适应性重用:重要的回顾

IF 0.3 4区 艺术学 0 ARCHITECTURE METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture Pub Date : 2022-04-03 DOI:10.1080/13602365.2022.2105381
F. Lanz, J. Pendlebury
{"title":"适应性重用:重要的回顾","authors":"F. Lanz, J. Pendlebury","doi":"10.1080/13602365.2022.2105381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Buildings have always been reused for both pragmatic and symbolic reasons. However, out of the turbulence of the mid-twentieth century, stimulated by reactions against modern ‘clean-sweep’ planning, a new field of policy and practice emerged in the 1970s to respond to the burgeoning conservation movement and growing environmental awareness, which came to be termed ‘adaptive reuse’. The last decade in particular has seen a flourishing of interest in adaptive reuse both on the ground and in scholarship. Today, the practice is witnessed across the architectural spectrum, from starchitects to the most modest community-generated projects. Adaptive reuse is ideologically supported through heritage and carbon reduction campaigning, and is evident in policy and education. In this paper, we critically review the rise of adaptive reuse scholarship and the emergent epistemology it represents, with a focus on the past twenty years and more recent monographs in the field. What we discern in these texts is a recent shift in the debate toward a more theoretical approach to the subject. While the debate on adaptive reuse has been continuously developing since the 1970s, it did so mostly with a focus on mapping and depicting an architectural phenomenon, and identifying tools and strategies to instruct practitioners and designers. However, more recent works on adaptive reuse are increasingly seeking to go beyond a pragmatic and practice-focused approach, and to investigate adaptive reuse in a more conceptual way. In doing so, they might open up the debate to new disciplinary contributions beyond the domain of architecture and design. This paper aims to outline and contribute to this shift.","PeriodicalId":44236,"journal":{"name":"METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adaptive reuse: a critical review\",\"authors\":\"F. Lanz, J. Pendlebury\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13602365.2022.2105381\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Buildings have always been reused for both pragmatic and symbolic reasons. However, out of the turbulence of the mid-twentieth century, stimulated by reactions against modern ‘clean-sweep’ planning, a new field of policy and practice emerged in the 1970s to respond to the burgeoning conservation movement and growing environmental awareness, which came to be termed ‘adaptive reuse’. The last decade in particular has seen a flourishing of interest in adaptive reuse both on the ground and in scholarship. Today, the practice is witnessed across the architectural spectrum, from starchitects to the most modest community-generated projects. Adaptive reuse is ideologically supported through heritage and carbon reduction campaigning, and is evident in policy and education. In this paper, we critically review the rise of adaptive reuse scholarship and the emergent epistemology it represents, with a focus on the past twenty years and more recent monographs in the field. What we discern in these texts is a recent shift in the debate toward a more theoretical approach to the subject. While the debate on adaptive reuse has been continuously developing since the 1970s, it did so mostly with a focus on mapping and depicting an architectural phenomenon, and identifying tools and strategies to instruct practitioners and designers. However, more recent works on adaptive reuse are increasingly seeking to go beyond a pragmatic and practice-focused approach, and to investigate adaptive reuse in a more conceptual way. In doing so, they might open up the debate to new disciplinary contributions beyond the domain of architecture and design. This paper aims to outline and contribute to this shift.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13602365.2022.2105381\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHITECTURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13602365.2022.2105381","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

建筑的重复利用既有实用主义的原因,也有象征意义的原因。然而,在20世纪中期的动荡中,在反对现代“大扫除”规划的反应的刺激下,20世纪70年代出现了一个新的政策和实践领域,以回应蓬勃发展的保护运动和日益增长的环境意识,这被称为“适应性再利用”。特别是在过去的十年里,无论是在地面上还是在学术上,对适应性再利用的兴趣都在蓬勃发展。今天,从明星建筑师到最不起眼的社区项目,这种实践在整个建筑领域都得到了见证。适应性再利用在意识形态上得到了遗产和碳减排运动的支持,在政策和教育方面也很明显。在本文中,我们批判性地回顾了适应性重用学术的兴起及其所代表的新兴认识论,重点是过去二十年和该领域最近的专著。我们在这些文本中看到的是,最近的辩论转向了更理论化的方法。虽然自20世纪70年代以来,关于适应性重用的争论一直在不断发展,但它主要集中在映射和描绘建筑现象,以及确定指导从业者和设计师的工具和策略。然而,最近关于自适应重用的工作越来越多地寻求超越实用主义和以实践为中心的方法,并以更概念化的方式研究自适应重用。在这样做的过程中,他们可能会开启对建筑和设计领域之外的新学科贡献的辩论。本文旨在概述并促进这一转变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Adaptive reuse: a critical review
Buildings have always been reused for both pragmatic and symbolic reasons. However, out of the turbulence of the mid-twentieth century, stimulated by reactions against modern ‘clean-sweep’ planning, a new field of policy and practice emerged in the 1970s to respond to the burgeoning conservation movement and growing environmental awareness, which came to be termed ‘adaptive reuse’. The last decade in particular has seen a flourishing of interest in adaptive reuse both on the ground and in scholarship. Today, the practice is witnessed across the architectural spectrum, from starchitects to the most modest community-generated projects. Adaptive reuse is ideologically supported through heritage and carbon reduction campaigning, and is evident in policy and education. In this paper, we critically review the rise of adaptive reuse scholarship and the emergent epistemology it represents, with a focus on the past twenty years and more recent monographs in the field. What we discern in these texts is a recent shift in the debate toward a more theoretical approach to the subject. While the debate on adaptive reuse has been continuously developing since the 1970s, it did so mostly with a focus on mapping and depicting an architectural phenomenon, and identifying tools and strategies to instruct practitioners and designers. However, more recent works on adaptive reuse are increasingly seeking to go beyond a pragmatic and practice-focused approach, and to investigate adaptive reuse in a more conceptual way. In doing so, they might open up the debate to new disciplinary contributions beyond the domain of architecture and design. This paper aims to outline and contribute to this shift.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: METU JOURNAL OF THE FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE is a biannual refereed publication of the Middle East Technical University published every June and December, and offers a comprehensive range of articles contributing to the development of knowledge in man-environment relations, design and planning. METU JFA accepts submissions in English or Turkish, and assumes that the manuscripts received by the Journal have not been published previously or that are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The Editorial Board claims no responsibility for the opinions expressed in the published manuscripts. METU JFA invites theory, research and history papers on the following fields and related interdisciplinary topics: architecture and urbanism, planning and design, restoration and preservation, buildings and building systems technologies and design, product design and technologies. Prospective manuscripts for publication in these fields may constitute; 1. Original theoretical papers; 2. Original research papers; 3. Documents and critical expositions; 4. Applied studies related to professional practice; 5. Educational works, commentaries and reviews; 6. Book reviews Manuscripts, in English or Turkish, have to be approved by the Editorial Board, which are then forwarded to Referees before acceptance for publication. The Board claims no responsibility for the opinions expressed in the published manuscripts. It is assumed that the manuscripts received by the Journal are not sent to other journals for publication purposes and have not been previously published elsewhere.
期刊最新文献
TRACING THE EMERGENCE OF A PERIPHERAL WATERFRONT NEIGHBORHOOD IN ISTAVROZBEYLERBEYI ON THE BOSPHORUS SHORES (1760-1805) Un-building: a utopia of receding construction Striving for a new monumentality: the non-classical influence on Gunnar Asplund’s architecture ‘The germ of future extension and perpetuity’: capitalism and the Peabody Trust RESTRUCTURING AND NEW SPATIAL TENDENCIES IN ANKARA FURNITURE SECTOR
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1