地的连续性。我认为这在他的自宅中非常明显。

你告诉我，"只有那些感情指向未来、想象力丰富的人，才能看到光线照射在空白、抽象的墙壁上的美感。" 为什么阿尔托在他自己的房子里打破了现代主义的抽象美学规则呢？

我认为现代主义在很大程度上根植于建筑师设计为中心的理念，并坚持一种人类无懈可击的观念。人类有一种傲慢，认为如果设计出了一个理想的城市或社会的理想蓝图，它将完全按照其意图实现。这种傲慢，在现在被认为是自负的，他们认为设计者可以从神的角度控制一切，并且有可能在世界任何地方建造类似风格的房屋和建筑。

我认为他们对人类的力量拥有极大的信心。然而，即使建筑和当时的背景基于这种人类力量的构建，人们也会衰老，某一时刻失去健康、力量和财富。人总会有失去一切的时候。

从这个角度来看，我觉得芬兰的气候让人不得不面对人类的脆弱性。那里非常寒冷，阳光很少。在这样一个严酷的环境中，我们被迫面对自己身体和精神上的脆弱性，往往仅仅因为身处其中而变得沮丧。这种挣扎在某种程度上是内在的。我感觉芬兰的建筑和文化源于这种情况，我对此深受共鸣。这可能是芬兰建筑高质量的原因，它在顺境和逆境中都能拥抱身体和灵魂。

一个国家有时是有活力的，有时是没有活力的。当一个社会失去活力时，那些在信仰和希望时期创造的东西会显得疯狂甚至可怕。

在你过去的一篇文章中，我记得你感叹现代运动对黑暗的根除，造成了平坦和平庸的空间。阿尔托的住宅是现代主义运动中迷恋整洁、卫生和健康的一部分。你能告诉我这个住宅里还有多少阴影或模糊性吗？在建筑内部它们还可以在哪里被发现？

我刚才提到了现代主义的问题；但是，我也相信现代主义开辟了很多可能性，可以用非常积极的方式来使用。在阿尔托的作品中，它们得到了研究并带来了很多益处。举个例子，大玻璃板是现代主义的产物——在芬兰，由于它们能使大量的阳光和热量进入建筑物，具体来说，在冬季证明是有益的。我觉得有趣的是，在细节中，现代主义的发明很好地融合了手工制作的温暖、天然材料的应用和功能的高性能。

我认为，在阿尔托的作品中，黑暗或神秘的存在体现在桑拿房中。阿尔托的许多住宅都有桑拿房，它们的形式非常传统。这些都是本土的、黑暗的、神秘的地方，脱离了现代主义的精神。

阿尔托的自宅有一个独特的特点，使其有别于其他住宅，它既是一个生活空间，又是一个办公室。位于房子一楼的起居室，经常被用来进行办公会议。你是如何设想住宅空间与工作区域的互动的？

我选择阿尔托的自宅，是因为我被他的公平感所吸引。阿尔托的设计理念是一致的，不管是他自己的住宅还是别人的。许多建筑师在为别人设计高度实验性的住宅的同时，却保持自己的住宅较为保守，但阿尔托没有这样做。我觉得，他一定有一种自由主义和公平的意识。这种态度可能出现在家庭和工作空间的融合上。

我认为阿尔瓦-阿尔托相信以住房原则设计所有类型的建筑物；即工作场所也应该是一个家，一个人类居住的巢穴，是人们归属的地方。无论是教堂、音乐厅、大学还是村委会，所有这些建筑的起点都是一个温暖地欢迎人的身心的家。我相信，阿尔托一定明白，在恶劣的环境中，人的存在、温暖和工艺等方面的意义和价值。在现代主义中，人们常常强调工业化或大规模生产的功效；然而，我相信，在理解这些发明的重要性的同时，阿尔托也开发了细节、施工方法和规划，以唤起人类的温暖感。

至于家庭和工作空间的融合，我认为这与人们不能孤单生活的事实有关。人是一种群居动物，当他们聚集在一起时，会变得更加温暖。在人口密度较低的芬兰，无法感受到他人的存在可能是相当可怕的。

在他家的一个屋檐下，每个人都有一个地方可以做一些事情：包饺子、读书、画建筑图，感受他人的存在。我认为，当时的芬兰社会比我们今天更宽容，更愿意分享空间。

住宅的氛围和使用与办公室的结合，并不完全是阿尔托的个性使然。我相信，他的妻子艾诺的存在在当时也是非常重要的。阿尔托似乎有性别平等的意识，他相信女性可以像男性一样在社会和建筑业中取得进展。这是阿尔托的另一个特点。当你参观那座住宅时，你可以看到他社会进步的观点。它真正告诉我们阿尔托的人道主义公平。

2022年12月29日

YASUSHI HORIBE

1967Born in Yokohama Kanagawa, Japan

1990Graduated from the Depaetment of Enviromental Design, Tsukuba University

1991−1994Worked at MASKO ATELIER

1994Established Yashshi Horibe Architect & Associates

2002The 18th Yoshioka Prize “Gallery in Ushiku”

2007−Professor at Graduate School, Kyoto University of Art & Science

2016 The Prize of Architectural Institute of Japan (architectural work) “Charnel House in Chikurin-ji”

2020 MAINICHI DESIGN AWARDS “Architecture that is hard to leave”

www.horibe-aa.jp

YASUSHI HORIBE

1967Born in Yokohama Kanagawa, Japan

1990Graduated from the Depaetment of Enviromental Design, Tsukuba University

1991−1994Worked at MASKO ATELIER

1994Established Yashshi Horibe Architect & Associates

2002The 18th Yoshioka Prize “Gallery in Ushiku”

2007−Professor at Graduate School, Kyoto University of Art & Science

2016 The Prize of Architectural Institute of Japan (architectural work) “Charnel House in Chikurin-ji”

2020 MAINICHI DESIGN AWARDS “Architecture that is hard to leave”

www.horibe-aa.jp

YASUSHI HORIBE

1967Born in Yokohama Kanagawa, Japan

1990Graduated from the Depaetment of Enviromental Design, Tsukuba University

1991−1994Worked at MASKO ATELIER

1994Established Yashshi Horibe Architect & Associates

2002The 18th Yoshioka Prize “Gallery in Ushiku”

2007−Professor at Graduate School, Kyoto University of Art & Science

2016 The Prize of Architectural Institute of Japan (architectural work) “Charnel House in Chikurin-ji”

2020 MAINICHI DESIGN AWARDS “Architecture that is hard to leave”

www.horibe-aa.jp