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

Yung ho Chang: I design houses as prototypes of architecture, meaning that it is never meant to be just about a functional house, but also about the possibility of organising spaces and structures in a certain way. I have always had a great interest in unconventional houses by other architects, and Angelo’s weekend house is one of them.

IS THERE ANY SIMILARITY BETWEEN BUCCI’S WEEKEND HOUSE AND THE ONE THAT YOU WERE BROUGHT UP IN? 

In a very remote way, yes, because I grew up and lived for 13 years in a courtyard house in Beijing. Angelo Bucci’s weekend house in Sao Paulo also has a kind of a yard. However, formally and spatially speaking, it’s completely different, though in both, there is an important central outdoor space. 

A traditional Chinese courtyard house is totally enclosed. It’s a very introverted situation. You don’t feel that you have neighbours because the peripheral walls are back-to-back with the other houses. Once in the house, you are away from the city and you feel like you’re in the centre of the world, or even the universe, because all you have is a piece of sky above your head and the ground underneath your feet. It’s the least urban place in the city - a courtyard is typically 10 by 10 metres. You can look up to see the birds flying or around to watch the flowers growing. I remember my mom used to plant beautiful flowers in the summer. All these elements made it a different world.

Bucci’s weekend house is one of a kind. Though, I would say there is a link between my family’s house and his design. He created a little enclosed jungle in a dense urban neighbourhood, which at a very basic level is the same idea.

THE HOUSE BY BUCCI IS A WEEKEND HOUSE. COULD IT ALSO BE USED EVERY DAY?

I saw the house in pictures many years ago. In 2019 I had an opportunity to be in Sao Paulo, Angelo took me there and told me more about the owner’s particular lifestyle. The owner is a writer and lives elsewhere outside of Sao Paulo, working at home. At the weekend, she wants to be in the city. Her routine is opposite to most of the city dwellers in Sao Paulo who flee to the nature on Saturdays and Sundays. 

However, without knowing the name of the house and the lifestyle of the owner, I think you can definitely imagine living in it during the week. There is something universal about a good house, on a basic level it provides comfort, but it should also offer an experience.

WHAT EXPERIENCE DOES THE HOUSE OFFER?

I am interested in the question: How do you make the reverse of a typical weekend house? I think his house is in a way subversive. That’s the power of Angelo’s design. I’ve never been to a typical weekend house outside of Sao Paulo. I could be totally wrong, but I would imagine that it’s a little bungalow in the landscape. 

What Angelo did was not only bring a piece of nature back to the city, but also in order to make a courtyard house within the limits of the size of the plot, he had to put the main volume of the house over the court. He invented another way of making a courtyard house. The yard is surrounded by the house sectionally and not in plan like in all traditional courtyard schemes. I have not seen this kind of a spatial diagram in any other houses.

WHAT KIND OF CITY DO YOU THINK A HOUSE OF BUCCI MAKES? DOES IT HELP TO GIVE LIFE TO A CITY OR IS IT A SORT OF CLOSENESS WITH AN INTERNAL OPENNESS?

If we speak about this house and its connection with the city of Sao Paulo, there are topics that are more socio-economically oriented that need to be faced. It is about the disparity of wealth, the poor and the rich, and the safety issues coming with this. Brazil in general, is quite dangerous, Sao Paulo is actually considered even more dangerous than the other Brazilian cities, if I remember correctly. In Asian cities, from Beijing to Tokyo, it is never an issue to walk the streets at the night, because you know it’s safe. Somehow, we have been lucky to avoid having that kind of problem.

Anyway, in China, in Latin America, in Mexico City, in Sao Paulo, I have a feeling it’s quite all over, you see huge black doors and nothing behind. In respect to this, Angelo’s house, is a lot more open. You see the plastic forms above the fence, some wood and concrete elements and so on. You see the elements and you don’t know what they are, which from urban point of view is more interesting. A person can appear on different levels, and this probably makes a difference. Even though as an inhabitant you are not directly connected with a city, it is still possible to be somewhere in an open space, even if being inside a house. It is not a singular volume that has all the interesting spaces inside but rather a sort of an inside-out condition.

The problems of urban nature, however, cannot be solved with one house only. In Beijing for instance, even though all the houses were introverted, they made clusters and neighbourhoods. The public spaces, these little alleyways called Hutong, were not only for circulation but also for the inhabitants and vendors to gather. It worked well as a fabric of very quiet private houses within a web of busy shared public spaces. 

From the modern examples, José Luis Cert comes to my mind. He built a courtyard house for himself in Cambridge, Massachusetts. However, what he designed was also a neighbourhood. There was not only an idea for one house, but many houses, all connected.

I think nowadays the suburbs should be rethought. The typical subdivisions are really very anti-urban, two houses split only three metres apart, and yet unable to talk to each other. In China there are huge developments of villa houses by the developers. The challenge for the architect is to strive for schemes that would have positive connections with the neighbours and the city. Unfortunately, what we have here is a Chinese version of an urban sprawl. Because of the density and population that we have, it is worse than the American one.

IS IT AN OBJECTIVE VALUE FOR THE HOUSE TO BLUR THE BORDER BETWEEN INSIDE AND OUTSIDE? 

It’s a question that I have been interested in as an architect very much for a long time. 

In the past century European culture has been very influential all over the world. What’s interesting or not so interesting in a way, is that European architecture, which is very much a northern architecture, has-spread all over the south, although some transformation has happened here and there.

I lived in the north of China. There, architecture is very much about how to insulate the house for half of the year at least because of the winter. People look out to the outside, to nature or the city through windows, through apertures.

In the Southern China, because of the warm and hot climate, it’s actually easier to open up the building. I am interested in that very much. I think the South should really take advantage of their climate. I really enjoy at least some outdoor space under a roof, instead of a locking myself in a room.

ANGELO’S HOUSE HAS V-SHAPED BEAMS THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE A FRAGMENT OF A HIGHWAY OR A BRIDGE. IT’S NOT SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY DOMESTIC. HOW DO YOU CONVINCE A CLIENT OF THIS KIND OF PROPOSAL? 

Angelo needed to make a very large span, so that the space underneath the bedrooms and the swimming pool could be completely open. This is for sure an objective quality. Although you mentioned infrastructure, I don’t know if he wanted to do a fragment of a freeway. I’m pretty sure he didn’t just want to do a kind of a little box there, blocking half the plot. Rejecting this, he naturally ended up with something not easily associable with a house. 

I think what Bucci did and what we are trying to do in our own work is designing not only a building, but a lifestyle. It’s an invitation. If the users or the clients want it, that is of course the best outcome. But to give yourself a chance to have your proposal accepted you must invent more than just something that makes sense conceptually. You need to seduce the users. Angelo proposed a situation full of potential, that’s why it was, and is, convincing.

I think all of us have two human natures, myself included. The first, is the kind of bourgeois nature that desires comfort. I have it as well for sure. On the other hand, in the end, we want something that would open up our minds and make us discover something in a kind of long-lasting way.

WHAT ARE YOUR EARLY EXPERIENCES WITH CLIENTS?

In my younger days, discussions were very difficult, people didn’t know what I was trying to do. They were suspicious and I can’t blame them. But today, sometime after, and having completed a few buildings, those that I thought would never like the houses we did, like them and even ask us to repeat them, which of course we don’t do, because we always want to try something new.

I don’t think the clients understand the verbal and graphic language we use to discuss architecture. Before they see the actual building, if you show only drawings or models, they get some idea of what you intend. But, in reality they don’t really see that picture we see in our minds. Sometimes they may even think a particular idea was not allowed - too weird or too strange. However, this changes, when they develop a trust in the architect, they begin to think, OK, maybe I was interested in the McMansion before, but here I see the possibility of a house that I never could have imagined. Often, they are open to that.

There is a story I heard decades ago. There was a poll by a newspaper in the UK. Readers were asked, what kind of dream house would they love to live in? The most popular answer was a lighthouse. The point is that you don’t always want things to be outrageous, but in the end, we are pretty open to things out of standard.

I think when we practice, we are actually teaching. It’s similar to when the students may not get it, may not agree with you, but you have to send the message out that there are other ways of living, that are better, more healthy and more interesting.

YOU SAID IN ONE OF THE INTERVIEWS: „I DON’T LIKE THINGS SERIOUS”. DO YOU THINK THAT THERE IS AN ASPECT OF SOMETHING HUMOROUS IN THE WEEKEND HOUSE IN SAO PAULO? 

Humorous, maybe not, but joyful, yes. There’s a book that every American household has: „The joy of cooking”. I think we don’t have enough of that in architecture today. You have some sculptural forms, but the spaces don’t really inspire people to a more uplifting mood. I think Bucci’s house has that kind of joy. Ultimately, as I said before, the architects need to offer not just a kind of playful look, but a way in which to spend time. In Bucci’s house you go up and down to take a swim, you do a barbecue under your swimming pool. That seems to be a place for the weekend. You live in a different way than in a typical house, and it’s very enjoyable.

DID THE REFLECTIONS WE BROUGHT TO THE TABLE TODAY INSPIRE YOUR OWN PRODUCTION?

For the first time in our lives, my wife and I, we are building a house for ourselves. My wife is also an architect and my partner. We designed an introverted house to be built in the Yangtze River Delta area. It is a courtyard house, however, around the courtyard, there’s no structural support. The whole roof is cantilevered from the thick outer peripheral wall. On a good day, you can open it and then there is nothing between the yard and the living space. It has something from both a traditional Chinese house and Bucci’s radical use of structure. Hopefully next year we will live there and see how it works. (This project is indefinitely on hold.)

IF YOU IMAGINE A BUILDING THAT YOU KNOW FROM THE HISTORY, A HOUSE THAT YOU STILL LIKE, BUT IS OPPOSITE TO ANGELO’S HOUSE, WHAT WOULD COME TO YOUR MIND?

I have had the fortune to travel quite a bit. As a student I saw the drawings of Palladio’s Villa Rotonda, and I have to say I didn’t really care much about it. But when I went there eventually, after many years, I realised the house was on top of a hill. I walked around it, you know, like a tourist. It was a panoramic experience. It was like watching a movie, there was a cinematic quality to the views. 

Not only is there a classical-contemporary contrast between Villa Rotonda and Bucci’s weekend house, but the fact that Palladio’s Villa looks always outside and Bucci’s, almost always inside, makes them somehow opposite. Moreover, the movement in Villa Rotonda is circular. And in Bucci’s it would be more back and forth, up, and down.

DID YOU SWIM IN THE SWIMMING POOL ON THE ROOF? 

Oh, I would love to. I didn’t get to do that. 

24.08.2021

张永和: 我将住宅作为建筑原型来设计，也就是说，它绝不仅仅是一个功能性居所的问题，也关乎于以某种组织空间和结构方式的可能性。我一直对其他建筑师的非常规住宅有着极大的兴趣，安杰洛的周末之家就是其中之一。

安杰洛的周末之家与你长大的房子，是否有相似之处？

有一点点。我在北京的一个四合院里长大并生活了13年，安杰洛在圣保罗的周末之家里也有一个院子。虽然从形式和空间上来说，它们是完全不同的，即使两者都有一个重要的、中心的户外空间。

传统的中式合院是完全围合的，它非常内向。你不会察觉到邻居的存在，因为它的围墙与其他的住宅背靠背。一旦进入宅子，你就远离了城市，你感觉自己是在世界甚至宇宙的中心，因为你的头上只有一片天空，脚下是一片土地。这是城市中最不城市的地方——一个院子通常是10乘10米。你可以抬头看见鸟儿飞翔，也可以四处看看花草生长。我记得我母亲曾经一到夏天就种一些漂亮的花儿。所有的这些元素使其成为另外一个世界。

布奇的周末之家是独一无二的。尽管如此，我想说我家的房子和他的设计之间有一种联系。他在一个高密度的城市社区里创造了一个小小的封闭式丛林，在很基本的层面上，这是相似的想法。

布奇的这所住宅是一个周末住宅。它也可以每天使用吗？

很多年前我就在照片上看到过这所住宅。2019年我有机会到圣保罗，安杰洛带我去了那里，并告诉了我更多关于房主的特殊的生活方式。房主是一位作家，住在圣保罗城外的其它地方，平时在家工作。周末时，她想待在城市里。她的作息与圣保罗的大多数市民相反，他们会在周六周日逃到大自然中去。

不管怎样，在不知道住宅名称和主人生活方式的情况下，我认为你肯定可以想象工作日时居住在这里。一所好的住宅有一些共通性的东西，在基本层面上保证舒适，但也应该提供一种体验。

这所房子能提供什么样的体验？

我对这个问题感兴趣：你如何做出一个典型的周末住宅的反面？我认为他的住宅在某种程度上是颠覆性的。这就是安杰洛设计的力量。我从来没有去过圣保罗城外的典型的周末住宅。我可能完全错了，但我想象它会是景观中的一个小平房。

安杰洛所做的不仅是把一片自然带回到城市，而且为了在局促用地条件下做出一个院子，他不得不把住宅的主要体量放在院落之上。他发明了另一种造院宅的方法。院子被住宅在剖面上包裹着，而不是像所有传统的院宅范式那样在平面上。我没有在其他住宅中看到过这种空间布局。

你认为布奇的房子会造就什么样的城市？它是否有助于赋予城市生气，还是一种具有内向的开放？

如果我们谈及这所住宅与圣保罗城市的联系，需要面对更多社会经济导向的话题。这关乎贫富悬殊，以及随之而来的社会安全问题。巴西，总的来说，是相当危险的。如果我没记错的话，圣保罗实际上还被认为比巴西其他城市更危险。在亚洲城市，从北京到东京，晚上在街上行走从来都不是问题，因为你知道这里是安全的。在这方面，我们很幸运。

总之，在中国，在拉丁美洲，在墨西哥城，在圣保罗，到处我都有一种感觉，你会看到巨大的黑色的门，完全看不到里面。就此而言，安杰洛的住宅要开放得多。你看到栅栏上面露出的形体，一些木制、混凝土的构件。你看到它们，并不知道是什么，但从城市景观的角度来看也很有趣。一个人可以出现在不同的层高上，而这很可能会带来不同的感受。即使作为居住者，你不直接接触城市，也可能置身开放空间中，纵然这个开放空间是在一座住宅内。它不是一个包含着各种有趣空间质量的单一体量，而是一种由内而外的状态。

然而，城市性质的问题不能只靠一栋住宅来解决。例如在北京，尽管所有的房子都是内向的，但它们形成了集群和邻里关系。公共空间是这些被称为胡同的小巷子，不仅仅是为了通行，也是居民和小贩的聚集地。作为一种肌理，非常安静的私人住宅，交织在繁忙的共享公共空间网络中，运作良好。

在现代的案例中，我想到了何塞-路易斯-瑟特（José Luis Cert）。他在马萨诸塞州的剑桥市为自己建造了一座院宅。但他所设计的实际上是一个社区。他的想法不仅关乎于一栋住宅，而是许多栋，彼此相连。

我认为今天，郊区应当被重新思考。典型的土地划分确实非常反城市，两栋房子只相隔三米，但之间却没有任何联系。在中国，有大量的开发商盖的别墅。建筑师所面临的挑战是要努力寻求能与社区和城市有积极关系的设计。不幸的是，我们在这里看到的是一个中国版的城市蔓延。由于我们的密度和人口，它比美国的更糟糕。

对住宅来说，模糊室内和室外的边界有客观的价值吗？

这是我作为建筑师，长期以来非常感兴趣的一个问题。

在过去的一个世纪里，欧洲文化在世界各地都有很大的影响。在某种程度上，有趣或不太有趣的是，欧洲的建筑，在很大程度上是北方的建筑，现已遍布南方，尽管在各处发生了一些转化。

我住在中国的北方。在那里，因为一年中至少有一半的时间是冷天，建筑在很大程度上是关于如何保温。人们透过窗户，通过孔洞看向外界，自然或城市。

在中国南方，由于气候温暖炎热，实际上更容易将建筑敞开。我对这一点很感兴趣。我认为南方应该真正利用他们的气候优势。我真的很享受至少在屋檐下的一些户外空间，而不是把自己关在一个房间里。

安杰洛的住宅有V型梁，看起来像是高速公路或桥梁的片段。不是特别有居家感。你如何说服业主接受这类的设计？

安杰洛需要一个非常大的跨度，这样卧室和游泳池下面的空间就可以完全开放。这显然是一种客观的品质。虽然你提到了基础设施，我不确定他是否想做一个高速公路的片段。但我很确定他不想在那里仅仅做一个小盒子，堵住一半的地块。拒绝了常规作法，他自然而然地转向不太像住宅的答案。

我认为布奇所做的和我们在自己的工作中试图做的，都不单单是设计一个建筑，而是设计一种生活方式。这是一种邀请，如果用户或客户想要它，这当然是最好的结果。但是为了给自己创造一个建议被接受的机会，你必须创造更多，不仅仅是一个概念。你需要“引诱”用户。安杰洛提出了一种充满潜力的可能性，这就是为什么它过去和现在都很有说服力。

我认为我们所有人都有两种人的本性，包括我自己。第一，是那种渴望舒适的资产阶级本性。我肯定也有这种本性。另一方面，最终，我们希望有一些东西能打开我们的思想，使我们不断地发现。

你早期与业主的合作经验是什么？

在我年轻的时候，沟通是非常困难的，人们不知道我想做什么。他们充满疑惑，而我也不能责备他们。但时至今日，在完成一些建筑后，一些我以为不会喜欢我们设计的住宅的人，喜欢它们并且要求我们复制它们，当然我们不会这么做，因为我们总想尝试一些新的东西。

我不认为业主懂得我们讨论建筑时使用的口头或图像的语言。在他们看到真正的建筑前，如果你只展示图纸和模型，他们会对你的意图有一些了解。但实际上他们没有真正看到我们脑海中的画面。有时，他们甚至会认为某个想法是不被允许的——太怪异或太奇特。然而，这种情况会发生变化，当他们对建筑师产生信任时，他们就会开始想，好吧，也许我以前对麦克豪宅（McMansion）感兴趣，但在这里，我看到了一个我永远无法想象的住宅的可能性。常常他们会对此持开放态度。

我在几十年前听到一个故事。英国的一家报纸进行了一次调查。读者们被问到，他们最想住在什么样的梦想之家？最受欢迎的答案是一个灯塔。问题是，你并不总是希望事情离谱，但最终，我们对非标准的事物是相当开放的。

我认为当我们实践时，我们实际上是在教学。这类似于当学生可能不明白时，会不同意你的观点，但你必须把信息传递出去：有其它的生活方式存在，这些方式更好，更健康，更有趣。

你曾在一次采访中说到 "我不喜欢严肃的事情"。你认为圣保罗的周末之家中，是否有幽默的一面？

幽默，或许不太对，但快乐，是的。有一本书是每个美国家庭都有的——《烹饪的乐趣》。我认为我们今天的建筑中没有足够的这样的东西。你有一些雕塑般的形式，但空间并没有真正激发人们更振奋的情绪。我认为布奇的住宅里有那种快乐。归根到底，正如我之前所说，建筑师需要提供的不仅仅是一种好玩的外观，而是一种度过时间的方式。在布奇的住宅里，你爬上爬下地去游泳，你在泳池下做烧烤。这似乎是一个周末的地方。你的生活方式与一般的住宅不同，而且非常令人愉悦。

我们今天谈论的这些反馈是否激发了你自己的创作？

第一次，在我们的生活中，我的妻子和我为自己建造住宅。我的妻子也是一名建筑师，是我的合作伙伴。我们设计了一个内向的房子，要建在长三角地区。这是一个院宅，然而，在院子周围，没有结构支撑。整个屋顶是由厚厚的外围墙体悬挑出来的。在天气好的时候，你可以打开它，然后院子和起居空间没有了任何隔段。它既有中国传统房屋的特点，也有类似布奇的对结构的激进运用。希望明年我们能住在那里，看看它是什么感觉。（目前项目处于停顿状态）

如果你想象一个你从历史中知道的建筑，一个你仍然喜欢的住宅，但与安杰洛的房子相反，你会想到什么？

我很幸运地走了不少地方。还是一个学生的时候，我看过帕拉迪奥的园厅别墅的图纸，我不得不说我对它并不怎么感兴趣。但多年以后，我最终去了那里，我意识到这个房子是在山顶上。我绕着它走了一圈，你知道，像个游客。那是一种全景体验。这就像看电影一样，有一种电影般的景色。

园厅别墅和布奇的周末之家之间不仅存在着古典与现代的对比，而且帕拉迪奥的别墅总是外面看，而布奇的，几乎总是向里面看，这使他们在某种程度上是相反的。此外，园厅别墅中的运动流线是环形的。而在布奇的作品中，它将更多地是往返和上下。

你有没有在屋顶上的泳池中游泳？ 

噢，我会很喜欢的。但那次没能游。

2021年8月24日

Yung ho Chang: I design houses as prototypes of architecture, meaning that it is never meant to be just about a functional house, but also about the possibility of organising spaces and structures in a certain way. I have always had a great interest in unconventional houses by other architects, and Angelo’s weekend house is one of them.

IS THERE ANY SIMILARITY BETWEEN BUCCI’S WEEKEND HOUSE AND THE ONE THAT YOU WERE BROUGHT UP IN? 

In a very remote way, yes, because I grew up and lived for 13 years in a courtyard house in Beijing. Angelo Bucci’s weekend house in Sao Paulo also has a kind of a yard. However, formally and spatially speaking, it’s completely different, though in both, there is an important central outdoor space. 

A traditional Chinese courtyard house is totally enclosed. It’s a very introverted situation. You don’t feel that you have neighbours because the peripheral walls are back-to-back with the other houses. Once in the house, you are away from the city and you feel like you’re in the centre of the world, or even the universe, because all you have is a piece of sky above your head and the ground underneath your feet. It’s the least urban place in the city - a courtyard is typically 10 by 10 metres. You can look up to see the birds flying or around to watch the flowers growing. I remember my mom used to plant beautiful flowers in the summer. All these elements made it a different world.

Bucci’s weekend house is one of a kind. Though, I would say there is a link between my family’s house and his design. He created a little enclosed jungle in a dense urban neighbourhood, which at a very basic level is the same idea.

THE HOUSE BY BUCCI IS A WEEKEND HOUSE. COULD IT ALSO BE USED EVERY DAY?

I saw the house in pictures many years ago. In 2019 I had an opportunity to be in Sao Paulo, Angelo took me there and told me more about the owner’s particular lifestyle. The owner is a writer and lives elsewhere outside of Sao Paulo, working at home. At the weekend, she wants to be in the city. Her routine is opposite to most of the city dwellers in Sao Paulo who flee to the nature on Saturdays and Sundays. 

However, without knowing the name of the house and the lifestyle of the owner, I think you can definitely imagine living in it during the week. There is something universal about a good house, on a basic level it provides comfort, but it should also offer an experience.

WHAT EXPERIENCE DOES THE HOUSE OFFER?

I am interested in the question: How do you make the reverse of a typical weekend house? I think his house is in a way subversive. That’s the power of Angelo’s design. I’ve never been to a typical weekend house outside of Sao Paulo. I could be totally wrong, but I would imagine that it’s a little bungalow in the landscape. 

What Angelo did was not only bring a piece of nature back to the city, but also in order to make a courtyard house within the limits of the size of the plot, he had to put the main volume of the house over the court. He invented another way of making a courtyard house. The yard is surrounded by the house sectionally and not in plan like in all traditional courtyard schemes. I have not seen this kind of a spatial diagram in any other houses.

WHAT KIND OF CITY DO YOU THINK A HOUSE OF BUCCI MAKES? DOES IT HELP TO GIVE LIFE TO A CITY OR IS IT A SORT OF CLOSENESS WITH AN INTERNAL OPENNESS?

If we speak about this house and its connection with the city of Sao Paulo, there are topics that are more socio-economically oriented that need to be faced. It is about the disparity of wealth, the poor and the rich, and the safety issues coming with this. Brazil in general, is quite dangerous, Sao Paulo is actually considered even more dangerous than the other Brazilian cities, if I remember correctly. In Asian cities, from Beijing to Tokyo, it is never an issue to walk the streets at the night, because you know it’s safe. Somehow, we have been lucky to avoid having that kind of problem.

Anyway, in China, in Latin America, in Mexico City, in Sao Paulo, I have a feeling it’s quite all over, you see huge black doors and nothing behind. In respect to this, Angelo’s house, is a lot more open. You see the plastic forms above the fence, some wood and concrete elements and so on. You see the elements and you don’t know what they are, which from urban point of view is more interesting. A person can appear on different levels, and this probably makes a difference. Even though as an inhabitant you are not directly connected with a city, it is still possible to be somewhere in an open space, even if being inside a house. It is not a singular volume that has all the interesting spaces inside but rather a sort of an inside-out condition.

The problems of urban nature, however, cannot be solved with one house only. In Beijing for instance, even though all the houses were introverted, they made clusters and neighbourhoods. The public spaces, these little alleyways called Hutong, were not only for circulation but also for the inhabitants and vendors to gather. It worked well as a fabric of very quiet private houses within a web of busy shared public spaces. 

From the modern examples, José Luis Cert comes to my mind. He built a courtyard house for himself in Cambridge, Massachusetts. However, what he designed was also a neighbourhood. There was not only an idea for one house, but many houses, all connected.

I think nowadays the suburbs should be rethought. The typical subdivisions are really very anti-urban, two houses split only three metres apart, and yet unable to talk to each other. In China there are huge developments of villa houses by the developers. The challenge for the architect is to strive for schemes that would have positive connections with the neighbours and the city. Unfortunately, what we have here is a Chinese version of an urban sprawl. Because of the density and population that we have, it is worse than the American one.

IS IT AN OBJECTIVE VALUE FOR THE HOUSE TO BLUR THE BORDER BETWEEN INSIDE AND OUTSIDE? 

It’s a question that I have been interested in as an architect very much for a long time. 

In the past century European culture has been very influential all over the world. What’s interesting or not so interesting in a way, is that European architecture, which is very much a northern architecture, has-spread all over the south, although some transformation has happened here and there.

I lived in the north of China. There, architecture is very much about how to insulate the house for half of the year at least because of the winter. People look out to the outside, to nature or the city through windows, through apertures.

In the Southern China, because of the warm and hot climate, it’s actually easier to open up the building. I am interested in that very much. I think the South should really take advantage of their climate. I really enjoy at least some outdoor space under a roof, instead of a locking myself in a room.

ANGELO’S HOUSE HAS V-SHAPED BEAMS THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE A FRAGMENT OF A HIGHWAY OR A BRIDGE. IT’S NOT SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY DOMESTIC. HOW DO YOU CONVINCE A CLIENT OF THIS KIND OF PROPOSAL? 

Angelo needed to make a very large span, so that the space underneath the bedrooms and the swimming pool could be completely open. This is for sure an objective quality. Although you mentioned infrastructure, I don’t know if he wanted to do a fragment of a freeway. I’m pretty sure he didn’t just want to do a kind of a little box there, blocking half the plot. Rejecting this, he naturally ended up with something not easily associable with a house. 

I think what Bucci did and what we are trying to do in our own work is designing not only a building, but a lifestyle. It’s an invitation. If the users or the clients want it, that is of course the best outcome. But to give yourself a chance to have your proposal accepted you must invent more than just something that makes sense conceptually. You need to seduce the users. Angelo proposed a situation full of potential, that’s why it was, and is, convincing.

I think all of us have two human natures, myself included. The first, is the kind of bourgeois nature that desires comfort. I have it as well for sure. On the other hand, in the end, we want something that would open up our minds and make us discover something in a kind of long-lasting way.

WHAT ARE YOUR EARLY EXPERIENCES WITH CLIENTS?

In my younger days, discussions were very difficult, people didn’t know what I was trying to do. They were suspicious and I can’t blame them. But today, sometime after, and having completed a few buildings, those that I thought would never like the houses we did, like them and even ask us to repeat them, which of course we don’t do, because we always want to try something new.

I don’t think the clients understand the verbal and graphic language we use to discuss architecture. Before they see the actual building, if you show only drawings or models, they get some idea of what you intend. But, in reality they don’t really see that picture we see in our minds. Sometimes they may even think a particular idea was not allowed - too weird or too strange. However, this changes, when they develop a trust in the architect, they begin to think, OK, maybe I was interested in the McMansion before, but here I see the possibility of a house that I never could have imagined. Often, they are open to that.

There is a story I heard decades ago. There was a poll by a newspaper in the UK. Readers were asked, what kind of dream house would they love to live in? The most popular answer was a lighthouse. The point is that you don’t always want things to be outrageous, but in the end, we are pretty open to things out of standard.

I think when we practice, we are actually teaching. It’s similar to when the students may not get it, may not agree with you, but you have to send the message out that there are other ways of living, that are better, more healthy and more interesting.

YOU SAID IN ONE OF THE INTERVIEWS: „I DON’T LIKE THINGS SERIOUS”. DO YOU THINK THAT THERE IS AN ASPECT OF SOMETHING HUMOROUS IN THE WEEKEND HOUSE IN SAO PAULO? 

Humorous, maybe not, but joyful, yes. There’s a book that every American household has: „The joy of cooking”. I think we don’t have enough of that in architecture today. You have some sculptural forms, but the spaces don’t really inspire people to a more uplifting mood. I think Bucci’s house has that kind of joy. Ultimately, as I said before, the architects need to offer not just a kind of playful look, but a way in which to spend time. In Bucci’s house you go up and down to take a swim, you do a barbecue under your swimming pool. That seems to be a place for the weekend. You live in a different way than in a typical house, and it’s very enjoyable.

DID THE REFLECTIONS WE BROUGHT TO THE TABLE TODAY INSPIRE YOUR OWN PRODUCTION?

For the first time in our lives, my wife and I, we are building a house for ourselves. My wife is also an architect and my partner. We designed an introverted house to be built in the Yangtze River Delta area. It is a courtyard house, however, around the courtyard, there’s no structural support. The whole roof is cantilevered from the thick outer peripheral wall. On a good day, you can open it and then there is nothing between the yard and the living space. It has something from both a traditional Chinese house and Bucci’s radical use of structure. Hopefully next year we will live there and see how it works. (This project is indefinitely on hold.)

IF YOU IMAGINE A BUILDING THAT YOU KNOW FROM THE HISTORY, A HOUSE THAT YOU STILL LIKE, BUT IS OPPOSITE TO ANGELO’S HOUSE, WHAT WOULD COME TO YOUR MIND?

I have had the fortune to travel quite a bit. As a student I saw the drawings of Palladio’s Villa Rotonda, and I have to say I didn’t really care much about it. But when I went there eventually, after many years, I realised the house was on top of a hill. I walked around it, you know, like a tourist. It was a panoramic experience. It was like watching a movie, there was a cinematic quality to the views. 

Not only is there a classical-contemporary contrast between Villa Rotonda and Bucci’s weekend house, but the fact that Palladio’s Villa looks always outside and Bucci’s, almost always inside, makes them somehow opposite. Moreover, the movement in Villa Rotonda is circular. And in Bucci’s it would be more back and forth, up, and down.

DID YOU SWIM IN THE SWIMMING POOL ON THE ROOF? 

Oh, I would love to. I didn’t get to do that. 

24.08.2021

张永和: 我将住宅作为建筑原型来设计，也就是说，它绝不仅仅是一个功能性居所的问题，也关乎于以某种组织空间和结构方式的可能性。我一直对其他建筑师的非常规住宅有着极大的兴趣，安杰洛的周末之家就是其中之一。

安杰洛的周末之家与你长大的房子，是否有相似之处？

有一点点。我在北京的一个四合院里长大并生活了13年，安杰洛在圣保罗的周末之家里也有一个院子。虽然从形式和空间上来说，它们是完全不同的，即使两者都有一个重要的、中心的户外空间。

传统的中式合院是完全围合的，它非常内向。你不会察觉到邻居的存在，因为它的围墙与其他的住宅背靠背。一旦进入宅子，你就远离了城市，你感觉自己是在世界甚至宇宙的中心，因为你的头上只有一片天空，脚下是一片土地。这是城市中最不城市的地方——一个院子通常是10乘10米。你可以抬头看见鸟儿飞翔，也可以四处看看花草生长。我记得我母亲曾经一到夏天就种一些漂亮的花儿。所有的这些元素使其成为另外一个世界。

布奇的周末之家是独一无二的。尽管如此，我想说我家的房子和他的设计之间有一种联系。他在一个高密度的城市社区里创造了一个小小的封闭式丛林，在很基本的层面上，这是相似的想法。

布奇的这所住宅是一个周末住宅。它也可以每天使用吗？

很多年前我就在照片上看到过这所住宅。2019年我有机会到圣保罗，安杰洛带我去了那里，并告诉了我更多关于房主的特殊的生活方式。房主是一位作家，住在圣保罗城外的其它地方，平时在家工作。周末时，她想待在城市里。她的作息与圣保罗的大多数市民相反，他们会在周六周日逃到大自然中去。

不管怎样，在不知道住宅名称和主人生活方式的情况下，我认为你肯定可以想象工作日时居住在这里。一所好的住宅有一些共通性的东西，在基本层面上保证舒适，但也应该提供一种体验。

这所房子能提供什么样的体验？

我对这个问题感兴趣：你如何做出一个典型的周末住宅的反面？我认为他的住宅在某种程度上是颠覆性的。这就是安杰洛设计的力量。我从来没有去过圣保罗城外的典型的周末住宅。我可能完全错了，但我想象它会是景观中的一个小平房。

安杰洛所做的不仅是把一片自然带回到城市，而且为了在局促用地条件下做出一个院子，他不得不把住宅的主要体量放在院落之上。他发明了另一种造院宅的方法。院子被住宅在剖面上包裹着，而不是像所有传统的院宅范式那样在平面上。我没有在其他住宅中看到过这种空间布局。

你认为布奇的房子会造就什么样的城市？它是否有助于赋予城市生气，还是一种具有内向的开放？

如果我们谈及这所住宅与圣保罗城市的联系，需要面对更多社会经济导向的话题。这关乎贫富悬殊，以及随之而来的社会安全问题。巴西，总的来说，是相当危险的。如果我没记错的话，圣保罗实际上还被认为比巴西其他城市更危险。在亚洲城市，从北京到东京，晚上在街上行走从来都不是问题，因为你知道这里是安全的。在这方面，我们很幸运。

总之，在中国，在拉丁美洲，在墨西哥城，在圣保罗，到处我都有一种感觉，你会看到巨大的黑色的门，完全看不到里面。就此而言，安杰洛的住宅要开放得多。你看到栅栏上面露出的形体，一些木制、混凝土的构件。你看到它们，并不知道是什么，但从城市景观的角度来看也很有趣。一个人可以出现在不同的层高上，而这很可能会带来不同的感受。即使作为居住者，你不直接接触城市，也可能置身开放空间中，纵然这个开放空间是在一座住宅内。它不是一个包含着各种有趣空间质量的单一体量，而是一种由内而外的状态。

然而，城市性质的问题不能只靠一栋住宅来解决。例如在北京，尽管所有的房子都是内向的，但它们形成了集群和邻里关系。公共空间是这些被称为胡同的小巷子，不仅仅是为了通行，也是居民和小贩的聚集地。作为一种肌理，非常安静的私人住宅，交织在繁忙的共享公共空间网络中，运作良好。

在现代的案例中，我想到了何塞-路易斯-瑟特（José Luis Cert）。他在马萨诸塞州的剑桥市为自己建造了一座院宅。但他所设计的实际上是一个社区。他的想法不仅关乎于一栋住宅，而是许多栋，彼此相连。

我认为今天，郊区应当被重新思考。典型的土地划分确实非常反城市，两栋房子只相隔三米，但之间却没有任何联系。在中国，有大量的开发商盖的别墅。建筑师所面临的挑战是要努力寻求能与社区和城市有积极关系的设计。不幸的是，我们在这里看到的是一个中国版的城市蔓延。由于我们的密度和人口，它比美国的更糟糕。

对住宅来说，模糊室内和室外的边界有客观的价值吗？

这是我作为建筑师，长期以来非常感兴趣的一个问题。

在过去的一个世纪里，欧洲文化在世界各地都有很大的影响。在某种程度上，有趣或不太有趣的是，欧洲的建筑，在很大程度上是北方的建筑，现已遍布南方，尽管在各处发生了一些转化。

我住在中国的北方。在那里，因为一年中至少有一半的时间是冷天，建筑在很大程度上是关于如何保温。人们透过窗户，通过孔洞看向外界，自然或城市。

在中国南方，由于气候温暖炎热，实际上更容易将建筑敞开。我对这一点很感兴趣。我认为南方应该真正利用他们的气候优势。我真的很享受至少在屋檐下的一些户外空间，而不是把自己关在一个房间里。

安杰洛的住宅有V型梁，看起来像是高速公路或桥梁的片段。不是特别有居家感。你如何说服业主接受这类的设计？

安杰洛需要一个非常大的跨度，这样卧室和游泳池下面的空间就可以完全开放。这显然是一种客观的品质。虽然你提到了基础设施，我不确定他是否想做一个高速公路的片段。但我很确定他不想在那里仅仅做一个小盒子，堵住一半的地块。拒绝了常规作法，他自然而然地转向不太像住宅的答案。

我认为布奇所做的和我们在自己的工作中试图做的，都不单单是设计一个建筑，而是设计一种生活方式。这是一种邀请，如果用户或客户想要它，这当然是最好的结果。但是为了给自己创造一个建议被接受的机会，你必须创造更多，不仅仅是一个概念。你需要“引诱”用户。安杰洛提出了一种充满潜力的可能性，这就是为什么它过去和现在都很有说服力。

我认为我们所有人都有两种人的本性，包括我自己。第一，是那种渴望舒适的资产阶级本性。我肯定也有这种本性。另一方面，最终，我们希望有一些东西能打开我们的思想，使我们不断地发现。

你早期与业主的合作经验是什么？

在我年轻的时候，沟通是非常困难的，人们不知道我想做什么。他们充满疑惑，而我也不能责备他们。但时至今日，在完成一些建筑后，一些我以为不会喜欢我们设计的住宅的人，喜欢它们并且要求我们复制它们，当然我们不会这么做，因为我们总想尝试一些新的东西。

我不认为业主懂得我们讨论建筑时使用的口头或图像的语言。在他们看到真正的建筑前，如果你只展示图纸和模型，他们会对你的意图有一些了解。但实际上他们没有真正看到我们脑海中的画面。有时，他们甚至会认为某个想法是不被允许的——太怪异或太奇特。然而，这种情况会发生变化，当他们对建筑师产生信任时，他们就会开始想，好吧，也许我以前对麦克豪宅（McMansion）感兴趣，但在这里，我看到了一个我永远无法想象的住宅的可能性。常常他们会对此持开放态度。

我在几十年前听到一个故事。英国的一家报纸进行了一次调查。读者们被问到，他们最想住在什么样的梦想之家？最受欢迎的答案是一个灯塔。问题是，你并不总是希望事情离谱，但最终，我们对非标准的事物是相当开放的。

我认为当我们实践时，我们实际上是在教学。这类似于当学生可能不明白时，会不同意你的观点，但你必须把信息传递出去：有其它的生活方式存在，这些方式更好，更健康，更有趣。

你曾在一次采访中说到 "我不喜欢严肃的事情"。你认为圣保罗的周末之家中，是否有幽默的一面？

幽默，或许不太对，但快乐，是的。有一本书是每个美国家庭都有的——《烹饪的乐趣》。我认为我们今天的建筑中没有足够的这样的东西。你有一些雕塑般的形式，但空间并没有真正激发人们更振奋的情绪。我认为布奇的住宅里有那种快乐。归根到底，正如我之前所说，建筑师需要提供的不仅仅是一种好玩的外观，而是一种度过时间的方式。在布奇的住宅里，你爬上爬下地去游泳，你在泳池下做烧烤。这似乎是一个周末的地方。你的生活方式与一般的住宅不同，而且非常令人愉悦。

我们今天谈论的这些反馈是否激发了你自己的创作？

第一次，在我们的生活中，我的妻子和我为自己建造住宅。我的妻子也是一名建筑师，是我的合作伙伴。我们设计了一个内向的房子，要建在长三角地区。这是一个院宅，然而，在院子周围，没有结构支撑。整个屋顶是由厚厚的外围墙体悬挑出来的。在天气好的时候，你可以打开它，然后院子和起居空间没有了任何隔段。它既有中国传统房屋的特点，也有类似布奇的对结构的激进运用。希望明年我们能住在那里，看看它是什么感觉。（目前项目处于停顿状态）

如果你想象一个你从历史中知道的建筑，一个你仍然喜欢的住宅，但与安杰洛的房子相反，你会想到什么？

我很幸运地走了不少地方。还是一个学生的时候，我看过帕拉迪奥的园厅别墅的图纸，我不得不说我对它并不怎么感兴趣。但多年以后，我最终去了那里，我意识到这个房子是在山顶上。我绕着它走了一圈，你知道，像个游客。那是一种全景体验。这就像看电影一样，有一种电影般的景色。

园厅别墅和布奇的周末之家之间不仅存在着古典与现代的对比，而且帕拉迪奥的别墅总是外面看，而布奇的，几乎总是向里面看，这使他们在某种程度上是相反的。此外，园厅别墅中的运动流线是环形的。而在布奇的作品中，它将更多地是往返和上下。

你有没有在屋顶上的泳池中游泳？ 

噢，我会很喜欢的。但那次没能游。

2021年8月24日

Yung ho Chang: I design houses as prototypes of architecture, meaning that it is never meant to be just about a functional house, but also about the possibility of organising spaces and structures in a certain way. I have always had a great interest in unconventional houses by other architects, and Angelo’s weekend house is one of them.

IS THERE ANY SIMILARITY BETWEEN BUCCI’S WEEKEND HOUSE AND THE ONE THAT YOU WERE BROUGHT UP IN? 

In a very remote way, yes, because I grew up and lived for 13 years in a courtyard house in Beijing. Angelo Bucci’s weekend house in Sao Paulo also has a kind of a yard. However, formally and spatially speaking, it’s completely different, though in both, there is an important central outdoor space. 

A traditional Chinese courtyard house is totally enclosed. It’s a very introverted situation. You don’t feel that you have neighbours because the peripheral walls are back-to-back with the other houses. Once in the house, you are away from the city and you feel like you’re in the centre of the world, or even the universe, because all you have is a piece of sky above your head and the ground underneath your feet. It’s the least urban place in the city - a courtyard is typically 10 by 10 metres. You can look up to see the birds flying or around to watch the flowers growing. I remember my mom used to plant beautiful flowers in the summer. All these elements made it a different world.

Bucci’s weekend house is one of a kind. Though, I would say there is a link between my family’s house and his design. He created a little enclosed jungle in a dense urban neighbourhood, which at a very basic level is the same idea.

THE HOUSE BY BUCCI IS A WEEKEND HOUSE. COULD IT ALSO BE USED EVERY DAY?

I saw the house in pictures many years ago. In 2019 I had an opportunity to be in Sao Paulo, Angelo took me there and told me more about the owner’s particular lifestyle. The owner is a writer and lives elsewhere outside of Sao Paulo, working at home. At the weekend, she wants to be in the city. Her routine is opposite to most of the city dwellers in Sao Paulo who flee to the nature on Saturdays and Sundays. 

However, without knowing the name of the house and the lifestyle of the owner, I think you can definitely imagine living in it during the week. There is something universal about a good house, on a basic level it provides comfort, but it should also offer an experience.

WHAT EXPERIENCE DOES THE HOUSE OFFER?

I am interested in the question: How do you make the reverse of a typical weekend house? I think his house is in a way subversive. That’s the power of Angelo’s design. I’ve never been to a typical weekend house outside of Sao Paulo. I could be totally wrong, but I would imagine that it’s a little bungalow in the landscape. 

What Angelo did was not only bring a piece of nature back to the city, but also in order to make a courtyard house within the limits of the size of the plot, he had to put the main volume of the house over the court. He invented another way of making a courtyard house. The yard is surrounded by the house sectionally and not in plan like in all traditional courtyard schemes. I have not seen this kind of a spatial diagram in any other houses.

WHAT KIND OF CITY DO YOU THINK A HOUSE OF BUCCI MAKES? DOES IT HELP TO GIVE LIFE TO A CITY OR IS IT A SORT OF CLOSENESS WITH AN INTERNAL OPENNESS?

If we speak about this house and its connection with the city of Sao Paulo, there are topics that are more socio-economically oriented that need to be faced. It is about the disparity of wealth, the poor and the rich, and the safety issues coming with this. Brazil in general, is quite dangerous, Sao Paulo is actually considered even more dangerous than the other Brazilian cities, if I remember correctly. In Asian cities, from Beijing to Tokyo, it is never an issue to walk the streets at the night, because you know it’s safe. Somehow, we have been lucky to avoid having that kind of problem.

Anyway, in China, in Latin America, in Mexico City, in Sao Paulo, I have a feeling it’s quite all over, you see huge black doors and nothing behind. In respect to this, Angelo’s house, is a lot more open. You see the plastic forms above the fence, some wood and concrete elements and so on. You see the elements and you don’t know what they are, which from urban point of view is more interesting. A person can appear on different levels, and this probably makes a difference. Even though as an inhabitant you are not directly connected with a city, it is still possible to be somewhere in an open space, even if being inside a house. It is not a singular volume that has all the interesting spaces inside but rather a sort of an inside-out condition.

The problems of urban nature, however, cannot be solved with one house only. In Beijing for instance, even though all the houses were introverted, they made clusters and neighbourhoods. The public spaces, these little alleyways called Hutong, were not only for circulation but also for the inhabitants and vendors to gather. It worked well as a fabric of very quiet private houses within a web of busy shared public spaces. 

From the modern examples, José Luis Cert comes to my mind. He built a courtyard house for himself in Cambridge, Massachusetts. However, what he designed was also a neighbourhood. There was not only an idea for one house, but many houses, all connected.

I think nowadays the suburbs should be rethought. The typical subdivisions are really very anti-urban, two houses split only three metres apart, and yet unable to talk to each other. In China there are huge developments of villa houses by the developers. The challenge for the architect is to strive for schemes that would have positive connections with the neighbours and the city. Unfortunately, what we have here is a Chinese version of an urban sprawl. Because of the density and population that we have, it is worse than the American one.

IS IT AN OBJECTIVE VALUE FOR THE HOUSE TO BLUR THE BORDER BETWEEN INSIDE AND OUTSIDE? 

It’s a question that I have been interested in as an architect very much for a long time. 

In the past century European culture has been very influential all over the world. What’s interesting or not so interesting in a way, is that European architecture, which is very much a northern architecture, has-spread all over the south, although some transformation has happened here and there.

I lived in the north of China. There, architecture is very much about how to insulate the house for half of the year at least because of the winter. People look out to the outside, to nature or the city through windows, through apertures.

In the Southern China, because of the warm and hot climate, it’s actually easier to open up the building. I am interested in that very much. I think the South should really take advantage of their climate. I really enjoy at least some outdoor space under a roof, instead of a locking myself in a room.

ANGELO’S HOUSE HAS V-SHAPED BEAMS THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE A FRAGMENT OF A HIGHWAY OR A BRIDGE. IT’S NOT SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY DOMESTIC. HOW DO YOU CONVINCE A CLIENT OF THIS KIND OF PROPOSAL? 

Angelo needed to make a very large span, so that the space underneath the bedrooms and the swimming pool could be completely open. This is for sure an objective quality. Although you mentioned infrastructure, I don’t know if he wanted to do a fragment of a freeway. I’m pretty sure he didn’t just want to do a kind of a little box there, blocking half the plot. Rejecting this, he naturally ended up with something not easily associable with a house. 

I think what Bucci did and what we are trying to do in our own work is designing not only a building, but a lifestyle. It’s an invitation. If the users or the clients want it, that is of course the best outcome. But to give yourself a chance to have your proposal accepted you must invent more than just something that makes sense conceptually. You need to seduce the users. Angelo proposed a situation full of potential, that’s why it was, and is, convincing.

I think all of us have two human natures, myself included. The first, is the kind of bourgeois nature that desires comfort. I have it as well for sure. On the other hand, in the end, we want something that would open up our minds and make us discover something in a kind of long-lasting way.

WHAT ARE YOUR EARLY EXPERIENCES WITH CLIENTS?

In my younger days, discussions were very difficult, people didn’t know what I was trying to do. They were suspicious and I can’t blame them. But today, sometime after, and having completed a few buildings, those that I thought would never like the houses we did, like them and even ask us to repeat them, which of course we don’t do, because we always want to try something new.

I don’t think the clients understand the verbal and graphic language we use to discuss architecture. Before they see the actual building, if you show only drawings or models, they get some idea of what you intend. But, in reality they don’t really see that picture we see in our minds. Sometimes they may even think a particular idea was not allowed - too weird or too strange. However, this changes, when they develop a trust in the architect, they begin to think, OK, maybe I was interested in the McMansion before, but here I see the possibility of a house that I never could have imagined. Often, they are open to that.

There is a story I heard decades ago. There was a poll by a newspaper in the UK. Readers were asked, what kind of dream house would they love to live in? The most popular answer was a lighthouse. The point is that you don’t always want things to be outrageous, but in the end, we are pretty open to things out of standard.

I think when we practice, we are actually teaching. It’s similar to when the students may not get it, may not agree with you, but you have to send the message out that there are other ways of living, that are better, more healthy and more interesting.

YOU SAID IN ONE OF THE INTERVIEWS: „I DON’T LIKE THINGS SERIOUS”. DO YOU THINK THAT THERE IS AN ASPECT OF SOMETHING HUMOROUS IN THE WEEKEND HOUSE IN SAO PAULO? 

Humorous, maybe not, but joyful, yes. There’s a book that every American household has: „The joy of cooking”. I think we don’t have enough of that in architecture today. You have some sculptural forms, but the spaces don’t really inspire people to a more uplifting mood. I think Bucci’s house has that kind of joy. Ultimately, as I said before, the architects need to offer not just a kind of playful look, but a way in which to spend time. In Bucci’s house you go up and down to take a swim, you do a barbecue under your swimming pool. That seems to be a place for the weekend. You live in a different way than in a typical house, and it’s very enjoyable.

DID THE REFLECTIONS WE BROUGHT TO THE TABLE TODAY INSPIRE YOUR OWN PRODUCTION?

For the first time in our lives, my wife and I, we are building a house for ourselves. My wife is also an architect and my partner. We designed an introverted house to be built in the Yangtze River Delta area. It is a courtyard house, however, around the courtyard, there’s no structural support. The whole roof is cantilevered from the thick outer peripheral wall. On a good day, you can open it and then there is nothing between the yard and the living space. It has something from both a traditional Chinese house and Bucci’s radical use of structure. Hopefully next year we will live there and see how it works. (This project is indefinitely on hold.)

IF YOU IMAGINE A BUILDING THAT YOU KNOW FROM THE HISTORY, A HOUSE THAT YOU STILL LIKE, BUT IS OPPOSITE TO ANGELO’S HOUSE, WHAT WOULD COME TO YOUR MIND?

I have had the fortune to travel quite a bit. As a student I saw the drawings of Palladio’s Villa Rotonda, and I have to say I didn’t really care much about it. But when I went there eventually, after many years, I realised the house was on top of a hill. I walked around it, you know, like a tourist. It was a panoramic experience. It was like watching a movie, there was a cinematic quality to the views. 

Not only is there a classical-contemporary contrast between Villa Rotonda and Bucci’s weekend house, but the fact that Palladio’s Villa looks always outside and Bucci’s, almost always inside, makes them somehow opposite. Moreover, the movement in Villa Rotonda is circular. And in Bucci’s it would be more back and forth, up, and down.

DID YOU SWIM IN THE SWIMMING POOL ON THE ROOF? 

Oh, I would love to. I didn’t get to do that. 

24.08.2021

张永和: 我将住宅作为建筑原型来设计，也就是说，它绝不仅仅是一个功能性居所的问题，也关乎于以某种组织空间和结构方式的可能性。我一直对其他建筑师的非常规住宅有着极大的兴趣，安杰洛的周末之家就是其中之一。

安杰洛的周末之家与你长大的房子，是否有相似之处？

有一点点。我在北京的一个四合院里长大并生活了13年，安杰洛在圣保罗的周末之家里也有一个院子。虽然从形式和空间上来说，它们是完全不同的，即使两者都有一个重要的、中心的户外空间。

传统的中式合院是完全围合的，它非常内向。你不会察觉到邻居的存在，因为它的围墙与其他的住宅背靠背。一旦进入宅子，你就远离了城市，你感觉自己是在世界甚至宇宙的中心，因为你的头上只有一片天空，脚下是一片土地。这是城市中最不城市的地方——一个院子通常是10乘10米。你可以抬头看见鸟儿飞翔，也可以四处看看花草生长。我记得我母亲曾经一到夏天就种一些漂亮的花儿。所有的这些元素使其成为另外一个世界。

布奇的周末之家是独一无二的。尽管如此，我想说我家的房子和他的设计之间有一种联系。他在一个高密度的城市社区里创造了一个小小的封闭式丛林，在很基本的层面上，这是相似的想法。

布奇的这所住宅是一个周末住宅。它也可以每天使用吗？

很多年前我就在照片上看到过这所住宅。2019年我有机会到圣保罗，安杰洛带我去了那里，并告诉了我更多关于房主的特殊的生活方式。房主是一位作家，住在圣保罗城外的其它地方，平时在家工作。周末时，她想待在城市里。她的作息与圣保罗的大多数市民相反，他们会在周六周日逃到大自然中去。

不管怎样，在不知道住宅名称和主人生活方式的情况下，我认为你肯定可以想象工作日时居住在这里。一所好的住宅有一些共通性的东西，在基本层面上保证舒适，但也应该提供一种体验。

这所房子能提供什么样的体验？

我对这个问题感兴趣：你如何做出一个典型的周末住宅的反面？我认为他的住宅在某种程度上是颠覆性的。这就是安杰洛设计的力量。我从来没有去过圣保罗城外的典型的周末住宅。我可能完全错了，但我想象它会是景观中的一个小平房。

安杰洛所做的不仅是把一片自然带回到城市，而且为了在局促用地条件下做出一个院子，他不得不把住宅的主要体量放在院落之上。他发明了另一种造院宅的方法。院子被住宅在剖面上包裹着，而不是像所有传统的院宅范式那样在平面上。我没有在其他住宅中看到过这种空间布局。

你认为布奇的房子会造就什么样的城市？它是否有助于赋予城市生气，还是一种具有内向的开放？

如果我们谈及这所住宅与圣保罗城市的联系，需要面对更多社会经济导向的话题。这关乎贫富悬殊，以及随之而来的社会安全问题。巴西，总的来说，是相当危险的。如果我没记错的话，圣保罗实际上还被认为比巴西其他城市更危险。在亚洲城市，从北京到东京，晚上在街上行走从来都不是问题，因为你知道这里是安全的。在这方面，我们很幸运。

总之，在中国，在拉丁美洲，在墨西哥城，在圣保罗，到处我都有一种感觉，你会看到巨大的黑色的门，完全看不到里面。就此而言，安杰洛的住宅要开放得多。你看到栅栏上面露出的形体，一些木制、混凝土的构件。你看到它们，并不知道是什么，但从城市景观的角度来看也很有趣。一个人可以出现在不同的层高上，而这很可能会带来不同的感受。即使作为居住者，你不直接接触城市，也可能置身开放空间中，纵然这个开放空间是在一座住宅内。它不是一个包含着各种有趣空间质量的单一体量，而是一种由内而外的状态。

然而，城市性质的问题不能只靠一栋住宅来解决。例如在北京，尽管所有的房子都是内向的，但它们形成了集群和邻里关系。公共空间是这些被称为胡同的小巷子，不仅仅是为了通行，也是居民和小贩的聚集地。作为一种肌理，非常安静的私人住宅，交织在繁忙的共享公共空间网络中，运作良好。

在现代的案例中，我想到了何塞-路易斯-瑟特（José Luis Cert）。他在马萨诸塞州的剑桥市为自己建造了一座院宅。但他所设计的实际上是一个社区。他的想法不仅关乎于一栋住宅，而是许多栋，彼此相连。

我认为今天，郊区应当被重新思考。典型的土地划分确实非常反城市，两栋房子只相隔三米，但之间却没有任何联系。在中国，有大量的开发商盖的别墅。建筑师所面临的挑战是要努力寻求能与社区和城市有积极关系的设计。不幸的是，我们在这里看到的是一个中国版的城市蔓延。由于我们的密度和人口，它比美国的更糟糕。

对住宅来说，模糊室内和室外的边界有客观的价值吗？

这是我作为建筑师，长期以来非常感兴趣的一个问题。

在过去的一个世纪里，欧洲文化在世界各地都有很大的影响。在某种程度上，有趣或不太有趣的是，欧洲的建筑，在很大程度上是北方的建筑，现已遍布南方，尽管在各处发生了一些转化。

我住在中国的北方。在那里，因为一年中至少有一半的时间是冷天，建筑在很大程度上是关于如何保温。人们透过窗户，通过孔洞看向外界，自然或城市。

在中国南方，由于气候温暖炎热，实际上更容易将建筑敞开。我对这一点很感兴趣。我认为南方应该真正利用他们的气候优势。我真的很享受至少在屋檐下的一些户外空间，而不是把自己关在一个房间里。

安杰洛的住宅有V型梁，看起来像是高速公路或桥梁的片段。不是特别有居家感。你如何说服业主接受这类的设计？

安杰洛需要一个非常大的跨度，这样卧室和游泳池下面的空间就可以完全开放。这显然是一种客观的品质。虽然你提到了基础设施，我不确定他是否想做一个高速公路的片段。但我很确定他不想在那里仅仅做一个小盒子，堵住一半的地块。拒绝了常规作法，他自然而然地转向不太像住宅的答案。

我认为布奇所做的和我们在自己的工作中试图做的，都不单单是设计一个建筑，而是设计一种生活方式。这是一种邀请，如果用户或客户想要它，这当然是最好的结果。但是为了给自己创造一个建议被接受的机会，你必须创造更多，不仅仅是一个概念。你需要“引诱”用户。安杰洛提出了一种充满潜力的可能性，这就是为什么它过去和现在都很有说服力。

我认为我们所有人都有两种人的本性，包括我自己。第一，是那种渴望舒适的资产阶级本性。我肯定也有这种本性。另一方面，最终，我们希望有一些东西能打开我们的思想，使我们不断地发现。

你早期与业主的合作经验是什么？

在我年轻的时候，沟通是非常困难的，人们不知道我想做什么。他们充满疑惑，而我也不能责备他们。但时至今日，在完成一些建筑后，一些我以为不会喜欢我们设计的住宅的人，喜欢它们并且要求我们复制它们，当然我们不会这么做，因为我们总想尝试一些新的东西。

我不认为业主懂得我们讨论建筑时使用的口头或图像的语言。在他们看到真正的建筑前，如果你只展示图纸和模型，他们会对你的意图有一些了解。但实际上他们没有真正看到我们脑海中的画面。有时，他们甚至会认为某个想法是不被允许的——太怪异或太奇特。然而，这种情况会发生变化，当他们对建筑师产生信任时，他们就会开始想，好吧，也许我以前对麦克豪宅（McMansion）感兴趣，但在这里，我看到了一个我永远无法想象的住宅的可能性。常常他们会对此持开放态度。

我在几十年前听到一个故事。英国的一家报纸进行了一次调查。读者们被问到，他们最想住在什么样的梦想之家？最受欢迎的答案是一个灯塔。问题是，你并不总是希望事情离谱，但最终，我们对非标准的事物是相当开放的。

我认为当我们实践时，我们实际上是在教学。这类似于当学生可能不明白时，会不同意你的观点，但你必须把信息传递出去：有其它的生活方式存在，这些方式更好，更健康，更有趣。

你曾在一次采访中说到 "我不喜欢严肃的事情"。你认为圣保罗的周末之家中，是否有幽默的一面？

幽默，或许不太对，但快乐，是的。有一本书是每个美国家庭都有的——《烹饪的乐趣》。我认为我们今天的建筑中没有足够的这样的东西。你有一些雕塑般的形式，但空间并没有真正激发人们更振奋的情绪。我认为布奇的住宅里有那种快乐。归根到底，正如我之前所说，建筑师需要提供的不仅仅是一种好玩的外观，而是一种度过时间的方式。在布奇的住宅里，你爬上爬下地去游泳，你在泳池下做烧烤。这似乎是一个周末的地方。你的生活方式与一般的住宅不同，而且非常令人愉悦。

我们今天谈论的这些反馈是否激发了你自己的创作？

第一次，在我们的生活中，我的妻子和我为自己建造住宅。我的妻子也是一名建筑师，是我的合作伙伴。我们设计了一个内向的房子，要建在长三角地区。这是一个院宅，然而，在院子周围，没有结构支撑。整个屋顶是由厚厚的外围墙体悬挑出来的。在天气好的时候，你可以打开它，然后院子和起居空间没有了任何隔段。它既有中国传统房屋的特点，也有类似布奇的对结构的激进运用。希望明年我们能住在那里，看看它是什么感觉。（目前项目处于停顿状态）

如果你想象一个你从历史中知道的建筑，一个你仍然喜欢的住宅，但与安杰洛的房子相反，你会想到什么？

我很幸运地走了不少地方。还是一个学生的时候，我看过帕拉迪奥的园厅别墅的图纸，我不得不说我对它并不怎么感兴趣。但多年以后，我最终去了那里，我意识到这个房子是在山顶上。我绕着它走了一圈，你知道，像个游客。那是一种全景体验。这就像看电影一样，有一种电影般的景色。

园厅别墅和布奇的周末之家之间不仅存在着古典与现代的对比，而且帕拉迪奥的别墅总是外面看，而布奇的，几乎总是向里面看，这使他们在某种程度上是相反的。此外，园厅别墅中的运动流线是环形的。而在布奇的作品中，它将更多地是往返和上下。

你有没有在屋顶上的泳池中游泳？ 

噢，我会很喜欢的。但那次没能游。

2021年8月24日

Yung ho Chang

Yung Ho Chang, FAIA 

Founding Partner and Principal Architect, Atelier Feichang Jianzhu (FCJZ) 

Educated both in China and in the US, Chang received Master of Architecture degree from the University of California at Berkeley in 1984. Since 1992, he has been practicing in China and established Atelier Feichang Jianzhu (FCJZ) with Lijia Lu in 1993. He has won a number of prizes and recognitions, such as First Place in the Shinkenchiku Residential Design Competition in 1986, a Progressive Architecture Citation Award in 1996, the 2000 UNESCO Prize for the Promotion of the Arts, and the Academy Award in Architecture from American Academy of Arts and Letters in 2006, 2016 China Architecture Media Award Excellence in Practice Prize, and Honorary Membership of AIA Hong Kong. FCJZ has been recognized as one of the 100+ Best Architecture Firms 2019 by Domus magazine. Jishou Art Museum has won the American Institute of Architects (AIA) 2020 Architecture Award and the ArchDaily China Building of the Year 2020 Award. He has published a number of books and monographs, including Exhibition as Construction Experiment in English, World Architecture special issue – The Modernity of Making: Yung Ho Chang in Chinese/English, Yung Ho Chang / Atelier Feichang Jianzhu: A Chinese Practice in English/French and Yung Ho Chang: Luce chiara, camera oscura in Italian. He participated in many international exhibitions of art and architecture, including six times in the Venice Biennale since 2000. He has taught at various architecture schools in the USA and China; he was a Professor and Founding Head of Graduate Center of Architecture at Peking University from 1999 to 2005; he held the Kenzo Tange Chair at Harvard GSD in 2002, the Eliel Saarinen Chair at Michigan in 2004, and between 2005 and 2010, he headed the Architecture Department at MIT. He was also a Pritzker Prize Jury member from 2012 to 2017.

www.fcjz.com

Yung ho Chang

Yung Ho Chang, FAIA 

Founding Partner and Principal Architect, Atelier Feichang Jianzhu (FCJZ) 

Educated both in China and in the US, Chang received Master of Architecture degree from the University of California at Berkeley in 1984. Since 1992, he has been practicing in China and established Atelier Feichang Jianzhu (FCJZ) with Lijia Lu in 1993. He has won a number of prizes and recognitions, such as First Place in the Shinkenchiku Residential Design Competition in 1986, a Progressive Architecture Citation Award in 1996, the 2000 UNESCO Prize for the Promotion of the Arts, and the Academy Award in Architecture from American Academy of Arts and Letters in 2006, 2016 China Architecture Media Award Excellence in Practice Prize, and Honorary Membership of AIA Hong Kong. FCJZ has been recognized as one of the 100+ Best Architecture Firms 2019 by Domus magazine. Jishou Art Museum has won the American Institute of Architects (AIA) 2020 Architecture Award and the ArchDaily China Building of the Year 2020 Award. He has published a number of books and monographs, including Exhibition as Construction Experiment in English, World Architecture special issue – The Modernity of Making: Yung Ho Chang in Chinese/English, Yung Ho Chang / Atelier Feichang Jianzhu: A Chinese Practice in English/French and Yung Ho Chang: Luce chiara, camera oscura in Italian. He participated in many international exhibitions of art and architecture, including six times in the Venice Biennale since 2000. He has taught at various architecture schools in the USA and China; he was a Professor and Founding Head of Graduate Center of Architecture at Peking University from 1999 to 2005; he held the Kenzo Tange Chair at Harvard GSD in 2002, the Eliel Saarinen Chair at Michigan in 2004, and between 2005 and 2010, he headed the Architecture Department at MIT. He was also a Pritzker Prize Jury member from 2012 to 2017.

www.fcjz.com

Yung ho Chang

Yung Ho Chang, FAIA 

Founding Partner and Principal Architect, Atelier Feichang Jianzhu (FCJZ) 

Educated both in China and in the US, Chang received Master of Architecture degree from the University of California at Berkeley in 1984. Since 1992, he has been practicing in China and established Atelier Feichang Jianzhu (FCJZ) with Lijia Lu in 1993. He has won a number of prizes and recognitions, such as First Place in the Shinkenchiku Residential Design Competition in 1986, a Progressive Architecture Citation Award in 1996, the 2000 UNESCO Prize for the Promotion of the Arts, and the Academy Award in Architecture from American Academy of Arts and Letters in 2006, 2016 China Architecture Media Award Excellence in Practice Prize, and Honorary Membership of AIA Hong Kong. FCJZ has been recognized as one of the 100+ Best Architecture Firms 2019 by Domus magazine. Jishou Art Museum has won the American Institute of Architects (AIA) 2020 Architecture Award and the ArchDaily China Building of the Year 2020 Award. He has published a number of books and monographs, including Exhibition as Construction Experiment in English, World Architecture special issue – The Modernity of Making: Yung Ho Chang in Chinese/English, Yung Ho Chang / Atelier Feichang Jianzhu: A Chinese Practice in English/French and Yung Ho Chang: Luce chiara, camera oscura in Italian. He participated in many international exhibitions of art and architecture, including six times in the Venice Biennale since 2000. He has taught at various architecture schools in the USA and China; he was a Professor and Founding Head of Graduate Center of Architecture at Peking University from 1999 to 2005; he held the Kenzo Tange Chair at Harvard GSD in 2002, the Eliel Saarinen Chair at Michigan in 2004, and between 2005 and 2010, he headed the Architecture Department at MIT. He was also a Pritzker Prize Jury member from 2012 to 2017.

www.fcjz.com