Comments from Dezeen
dan • 2 days ago A massive dodge of an even bigger bullet, well done Japan. 巧妙地躲过一劫，日本干得漂亮。
Chris MacDonald • 2 days ago I think the overall form of her first attempt was far better than the "squashed" second version, but ultimately neither were particularly beautiful or suitable for the site. Odd, given the enormous success of her aquatic park in London, which actually is beautiful. 我认为她的初版设计远比“扁平化”的第二版要好，但都不是特别漂亮或者契合场地。鉴于她在伦敦水上公园的巨大成功——那的确很美——这次的失利令人不解。
Sabina • 2 days ago I hope they will come to their senses and choose a Japanese architect this time. Should never have chosen a foreign architect for a project of such national importance, especially in a country like Japan. 我希望这次他们能追随自己的内心，选择一位日本建筑师。在有这么大国际影响力的项目上不该选择国外建筑师，尤其是日本这样的国家。
KeepForeignArchitectsOut Sabina • 2 days ago Yes, because foreign architects should not be allowed to build in other counties. Bleedin' foreigners stealin' our jobs! Well done! 是哒，因为国外建筑师不应被允许在其他国家工作。该死的老外偷走了我们的工作！赞一个！
herp derperson KeepForeignArchitectsOut • 2 days ago （他们抢了我们的饭碗！）
vincentius • 2 days ago The London stadium by Populous cost ￡486M ($760M); construction of Hadid's design is estimated to be ￥2520M ($2.05B). Hadid is blaming labour costs while analysts blame the extravagant retractable roof. 由Populous建筑事务所设计的伦敦体育场耗资4.86亿英镑（7.6亿美元）；而哈迪德的设计造价预估达到2520亿日元（20.5亿美元）。哈迪德在责备劳动力价格的上涨，而分析家们则在抱怨豪华的可伸缩屋顶。
Nathan • 2 days ago I didn't hate the original concept, but it was never appropriate in the context of it's location at Meijijingu Gaien. A complete rethink is a much better course of action than the compromised revision, although the decision should have probably been made earlier. 我不反对原始概念，但它与明治神宫外苑的语境并不相符。一个彻底的重新考虑要比妥协的修改强得多，虽然早该如此了。
parach • 2 days ago I just don't get it, aren't architects paying attention? Why does it always have to be grandiose and 'spectacular'? Kudos to Japan on scrapping this 'giant turtle'. 我就不明白了，难道就没有建筑师们站出来吗？为什么建筑总要如此宏伟“壮观”？谢天谢地日本废掉了这只“巨龟”。
I was surprised when she won, given that this is a country that is very particular about its cultural image. You have an abundance of world-class architects who fully understand the local context... Use them! 当初她赢得竞标我就很惊讶，因为这是个文化背景十分特殊的国家。你们有那么多了解本地背景的世界级建筑师……用他们！
polodog • 3 days ago Whether you love or hate Zaha's proposal is not the issue, she won the competition fair and straight. The closed-mindedness of Japanese architects and politicians of Abe-regime really ruined everything. Also, you the political nature of this issue is even deeper than you may think here in Japan. 你是否喜欢扎哈的作品不是问题所在，她公平公正地赢得了竞赛。日本建筑师和安倍政权的政客们的封闭思想毁掉了一切。当然，在日本，其中的政治原因比你想象的要深不可测得多。
Neek for polodog • 3 days ago Hadid's proposal is absolutely part of the issue, and I'd like to think that a different scheme, something innovative for an urban stadium (perhaps more subtle as well, but that's a different conversation) would have trumped the conservative opinion that a local architect should have won the competition. The public outcry against the scheme happened for a reason, and it wasn't (only) because her passport is missing kanji. 哈迪德的设计绝对是问题所在之一，我更倾向于一个不同的方案，一个更具革新的城市体育场（也许该表达得更微妙一些，但这是另一码事）将赢过保守派，使得当地建筑师赢得竞赛。 这个方案遭到公众反对是有原因的，并不只是因为她的护照上没有汉字。
gambarimasho • 3 days ago The 1964 Olympics for Japan has previously been symbolisation of the new beginning, a nation with new goals after defeat in WWII. After that Olympics, Japan rose as the world's leading manufacturer and innovator. Recently, and for a few previous decades, there are many problems in Japan; economic stagnation, ageing population, conservatism to name a few. Conservatism is the hardest problem to overcome. This country is very private, not much news, especially negative ones leak out to the world. It is a nationalistic country – that is not surprising with about 5% of foreigners living in Japan. You can never become a Japanese citizen unless you are born in Japan. Japan knows its problems and that is why they bid on the 2020 Olympics. Choosing a foreigner to build its national stadium was a great gesture, never mind the design (design itself does not matter in this politically charged controversy). After all, conservatism and the old ways won the battle. Unfortunately Japan will not rise to new challenges and new ways. 1964年的奥运会是日本建筑的新纪元，从此日本有了二战战败后的新目标。奥运会过后，日本成长为世界制造和创新方面的领导者。 最近几十年，日本存在许多问题；经济停滞、人口老龄化、保守主义等。 保守主义是最难攻克的问题。这个国家很封闭，没有太多新闻——尤其是负面消息会泄露给世界。这也是个民族主义的国家——所以只有5%的外国人居住在日本也就不足为奇了。除非你生在日本，否则你永远也别想成为日本公民。 日本知道自己的问题，所以他们申办了2020年奥运会。选择一位外国建筑师来建造它的国家体育场是一种伟大的姿态，设计不是问题（在这个充满政治争议的地方设计本身无足轻重）。最终还是保守派和老路子赢得了这场战争。不幸的是日本将无法上升到新的挑战和道路。
Neek for gambarimasho • 3 days ago You may be right about the conservative nature of Japanese politics and culture, but the design does matter. It's too easy to point the finger and justify the design by saying the conservatives blocked it because Hadid isn't Japanese. There has been no mention yet of who or what will replace this scheme, but you're default assumption is that it will be a local architect, which I will admit is fair. However, I don't find much strength in the argument that the design isn't the issue, or that it had nothing to do with this decision. 在日本政治和文化的保守方面你也许是对的，但是设计问题不可忽略。这是显而易见的，说保守派由于哈迪德不是日本人而封锁了她的方案，是在掩盖设计问题。 这个方案将被谁或是被什么取代都还未曾提及，但你默认的假设是将会由一位当地建筑师担纲，我承认这很公平。然而，我没有看到关于设计不是问题所在、或者说设计与该决定毫无关系的有力论证。
gambarimasho for Neek • 3 days ago I hope that you are right and architecture still has the power through design and everything else we thought to believe in school. However, Zaha Hadid's proposal was a direct response to the competition brief, the scale of project determined by organizers as well as the site. Organizing a competition always comes with the risk of large budgets as competitors are trying to outdo each other to get noticed. Competitions are another waste of resources, perfect to fit the Olympics as it is now. By cancelling Zaha's design, Japan shows that competition results hold no merit unless it fits someone's idea. Why did the invite jury then? Let Abe, Ito, and Maki and other unhappies to be judges then. I personally think that Olympics is a huge waste of money and very unsustainable. This Olympic stadium at least shows the situation as it is. Perhaps, Tange Stadium was an eyesore for some at the time, but now it is one of the most visited sites in Tokyo. 我希望你是正确的，建筑仍然拥有设计以及其他一切我们在学校时愿意相信的那些力量。 然而，哈迪德的方案是对竞赛要求的直接回应，项目的规模取决于主办方和场地。 应该意识到，一场竞赛总会伴有巨大预算的风险，竞争者都想超越对手获得注意。竞赛是另一种对资源的浪费，完美的契合了如今的奥运会。 通过取消扎哈的设计，日本表明了竞赛结果只有在合了某人的胃口时才有意义。那么要评审团何用？让安倍、伊东豊雄、Maki以及其他不高兴的人来判决好了。 个人认为奥运会是一种对金钱的巨大浪费而且不可持续发展。这座奥运会场馆至少彰显了这个形势。 或许，丹下健三的体育场在某些人眼里不好看，但目前它是东京最受欢迎的场所。
Frank for gambarimasho • 2 days ago Zaha's design did NOT meet the requirements of the competition brief. The brief set a budget of 130 billion yen. Her design was estimated at 300 billion yen, even in the preliminary design stages. Likewise, it turns out that the foundations of the huge arches would have rammed through the subway tracks outside the project site, so it seems she never really thought out the executability of her design. So why was it chosen as the winner? You'd have to ask Tadao Ando, the selection committee chairman, who is another designer known for sculptural masterpieces that are hell to live in (like requiring you to use an umbrella to go the loo from your bedroom in the middle of driving rain because he wanted to create the effect of a courtyard between the bedroom and the toilet). 扎哈的设计并没有符合竞赛要求。要求的预算是1300亿日元。她的设计飙升至3000亿日元，即使是在最初的方案中。 同样的，方案中巨拱经过地铁隧道的设计同样增加了预算，她似乎从不认真考虑设计的可行性。 所以这方案为什么能赢？你应该去问问评委会主席安藤忠雄，以令人有如住进地狱般的雕塑感的杰作闻名（比如让你在下雨天时撑伞从卧室去厕所，因为他想要在卧室与厕所中间创造庭院的效果）。
cho cho for Frank • a day ago I agree with most of your points but the Ando project you referenced was one of his first, probably 40 years ago, it was tiny, and frankly it made him famous. I doubt any of his super high end clients of the last, say 30 years need to go outside and back in to the loo. 我同意你的大部分观点，但你引用的建筑是安藤最初的作品，大概有40多年了，那座建筑很窄，而且坦白说正是它使安藤出名。我怀疑他的顾客最后都会变成诉讼人，告他让他们需要出出入入去厕所30年时间。
Neek for Frank • 7 hours ago Ando's Azuma House was based on a traditional Japanese townhouse style called machiya, which often incorporated a small courtyard as they were typically long and narrow. 安藤的住吉的长屋是建立在一种叫做“町屋”的传统日本住宅风格上的，这种住宅由于长而窄，所以常常有一个小庭院。
Neek for gambarimasho • 6 hours ago I agree with the Olympics as being a resource drain, especially in Tokyo amidst the current environmental disaster at Fukushima. But that's a different conversation. And sure, I could be naive to the real story here. Fair enough. The requested scale of the project is large, yes. But looking back at some of the other shortlist proposals, namely the scheme by gmp Architekten and perhaps SANAA's scheme found ways to lessen the impact of such a large program. I'm not sure whether or not the stadium is an eyesore is the point. It's hard for me to imagine Tange's stadium as such, and it's visited so much because it's still in use. Tange's plan fits the site perfectly and is accessible to the city. It pushed the limits of contemporary construction at the time, while maintaining buildability. It's one of the few sporting arenas to exhibit national architectural identity, and perhaps the only example of an Olympic stadium with this much continued use. It's also a much smaller building, so this is a forced comparison. Also, I do feel for the architects involved with this project. Cancelling a project after two years of work must be hard to take. I wish them much better luck with their future efforts. 我同意奥运会是一种对资源的浪费，特别是在这种福岛还处于环境灾难的情况下。但那是另一回事了。当然也可能是我幼稚了。呵呵。 没错，项目的要求规模是很大。但是看看名单上其他参赛者的方案，例如gmp Architekten的或者SANAA的设计，或许找到了减小巨大场馆对周围的影响的方式。 我不确定是否这个体育场看起来丑是关键。我做不到如此看待丹下的体育馆，而且它如此受欢迎是由于它仍在使用中。丹下的设计完美得契合场地而且它对城市是开放的。它推动了当代的建造能力并且维持了可建性。这是体育场馆中少数的展示国家建筑形象的，并且也许是如此充分发挥可持续利用的奥运场馆中唯一的例子。它也是一座小得多的建筑，所以这样的比较有些勉强。 同时，我也为参与这个项目的建筑师们感到惋惜。取消一个进行了两年的项目一定很难接受。我祝愿他们在接下来的努力中能有更好的运气。
Comments from theguardian
globallc54 19 Jul 2015 16:09 So Abe's government does not know huge cost overrun is a norm for grand plan of holding the Olympics. So Abe's government is not aware Japan is a country run by greedy and corrupted politicians, construction consortiums and powerful family dynasties where Abe is from? So it is not a loss of pride and prestige allowing a foreigner to do the design? So it is ok to beat up the competitors with grand plan and then back out claiming ignorance? Time to get rid of the Olympics circus and the people running them being dined and wined the most luxury way one can't even imagine. Hold the Olympics in Greece every 4 years with true sport spirit and get rid of nationalism so blatantly displayed in every game. The tourism will help Greece to survive and lessen the EU burden. 所以说安倍政府不知道巨额预算超支是举办奥运会大型计划时的惯例。 所以说安倍政府并没有意识到日本是一个由贪婪和腐败的政客们、建设财团和安倍所属的那种强大家族王朝运行的国家？ 所以说允许一个外国人来设计不会有损尊严和威望？ 所以说用宏伟计划击败对手再回过头来声称无知，这样也可以？ 是时候摆脱奥林匹克马戏团和运行它的人们了，这些人的铺张浪费令人无法想象。 每4年只在希腊举办奥林匹克运动会，用真正的体育精神，摆脱在每场比赛中都明目张胆的民族主义。旅游业能帮助希腊挺过来同时减小欧盟负担。
iancook1964 19 Jul 2015 08:44 I feel like I'm the only one who thought the original Hadid design was jaw dropping and asthetically beautiful. Recognise cost us an important issue though. 似乎我是唯一一个认为哈迪德原始方案令人印象深刻而且无比美丽的。当然我们必须承认预算问题的重要性。
AzuuriAoi 19 Jul 2015 08:11 original concept was "compact and reasonable". but actual state is "costly and unreasonable". Olympics 2020 is mere pretext for moneymaking by politics-construction industrial complex. 原始概念是“简洁合理的”。 但实际情况是“昂贵不合理的”。 2020年奥林匹克运动会只不过是政治和工业建设用来赚钱的借口。
ashbyman 18 Jul 2015 09:27 "Hadid’s Aquatics Centre in London, where costs soared threefold to ￡269m as a result of the ambitious design" - actually mostly as a result of the government changing the requirements after starting work, rising construction costs, and the imposition of VAT, plus inevitable "it cost more than we thought" optimism bias. None of which was within the remit of the architect. The government wrote to Hadid in 2006 to apologise for blaming her for the problems. “哈迪德的伦敦水上乐园，预算飙升3倍至2.69亿英镑，作为这个雄心勃勃的设计的后果”——事实上原因是政府在项目启动后又变更了要求、上升的建造成本、增值税的征收以及“花的总比计划多”的乐观预差。没有一项是在建筑师的职责之内。于是在2006年政府向哈迪德公开道歉，表示不该在这些问题上指责她。
egbertnosausage nlygo 17 Jul 2015 19:38 That was the wrong shape too. Why build round when it forces spectators further away from the action. A fundamentally stupid plan that ignores what the venue is for. Spurs wanted the Olympic stadium but said they'd have to rebuild the interior to suit watching football. West Ham compromised on that requirement on the basis they got it at a give away price. The London Olympics was a massively expensive mistake with no legacy of any worth. 这也是个错误的形状。 如果要迫使观众远离活动区，为什么要建成球状的呢？一个忽略了场所属性的根本性愚蠢的计划。 马刺队想要这个奥林匹克运动场馆但是说他们必须改造建筑内部以使场地符合观看球赛的需要。在以甩卖价成交的情况下，西汉姆妥协地接受了这个要求。伦敦奥林匹克运动场是一个毫无价值的昂贵错误。
Hutomo Riyadi 17 Jul 2015 19:15 The desgin looks nice, but somewhat i can't find the feel of 'utility', 'earthquake resist' and 'multi purpose' on it. Only feel of futuristic theme. But above that, she makes me feel disgust when she slam out the critics by said “They don’t want a foreigner to build in Tokyo for a national stadium. On the other hand, they all have work abroad. Whether it’s Sejima, Toyo Ito, or Maki or Isozaki or Kengo Kuma.” The Japanese knows best what they want for their new stadium, perhaps she must do a depth observation about Japanese perspective and Japanese architecture before she made the desgin in the first place. 设计看起来还不错，但是不知怎的我感觉不到“实用”、“抗震”和“多功能”。只是感受到了未来主义。 但是不管怎么说，她抨击批评人士时发表的言论令人厌恶：“他们不想让一个外国人在东京建造一座国际运动场。而另一方面他们却全都在国外有项目。不管是妹岛和世、伊东豊雄、Maki 、矶崎新或隈研吾。”日本人最知道他们想要什么样的运动场，也许在开始设计之前她应该对日本视角与日本建筑做一个深度观察。
| 
楼主 |
拓都将军
建筑师讨论
