蘇格蘭議會(huì)大廈——澳大利亞悉尼

設(shè)計(jì)/竣工年份：1998～2004年

業(yè)主：蘇格蘭行政當(dāng)局

建筑師：恩里克·米拉萊斯、貝娜蒂塔·塔格利亞布

項(xiàng)目主管：瓊·卡利斯

地方建筑師：RMJM蘇格蘭有限公司、M.A.H Duncan、 T.B. Stewart

攝影師：Christian Ritchers

Date： 1998 - 2004

Client： The Scottish Executive Government

Architects： Enric Miralles， Benedetta Tagliabue

Project director： Joan Callis

Local Architects： RMJM Scotland LTD， M.A.H Duncan， T.B. Stewart

Photogrphs： Christian Ritchers

蘇格蘭是一個(gè)國家，而非僅僅由一系列城市構(gòu)成的地區(qū)。議會(huì)應(yīng)當(dāng)能夠真實(shí)反映其所代表的土地。

開放場(chǎng)地……

這是理解該場(chǎng)地潛力的關(guān)鍵性圖示。

這塊土地本身將轉(zhuǎn)化為一種物質(zhì)，一種實(shí)體建筑材料。我們期望泥炭和草地所賦予水體的特質(zhì)成為新議會(huì)大樓的基礎(chǔ)。

這是一種與荷里路德宮（Holyrood Palace）概念上拉開距離的方法。宮殿是建立在景觀之上的建筑，源于園藝傳統(tǒng)，而蘇格蘭議會(huì)則將被融入土地之中。

當(dāng)坎農(nóng)門（Canon Gate）的盡頭打開時(shí)，人們對(duì)該地點(diǎn)及其規(guī)模的感知將發(fā)生根本性的變化。沿著坎農(nóng)門排列的小型房屋將重新出現(xiàn)，遠(yuǎn)處的視野將向羅伯特·伯恩斯紀(jì)念碑（Robert Burns Monument）和亞瑟座山（Arthur's Seat）敞開。新建的蘇格蘭議會(huì)大廈不應(yīng)妨礙這些視野，這些視野將在現(xiàn)有釀酒廠拆除后變得更加清晰可見。小規(guī)模與遠(yuǎn)距離視野，如同約翰·諾克斯（John Knox）建筑在皇家大道（Royal Mile）上的專注目光，為我們提供了一種新的視覺體驗(yàn)。

議會(huì)坐落于這片土地上

因?yàn)樗鼘儆谔K格蘭的領(lǐng)土，這是我們的目標(biāo)。從一開始，我們就秉持這樣的直覺：個(gè)人對(duì)土地的認(rèn)同感蘊(yùn)含著集體意識(shí)與情感。我們不想忘記蘇格蘭議會(huì)將設(shè)在愛丁堡，但它歸屬于整個(gè)蘇格蘭，歸屬于這片土地。議會(huì)應(yīng)當(dāng)能夠反映其所代表的地域特征。這座建筑應(yīng)從亞瑟座山的斜坡基座升起，仿佛是從巖石中噴涌而出，融入城市之中。

議會(huì)大廈的座位構(gòu)成了一個(gè)大型露天劇場(chǎng)的一部分，市民們可以在此欣賞風(fēng)景。

這是一個(gè)可通過多種方式進(jìn)行建造的設(shè)計(jì)……社會(huì)形態(tài)可以呈現(xiàn)出多樣的“形式”……。自然露天劇場(chǎng)將成為這片土地上的首個(gè)形態(tài)。我們期望從這一形態(tài)中衍生出一系列關(guān)于建筑與土地、土地與公民、公民與建筑之間認(rèn)同感的探索。這不僅僅是一個(gè)“形象”，更是一種參與的姿態(tài)，即共同坐在一起——聚集的物理體現(xiàn)。

它將如何根本性地區(qū)別于其他歐洲議會(huì)大廈？

與其說是一座令人敬畏的紀(jì)念碑，僅僅依賴于尺寸和修辭，我們更傾向于從心理層面來探討這個(gè)問題。

新議會(huì)大廈在心理上應(yīng)具備怎樣的形象？所有公民心中將如何與新議會(huì)大廈建立聯(lián)系？

議會(huì)大廈應(yīng)當(dāng)融入一個(gè)更廣泛的概念之中。具體地點(diǎn)并不重要。議會(huì)大廈應(yīng)該以清晰而有力的信息脫穎而出……以一種不受場(chǎng)地條件限制的方法……任何有力的信息都應(yīng)具有政治意義…議會(huì)大廈是一種存在于人們心中的形式，它代表了一種心理空間。這一空間應(yīng)在特定場(chǎng)地得到充分表達(dá)。我們認(rèn)為，這座建筑應(yīng)該如同從土地中生長(zhǎng)出來一般……雕刻出能夠匯聚人群的形狀。

它不是建造在公園中的單純建筑，也不是一處花園。讓市民們得以坐下、休息和思考，而他們所處的位置應(yīng)當(dāng)類似于立法者的位置。

回憶起蘇格蘭時(shí)，我們找到了那些深深印刻在腦海中的圖像。

陸地上的船只。我們喜愛這些船只，不僅因其結(jié)構(gòu)，更因?yàn)樗鼈兯宫F(xiàn)出的專注姿態(tài)及其存在感。它們那漂浮于風(fēng)景之中的輪廓，應(yīng)成為我們項(xiàng)目的重要組成部分。

SCOTLAND IS A LAND ... IT IS NOT A SERIES OF CITIES. The Parliament should be able to reflect the land， which it represents.

THE OPEN SITE...

This is a crucial image in understanding the possibilities of the site.

The land itself will be a material， a physical building material. We would like the qualities that the peat gives to the water and turf were the basis for the new Parliament.

This is a way of making a conceptual distance from Holyrood Palace. Whereas the Palace is a building set on the landscape， related to the gardening tradition， the Scottish Parliament would be slotted into the land.

The perception of the place and the scale of the site will change drastically when the end of Canon Gate is opened. The small scale of the houses along the Canon Gate will appear again and distant views will open to the Robert Burns Monument and the rock of Arthur’s seat. The new Scottish Parliament should not impair these vistas which will become visible when the existing Brewery is demolished. Small scale and long distance views， like the attentive eye of the John Knox building on the Royal Mile， offer a new field of vision.

THE PARLIAMENT SITS IN THE LAND

Because it belong to the Scottish land. This is our goal. From the outset we have worked with the intuition that individual identification with land carries collective consciousness and sentiments.

We don’t want to forget that the Scottish Parliament will be in Edinburgh， but will belong to Scotland， to the Scottish land. The Parliament should be able to reflect the land it represents. The building should arise from the sloping base of Arthur’s seat and arrive into the city almost surging out of the rock.

THE SEATS OF THE PARLIAMENT ARE A FRAGMENT OF A LARGE AMPHITHEATRE WHERE CITIZENS CAN SIT ON THE LANDSCAPE.

It is a diagram that could be built in many ways…The social form could have many ‘forms’… The natural amphitheatre will be the first form in the land. We hope that what emerges from this form is a series of identifications between the building and the land， between land and citizens， between citizens and the building. Not just and ‘image’ but a physical representation of a participatory attitude to sit together - gathering.

How is it going to be fundamentally distinct from other European Parliaments？

Instead of an overwhelming monument， which only relates to dimensions and rhetorical forms， we like to think about it in terms of a psychological approach.

What is the mental image of the new Parliament？ How will all of us， citizens， relate in our mind to the new Parliament？

The Parliament should belong to a broader concept. The specific place should not be crucial. The Parliament building should come out of a clear and strong statement…in a way independent of site circumstances …Any strong statement should carry political implications… The Parliament is a form in people’s mind. It is a mental place. That place should be expressed in the site. We have the feeling that the building should be land… built out of land…To carve in the land the form of gathering people together.

Neither a building in a park nor a garden. Citizens， sitting， resting， thinking but in a similar place and position as members of Parliament.

From our recollections of Scotland we find these images that stick in our minds.

The boats offered by the land. We like these boats not only in their construction， but also in their dedicate presence in a place. Something about their form floating in the landscape should be a part of our project.