Life as a Runway | The Artworks Were Walking@Fashion

THE Guggenheim's 50th anniversary celebration last week was a magnet for fashion extremists. Fans stormed the doors at 9 p.m. to hear a performance by Animal Collective.
Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

In contrast to the band's incandescent white headdresses, guests wore riotous color: Summer of Love headbands, tomato-color satin frocks and vibrant war paint that suggested "Avatar."
Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

There were studied resurrections of Seattle grunge, 'I'm with the band' T-shirts and festoons of Sgt. Pepper military braid.
Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

Upstairs, a benefit auction presided over by the museum's Young Collectors Council was only slightly more sedate, with guests swanning by in sequins and Baudelairean frills.
Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

Angelo Chan, left, wears sober tweeds by day, but traded in his banker's cravat that night for a Lanvin velvet butterfly tie. "There's a very fine line between fashion and costume," Mr. Chan said, "and this tie is as close to costume as I get."
Photo: Elizabeth Lippman for The New York Times

@Source from: http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/03/10/fashion/20100311-runway-slideshow_index.html

Pierre Cardin: 60 Years and Counting@Fashion

"Pierre Cardin: 60 Years of Innovation" is a monument to the French designer's oeuvre. Written by his long-term collaborator Jean-Pascal Hesse, the book vividly illustrates Mr. Cardin's career through images of colorful circle furniture and visionary zippered-jersey masculine sportswear.

In the 1960's, Mr. Cardin created dresses iconic of the space age: square-cut to free the body with circular cut-outs and satellite sleeves, aviator helmets, miniskirts and colorful hose. His landmark Cosmos collection of 1964, with tunic and hose for both men and women, was a confident statement about unisex clothing and anticipated the masculine/feminine fashion standoff that dominated the second half of the 20th century.
Photo: Archives Pierre Cardin

Mr. Cardin hoped his designs would express physical and mental emancipation for women. "My way was to draw something of the future — to be young, to see that a woman could be free," he said. "I wanted to give women in the 1960's a chance to work, to sit, to take the car and drive in my dresses."
Photo: Archives Pierre Cardin

Though Mr. Cardin's fashion training began in haute couture, he was never comfortable in the shell of couture gentility. "When I started 60 years ago, the fashion I was drawing was something strange — people said I was crazy and they never wanted to wear my clothes," he said.
Photo: Archives Pierre Cardin

Mr. Cardin was considered a maverick and an outsider. The designer was criticized for creating furniture that looked as though it were extruded from a space ship (although he explains that he would "buy the tree, cut the wood and make the drawing") and berated for building an empire on licenses for anything from men's shirts to a frying pan.
Photo: Archives Pierre Cardin

Even now, in his late 80s, Mr. Cardin's aim is always to appeal to the next generation, and today's young designers seem to be catching up with his style. Louise Goldin, a London-based designer, found influence in a Cardin image for her autumn 2010 collection (shown here). "It is beautiful and it still looks so futuristic — and that is the way I have been working," said Ms. Goldin. "I like to challenge myself. There were a lot of elements of 3-D. But that is the moment we are in. His images still look so incredibly modern."
Photo: Catwalking.com

@Source from: http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/03/22/fashion/20100323-ihtcardin-slideshow_index.html

Interview with Anne Makepeace, the Director/Writer of I.M. Pei: Building China Modern@People

Anne Makepeace, who previously worked with American Masters as writer/producer/director of Robert Capa: In Love and War as well as Edward Curtis: Coming to Light, answers questions about the making-of I.M. Pei: Building China Modern. In this interview she talks about the challenges of filming in China, her creative process when interviewing subjects and documenting a story, and her admiration for Pei’s body of work.
What first got you interested in doing a film on I.M. Pei?
When Eugene Shirley, the producer of I. M. Pei: Building China Modern, contacted me back in 2003 to ask I would be interested in directing a film about Pei, I was very excited about the idea. I had seen Pei’s pyramid at the Louvre and other buildings done by him – CAA in LA, the East Wing of the National Museum of Art – and was eager to find out more about the man behind these great works. Eugene had been directing as well as producing up until that time, but found that producing itself was more than full time, especially in China. I was very happy to be asked to take over that role.
While making the film, did you learn anything that surprised you about Pei?
I was amazed at the sheer number and variety of buildings Pei had designed and built. And I found the story of his exile from China very compelling. Pei left China in 1935 at age 17 to study engineering, intending to return home at the end of his studies. For decades his return was interrupted by war and revolution, keeping him in the United States for his whole adult life. Then at the age of 85, he was asked to design an art museum for his hometown city of Suzhou. The story of the “Return of the Native” was very compelling for me.
Are there any interesting anecdotes about the filming or the interviewees?

Filming in China presented huge challenges for the production. We were constantly shadowed by friendly but strict representatives of the Communist Party, including our translators, so we were not able to hear any negative points of view about the museum, which after all was extremely controversial in that it required destroying neighborhoods in an area protected by UNESCO, which had designated that part of Old Suzou as a World Heritage Site. When interviewing officials, we were required to adhere to a very strict list of questions. Filming Pei at the Louvre was a joy, however – he seemed very free and happy to be there, and that shoot provided an opening to the film that enabled audiences to enter into the story of tradition vs. modernism, our focus in China.
Please describe your approach to the film.
During interviews, I like to prepare a list of questions, but then to be spontaneous and open to following interesting threads that I may not have foreseen. I also like to get as much verité footage of everything that is happening around the subject of the film, and then to discover the story in the footage during editing.
What were some of the obstacles in achieving your vision of the film?
This was one of the rare films that I directed but did not produce, and Eugene’s and my visions were not always the same. I was more interested in the biographical and personal aspects of Pei’s life and how these influenced his design of the museum; while Eugene’s focus was very much on the theme of the film – tradition vs modernism – as reflected in the in the creation of the Suzhou museum. In the end, we created a film that we are both very proud of.
Please describe your background credits, how maybe they led to this film.
Eugene contacted me in 2003 after seeing my recently completed documentary, Robert Capa: In Love and War, which I had written, produced and directed for American Masters. Apparently, he liked what he saw there, and I had also been recommended to him by people at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the National Endowment for the Arts, and elsewhere. The Capa film, as well as my previous film on Edward S. Curtis, which was also broadcast on American Masters, gave him confidence that I could direct a strong film about an artist and his work.

@Source from: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/i-m-pei/interview-with-anne-makepeace-the-directorwriter-of-i-m-pei-building-china-modern/1559/

I.M. Pei Returns to China in PBS Documentary@Arch

I.M. Pei Architect with Pei Partnership Architects
Suzhou Museum, night view of the garden.
Photo © Kerun Ip

I.M. Pei working with a model of the Suzhou Museum.
Photo © Pei Partnership Architects

Suzhou Museum, aerial southwest view.
Photo © Kerun Ip

I.M. Pei on a canal in Suzhou, China.
Photo © Pei Partnership Architects

Suzhou Museum, garden view.
Photo © Kerun Ip

Suzhou Museum, great hall.
Photo © Kerun Ip

Suzhou Museum, painting gallery.
Photo © Kerun Ip

Suzhou Museum, rock landscape.
Photo © Kerun Ip

I.M. Pei on site with architect Bing Lin (right) and associate.
Photo © Pei Partnership Architects

Suzhou Museum, night view.
Photo © Kerun Ip

March 29, 2010
By Carl Yost

The Suzhou Museum might not be I.M. Pei’s most famous building, but it clearly expresses the architect’s longstanding quest to meld local traditions with modern architecture. And with “I.M. Pei: Building China Modern,” a one-hour documentary airing at 9:00 PM (Eastern) this Wednesday, March 31 on PBS, that quest will receive a little more recognition.
The documentary, part of PBS’s American Masters series, follows Pei as he returns to the 2,500-year-old city of his ancestors to construct a museum for ancient Chinese art, located within historic Old Suzhou. Along the way, the filmmakers recorded various milestones, from Pei’s first site visit in 2002 to the building’s jubilant opening in October 2006, and interviewed such architectural luminaries as Pei, now 92 years old; his sons, Didi and Sandi Pei, partners at Pei Partnership Architects who oversaw the project; and historian-critic Charles Jencks.
At the film’s premiere last week at the Paley Center for Media in New York, producer Eugene Shirley said he seized on the Suzhou museum to investigate how China’s rapid modernization impacts its traditional culture. When he learned Pei would be designing the museum, he said, it seemed like the perfect lens through which to approach the topic.
That didn’t mean the eight years of filming, which continued until last September, were a breeze. Director Anne Makepeace described the subtle restrictions imposed by the crew’s omnipresent, Chinese government-approved “handlers,” who limited the choice of interview subjects. Notably, no residents on camera oppose their displacement by the construction.
When asked about the film's central theme, the dialogue between modernity and tradition, Didi Pei explained the goal of the Suzhou Museum by saying, “How do you move forward, to bring more current building technology into China, without completely destroying the original spirit?” He compared the project to late-20th-century Japanese architecture, which is clearly modern, but which retains a very Japanese spirit (for an example, one need look no further than the portfolio of newly minted Pritzker winners Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa of SANAA).
“That’s what I’m really hoping will happen in China,” Didi Pei said, “and I think that’s what my father was trying to do, to show, ‘Look, you don’t have to throw away that spirit in order to be modern.’”

@Source from: http://archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/2010/100329pei.asp

藝術LV全世界僅三家 台灣佔一@Fashion

法國藝術家Thomas(左)與中國藝術家張雷華昨天現身LV藝展。記者蘇建忠／攝影

LV中山店擁有獨立的藝廊空間，不定期展出藝術作品，開放民眾參觀。記者蘇建忠／攝影

「六島」藝術作品以粗紙水墨畫結合LED燈，詮釋傳統與現代的衝突感。記者蘇建忠／攝影

LV的「六島‧奇幻之光」藝術展上演精采的多媒體藝術作品。記者蘇建忠／攝影

聯合報╱記者陶福媛。

藝術，讓時尚更有文化氣質。

路易威登(Louis Vuitton)中山旗艦店即日起舉辦「六島．奇幻之光」藝術展，現場展出國際多媒體藝術團體「六島」的8件裝置藝術品，LV時尚有了藝術加持，更增添知性美感。

LV贊助藝文活動向來不餘遺力，除了邀請藝術家村上隆、Stephen Sprouse、Richard Prince等合作設計皮包配件，且大力贊助藝術活動，如去年在香港藝術館舉辦的「法國五月」展中，LV的「路易威登：創意情感」展出LV與藝術跨界的成果，就受到廣大的回響。

即日起在LV中山店登場的「六島．奇幻之光」藝術展，是法國藝術家Thomas Charveriat集合15位上海藝術家共同組成的藝術團體，將中國傳統的粗紙、剪紙、水墨畫，結合現代的LED燈重新賦予新意，針對快速變遷的上海，在「傳統」與「現代」之間的擺盪與取捨，有相當深刻的反省。

LV總裁卡西爾 (Yves Carcelle)曾自豪地說：「LV給予藝術家完全自由，這是其他品牌做不到的。」同樣的，LV對藝術專業的尊重，也反應在服裝設計上，LV設計總監Marc Jacobs熱愛現代藝術，且是現代藝術品的收藏家，他常在作品融入現代藝術的元素，展現不凡的時尚品味，深受明星名模的喜愛。

日前LV日本神戶店開幕時，「波麗士大人」日裔女星福本幸子(JUDY)身穿一襲藍染洋裝與會；LV贊助俄國名模娜塔莉(Natalia Vodianova)發起的「LOVE BALL」慈善晚宴中，名模娜塔莉和性感名模懷特莉 (Rosie Whiteley)也穿上青春亮麗的LV春裝，都是相當具代表性的服裝作品。

六島藝術展 台北中山店免費看
全球的LV旗艦店當中，只有巴黎香榭里舍大道總店、香港廣東道店和台北中山店擁有畫廊和藝文空間，LV不定期在店內推出藝術展，開放免費參觀。「六島．奇幻之光」藝術展自即日起至6月6日止，周一到周日10點至21點。
@Source from: 【2010/04/01 聯合報】@ http://udn.com/

妹島 把美術館變玻璃迷宮@Arch

聯合報╱記者 陳宛茜

妹島和世是繼伊拉克籍建築師札哈哈蒂（二○○四年）後，第二位奪得普立茲克獎的女性。相較於札哈作品呈現的強勢、遵循男性主導的建築世界邏輯；妹島作品的去中心化、反權威等特質，與男性建築師截然不同，更值得喝采。
妹島有藝術家直覺、西澤邏輯性強烈，兩人合體天衣無縫，二○○四年憑「金澤廿一世紀美術館」贏得威尼斯建築雙年展金熊獎，從此在歐美聲譽鵲起，贏得許多美術館設計案。
金澤美術館可視為妹島對新世紀的建築宣言。妹島以玻璃代替水泥牆，讓傳統封閉式的美術館變身為玻璃屋，讓市民隨性漫遊時「撞見」展品，將美術館從藝術殿堂拉到市民的高度。她甚至將收票的展場放在最中間，不收費的展場則圍繞四周，方便市民親近。因此威尼斯建築展評審稱許金澤美術館「改變城市和人的關係」。
妹島擅用玻璃交錯產生的迷離光影，打造虛幻、曖昧、流動，彷彿不存在於現實世界的夢幻空間。交大人社院副院長曾成德形容她是「光影的魔術師」，用玻璃創造「去物質化的空間，對應廿一世界虛擬空間特質。」
金澤美術館最驚世駭俗的是動線設計。相較於萊特為古根漢美術館設計的明確動線、「指引」觀眾隨動線移動，金澤的展場呈現一種「離散」特質，沒有明確的起點和終點，像個迷宮。
此舉讓金澤美術館開館時引起震撼，它不僅挑戰傳統展覽「線性」導覽的陳規，更造成大批觀眾迷路。然而妹島卻想藉這種的特質，讓觀眾不再依照策展人設定的路線看展，發展自己對美術史的觀點。
妹島跟台灣頗有淵源，她母親生於台北，妹島曾多次來台演講。作品展此刻正在台北士林紙業加工間展出，她在台灣的首件作品將是集溫室、石雕收藏與庭園設計於一身的「草山玉溪園」，在陽明山，正在規劃中。
@Source from: 【2010/03/30 聯合報】@ http://udn.com/

妹島、西澤奪建築諾貝爾獎@Arch

妹島和世獲得普立茲克建築獎。這是她今年一月擔任威尼斯建築雙年展首位女性策展人時留影。歐新社資料照片

妹島設計的DIOR表參道店，讓人想起DIOR服裝飄動的裙襬，夜晚宛如一盞白色燈籠。記者陳宛茜／攝影
聯合報╱編譯夏嘉玲
日本知名雙人組建築師妹島和世和西澤立衛，廿八日獲得建築界最高榮譽普立茲克獎。評審團稱許妹島、西澤擅長運用普通的建築材料，作品纖細卻有力，結構容納流暢、夢幻般空間，只應天上有。
普立茲克獎有建築界諾貝爾獎之稱。五十三歲的妹島和四十四歲的西澤，著名作品包括日本和歌山縣熊野古道中邊路美術館、石川縣金澤美術館、紐約新當代藝術館、東京三宅一生精品店等。
評審團提及妹島和西澤設計的東京表參道迪奧精品店、美國托雷多美術館玻璃藝術中心、甫啟用的瑞士聯邦科技研究院勞力士學習中心，讚揚他們設計的結構充分融入周圍環境，為建築物內的活動提供柔和的背景。評審團指出，「兩人尋求以基本的建築品質，造就出更令人激賞的率真和簡約。」
妹島表示，「非常開心，今後希望設計出具有魅力的建築」。西澤說，「大感意外，備受激勵」。
他們認為未遵循日本建築傳統，但作品受木造廟宇的簡潔風格和內外空間貫通的影響。妹島把兩人設計的建築比喻為公共廣場，可讓訪客成群自由漫步，或尋找舒適的地方消磨時間，「評審可能比較欣賞我們的設計方式。」頒獎預定五月十七日在紐約舉行，可獲十萬美元獎金。
@Source from: 【2010/03/30 聯合報】@ http://udn.com/

綠建築與自然共生 科學好風水@Arch

南科台達電台達電南科廠建材每坪七萬元，外牆可遮擋豔陽，造型又搶眼，打破綠建築貴又醜的迷思。圖／台達電提供

北投圖書館北投圖書館有種植草皮和太陽能光電板的綠屋頂，高低窗設計增加對流，降溫效果很好。本報資料照片

聯合報╱記者 鄭朝陽

綠建築比一般建築物更注重生態、節能、減廢和使用者健康，它在生命周期中，消耗最少地球資源、能源，產生最少廢棄物，讓使用者得到省電、省水、省錢、健康的實質好處，也有助預防洪災、改善地球暖化，可謂顧健康、救地球、護荷包三效合一。鋼筋混凝土 排碳量超高為什麼要發展綠建築？內政部建築研究所環境控制組組長鄭元良指出，以往蓋房子大多用木材、石塊、泥磚等天然材料，對環境無多大傷害，但現代建築用的材料，大多經過繁複加工，讓建築成為高汙染、高耗能、高排碳的產物，助長地球暖化。產業耗能統計顯示，台灣生產一公斤水泥排放零點四公斤二氧化碳（CO2），每公斤鋼筋要排零點九公斤CO2，每平方公尺的磁磚排放七點九公斤CO2。成功大學建築研究所進一步算出台灣中層住宅大樓（約十二層樓）的建材，每平方公尺約排放三百公斤CO2，以每戶卅五坪計算，一戶的排放量達三萬四千公斤，相當一棵喬木四十年的光合作用才能吸收完畢。因此，台灣人必須種五百萬棵喬木（全台約五百萬戶住宅），才能平衡住宅建造初期的排碳量。西曬耗冷氣 當然會漏財除了高排碳，鋼筋混凝土（RC）建築的施工階段，每平方公尺樓地板面積還會產生一點八公斤粉塵、零點五六立方公尺的土方等廢棄物，拆房子時還會產生一點二公斤的營建廢棄物，成為垃圾掩埋場的沉重負荷。一棟結構設計良好的RC建築，合理使用期至少五十年，若設計不當，使用階段耗能也很可怕。成大建築系教授林憲德拿中南部透天厝為例，西曬（東西座向）的透天厝冷氣用電較凶，年平均用電量是北向住宅的一點三三倍，南向的一點零六倍，可見日曬嚴重的方位也是「漏財」的方位。現代大樓全落地的大開窗，空調耗電比只開窗百分之卅的大樓高出六成。無毒綠建材 環保又健康蓋房子也常造成建築基地水泥化，綠建築提供多項具體的評估指標，結合建築師的專業和創意，排除上述汙染和能源浪費現象，例如選擇不西曬的建築座向和可回收再利用的建材，外殼做好遮陽、採光、通風設計，計算合理的空調需求，採用無毒、環保的綠建材作為室內裝潢和家具材料，同時營造室外的綠化空間，打造透水的地表和生物多樣性的環境。林憲德形容，綠建築是保護自然環境、追求健康室內環境的「科學風水」，利己也利他。

@Source from: 【2010/03/29 聯合報】

Japanese Team Wins Pritzker Architecture Prize@Arch

The Pritzker winners Kazuyo Sejima, left, and Ryue Nishizawa at their Rolex Learning Center in Lausanne, Switzerland.
By ROBIN POGREBIN
Published: March 28, 2010

Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa, partners in the Japanese architectural firm Sanaa, have won the 2010 Pritzker Architecture Prize, the profession’s highest honor.

“They explore like few others the phenomenal properties of continuous space, lightness, transparency and materiality to create a subtle synthesis,” the jury citation said. “Sejima and Nishizawa’s architecture stands in direct contrast with the bombastic and rhetorical. Instead, they seek the essential qualities of architecture that result in a much appreciated straightforwardness, economy of means and restraint in their work.”

The pair’s buildings include the acclaimed New Museum in New York, a sculptural stack of rectilinear boxes on the Bowery, which was completed in 2007. The first Sanaa project in the United States was a glass pavilion for the Toledo Museum of Art, completed in 2006. It holds the museum’s collection of glass artworks, reflecting that city’s history as a major center of glass production.

In The New York Times, the critic Nicolai Ouroussoff said that the pavilion — which featured an elegant maze of curved glass walls — “can reawaken” the “belief in the power of glass to enchant.”

The jury citation highlighted those projects as well as two in Japan: the O-Museum in Nagano and the 21st Century Museum of Contemporary Art in Kanazawa. The pair formed their firm in 1995.

“I have been exploring how I can make architecture that feels open,” Ms. Sejima said in a prepared statement after winning the prize, “which I feel is important for a new generation of architecture.”

Mr. Nishizawa said: “Every time I finish a building I revel in possibilities and at the same time reflect on what has happened. Each project becomes my motivation for the next new project. In the same way this wonderful prize has given me a dynamic energy that I have never felt before.”

Although their work has been concentrated in Japan, Mr. Nishizawa and Ms. Sejima have designed projects in Germany, Britain, Spain, France, the Netherlands and the United States. Among their most recent projects is the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology’s Rolex Learning Center in Lausanne.

The firm’s first British project was the Serpentine Pavilion in Kensington Gardens, London, the ninth such commission in the Serpentine’s pavilions series. In Lens, in northern France, the firm is designing a 300,000-square-foot branch of the Louvre.

This is the third time in the prize’s history that two architects have been awarded the Pritzker. The first was in 1988 with Oscar Niemeyer of Brazil and Gordon Bunshaft; the second in 2001, with the Swiss architects Jacques Herzog and Pierre de Meuron.

The award ceremony will be on May 17 on Ellis Island in New York.
@Source from: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/29/arts/design/29pritzker.html?ref=design

MoMA Presents Futuristic Solutions to Urban Flooding@Arch

A map of the five project zones.
Map by Guy Nordenson and Associates, Catherine Seavitt Studio, and Architecture Research Office

In Zone 0, A New Urban Ground proposal transforms Lower Manhattan with an infrastructural ecology of wetlands, parks, and "greenway" streets.
Image courtesy Architecture Research Office and dlandstudio

A hybrid land/seascape proposal with "aquatel piers" in Zone 1, the Water Proving Ground.
Image © LTL Architects

A rendering of Zone 2, Working Waterline, shows repurposed oil tanks as recycling facilities and reused discarded glass as imaginative "glass reefs."
Image © Matthew Baird Architects

A view of Zone 3, New Aqueous City, showcases residential buildings hung from shared bridge structures, floating treatment wetlands, and wave attenuating public piers.
Image © nARCHITECTS

In Zone 4, the Oyster-tecture proposal seeks to revitalize the once-active natural reef into a giant oyster nursery.
Image © SCAPE

By Alanna Malone
An exhibition that presents “soft” infrastructure solutions to rising sea levels around New York opens today at the Museum of Modern Art.
Rising Currents: Projects for New York’s Waterfront features drawings and models conceived by five multidisciplinary teams, led by designers from Architecture Research Office (ARO), LTL Architects, Matthew Baird Architect, nARCHITECTS, and SCAPE Studio. The teams produced their schemes from November to January, during an 8-week architecture-in-residency program at the P.S.1 Contemporary Art Center, in Queens.
Barry Bergdoll, curator of the architecture and design department at MoMA, says Rising Currents is unusual in terms of museum exhibitions. Though “elegant” as a whole, the five independent pieces are not meant to come together cohesively. Bergdoll hopes the exhibit will catalyze discussion and controversy, but understands that the work is far from done. “We don’t want the ideas to rest here, but percolate with real projects and urban responses to climate change,” he concludes.
The exhibition was initially inspired by a study on urban flooding conducted by the 2007 Latrobe Prize team, led by engineer Guy Nordenson.
Rising Currents runs through October 11.

@Source from: http://archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/2010/100324rising_currents.asp

世博在拚什麼 新上海 新機會@Trend

記者:文／李雪莉 研究／辜樹仁


每天，十六萬名工人同步學習世界最新的工法；每四十五秒就有一人通過海關；到中國的貨櫃，每五個就有一個在此裝卸。上海的GDP已超越香港，上海的地位也超越東京，成為亞太最大的經濟區。上個世紀的上海，孕育了中國的資本主義，也點燃了共產革命。這裡，曾是改變全中國的支點。2010，首度在開發中國家舉辦的世界博覽會，宣示上海的新起點。新上海的誕生，是否將再度改變中國、改變世界？
五月一日即將開幕的浦東上海世博園區工地裡，塵煙四起，風乾的泥漬，沾印在上海百通建築董事長談桂華深藍色西裝褲上。率領近百名工人正為剩下五十天不到的世博台灣館趕工的他，臉上掛滿笑容。


「從沒做過這麼難的工程，很多新工藝是過去大陸沒用過的，」做了四十年營造的談桂華說。

這個由李祖原設計、天燈造型的台灣館，最困難的是弧形隱形框玻璃帷幕的切割與施工，好幾百塊不規則的玻璃無縫拼接，重達幾百噸的鋼結構，高難度的打樁……，這些都是當地工程界的新鮮事，吸引上海建築科學研究院特別為新技術做測試。

承包台灣館建築工程，再發包給上海百通的達欣工程董事長王人正，形容整個世博就像是個「滾雪球」的效應，他說，「當各國都進世博，做很未來城市的建築，就會帶動大陸建築概念的改變。」
史上最大規模的世博


這是第一次由開發中國家舉行，也是歷來規模最大，有二四二個國家和國際組織參與的世博會。


與過去幾屆世博以推動外貿的做法不同，上海世博拉高到中央層次，由中央政治局領導，黨與市共同執行。上海世博的做法也與上屆的愛知博覽會，由日本建館、再租賃給各國的戰略不同；中國為了吸收世界的工藝，選擇由各國自建場館，歐盟、美洲、中東各國還有中國館，多半開國際標，來自全世界的建築團隊過去一年因此多次進出中國，攪動一場全球性建築競賽。

建築牽動水、電、玻璃、鋼材、技法、設計、工藝、文創等五、六十個行業的進步。將近半年，每天十六萬名工人在裡頭學習。因為世博工程，上海不只成為巨大的工地，更成為巨大的、上萬家廠商逐鹿的創新市場。

85度Ｃ、一茶一坐等台灣連鎖餐飲業者競標只開張半年的世博園生意，包下園區內二○％的餐飲。

三年前帶頭打下中國大陸江山的 85度C總召集人鄭吉隆說，「我們想在這場化粧舞會裡吸引更多人的目光，走進世界。」85度C從廚師、外場制服到門店全都更新，推出英文菜單，高規格打商戰。
而上海改變的不僅是黃浦江兩岸世博園的建設，亮點還涵蓋整座城市。


國際候鳥停留上海

做為長江出海口的上海，向來囤積著源自上中游工廠的淤泥，但最近來自南方澳洲的候鳥，竟在上海浦東九段沙溼地，歇腳再走。

全世界的貨櫃來到中國，每五個就有一個在上海港裝卸；外商投資在中國，每八元有一元投到這裡。

此刻的上海，是全球經濟活動總量最大的城市之一。而航向上海，似乎是世界企業與人才不約而同的路徑選擇。


日本建築大師安藤忠雄來了。

他將在上海內環、環同濟大學設計產業圈旁，建造他在中國第一個建築「上海國際設計中心」。他說來這裡造寫字樓是因為：「中國將成為全球設計中心，世界各地的設計師都會匯集上海。」


連匯豐（HSBC，S代表上海）都想在這裡重塑象徵匯豐精神的銅獅子。匯豐原有三對銅獅，外灘原匯豐大樓最原始的一對歷經抗戰和文革的波折，現在存放在上海的博物館裡；另外兩對是香港和倫敦的匯豐總部仿造；而今年將在浦東陸家嘴成立的中國新總部，它們要再鑄造一對，讓匯豐的銅獅回到上海的家。


全球最大鐘錶零售商Swatch集團承包和平飯店南樓做為旗艦店，樓上成博物館和藝術沙龍。
過去這一年，二十八萬班飛機，載著來自歐美、非洲、中東超過三千萬人次的專業人士和旅客在上海浦東機場起降。海關每四十五秒簽過一人，入關後還可以對海關按下服務滿意度的評分。來自印度的商務客說，這幾年印度最大城孟買就說要向上海學習，希望能像上海一樣有效率，還能有個快速移動人口的交通系統，說完，他搭著磁浮列車，體驗八分鐘從浦東國際機場到上海市中心的速度。

從台灣飛大陸的兩岸直航旅客中，三○％前往上海，上海也成為全球單一城市裡，台灣人最多的城市。

上海強大的磁吸力，使得大規模的城市設計、都市規劃、新科技運用、藝文活動、消費動能在此引爆。


人均ＧＤＰ突破一萬美元，物價與生活水準已與國際大都市同步。

麥當勞一份二十一元的早餐（約一百元新台幣），人山人海，相襯在旁的是，街角里弄間油滋滋、兩元人民幣一份的燒餅油條店；為迎接世博而開張的鼎泰豐波特曼店，午間座無虛席，五人一桌的筵席上，小籠包裡飽滿的黑色松露；豐盛的一桌菜，結完帳，是勞動者一到三個月的薪水。
保時捷與法拉利在寒冬葉落的梧桐樹下發亮著，但富裕的街角旁，人們正討論著土方車（砂石車）多久撞死一個人的小道消息。

重新回到世界的懷抱


上海，用大筆揮灑油彩的力氣，掩蓋它前一代的足跡，內部儘管存在許多斷裂與矛盾，卻看得到上海在說，「給我一個支點，就能撬動地球。」

這個支點就是世博，二○一○是上海元年，它要用世博重回一九三○年代繁華的野心。


@Source from: 天下雜誌 2010-03-24 記者:文／李雪莉 研究／辜樹仁 攝影／劉國泰

詹偉雄：說說卡麥隆@People

【聯合報╱詹偉雄】2010.03.24

今年的奧斯卡獎，詹姆斯．卡麥隆（James Cameron）雖然沒得到大獎，但由他擔任製片與導演的電影〈阿凡達〉卻已經寫下廿六億美金全球票房紀錄，堪稱是「贏得最多的輸家」。

他的片子 從不缺壯觀奇景

如果你是上了些年紀的影迷，應也記憶猶新：卡麥隆的每一部電影，都曾戴上「改寫票房」桂冠：〈鐵達尼號〉（一九九七）、〈魔鬼終結者2：審判之日〉（一九九一）、〈魔鬼終結者1〉（一九八四）。現任加州州長阿諾就是以飾演〈魔鬼終結者1〉裡的T80機器人開始走紅影壇，許多人都應該還記得，即使他燒掉了皮膚、截斷了身體，但合金鋼鍛造的頭顱上之那顆一閃一閃的紅色眼球，似乎從不曾在廿世紀的影史上熄滅。

和蘋果創辦人賈伯斯一樣，卡麥隆在加州Fullerton大學沒念完就輟學了，泡在南加大電影資料館研究「電影特效」（包括光學印刷、前螢幕投影、染色轉印）。一九七七年，他看完喬治．盧卡斯的〈星際大戰〉，決定進入好萊塢，他由模型師傅做起，當過藝術指導、特效製作，邊寫劇本，邊等著當導演的機會。〈魔鬼終結者1〉開拍之初製作費僅六五○萬，上片後全球市場賣了七千八百萬美金，自此，卡麥隆就再也不缺錢拍片了。

直探人性 充滿著謎樣情懷

卡麥隆片子賣座，有兩個重要的原因：其一，他的電影一定有壯觀、新鮮與燦爛的「奇景」（spectacle），他明白現代觀眾要進電影院的原因，就是希望能在重複單調的日常生活中，插進二至三小時的「意外」，這正是他本行所在———從小，科學狂的他就在真實的世界裡研擬製作各種「意外」（電影特效）的可能性。其二，他的電影直指時代中人類最「本質」的恐懼和希望。〈魔鬼終結者〉映演的八○年代，電腦開始主導著現代人的生活世界，人們對「機器」取代人、甚而主導人的恐懼，與對機器的「效率」、「乾淨」、「速度」、「多工」之仰慕混雜在一起，構成一種謎樣的情懷。

而在〈鐵達尼號〉中，卡麥隆呈現的是一個關於西方世界兩百多年歷史之「浪漫愛」（romantic love）消亡與殞落的故事，不只是一個「科技理想」不敵「自然天險」的俗套主題而已。在西方現代性發展過程中，「浪漫愛」原本意味著「行動主體願意為他所愛的對象犧牲一切，包括他自己的生命」，然而經歷過廿世紀末個人主義社會洗禮之後，人們發覺自己更常面對的毋寧是「被所愛者的棄絕」，同年猝逝的黛安娜王妃之一生，代表的正是如詩的幻滅，當戲末李奧納多的臉龐逐漸沉入海中，觀眾們哭泣的正是現實世界與希望的反差。

戲裡戲外 他的評價很兩極

在戲外，卡麥隆有著極端的評價，演員們肯定他為求戲好，不計一切，但身體與心靈承受的巨大壓力，也使他們視之為魔鬼。他的婚姻一點都不「鐵達尼」，總共五次，為了拍〈鐵達尼號〉，他自己潛水深入大西洋海底，片中末尾的殘骸影像就是他自己攝影的。

卡麥隆是很典型的「個性人」，在台灣邁向個體化社會之路上，他的故事和賈伯斯的一樣，都深具啟發性，而且他們都還活著，連猜他們下一個作品是什麼，都是件充滿刺激的事。

（作者為學學文創志業副董事長）
@Source from: 聯合新聞網

Less Than the Sum of Its Parts@Art

From left, Kiki Smith's Untitled (Bowed Woman), 1995; Jeff Koons's One Ball Total Equilibrium Tank, 1985.
(Photo: Benoit Pailley)

“Skin Fruit,” the New Museum’s show curated by Jeff Koons, highlights the cracks in the institution.

By Jerry Saltz
Published Mar 26, 2010

If I were the New Museum, I’d have whiplash by now. Since opening its spiffy new Bowery building in 2007, the place has gone from being champion of the underdog and advocate of the experimental to starstruck promoter of A-list artists and international cool hunter. With “Skin Fruit: Selections From the Dakis Joannou Collection,” curated by the artist Jeff Koons, this much beloved yet deeply frustrating institution has crossed some invisible line, its already-thin credibility stretched to the breaking point.

“Skin Fruit” is a shapeless amalgam of big names, big dicks, and big price tags, crowded into too little space. Koons’s intention in taking these 83 works from the star collector Joannou’s huge trove was, he said, to choose art that deals with “a vocabulary that people can respond to.” Based on the art he’s chosen, I interpret that language to be big, brash, and bold. Though the title is explained only obliquely, the erotic content suggests it might be Koons’s way of taking “skin flute,” the slang term for phallus, and feminizing it, making it more suggestive, juicier. But trying to think like Koons is almost an oxymoron. And the overwhelming impression I came away with was, Wow, these two guys are really sick puppies. They’ve got sex, shit, birth, and death on the brain. Maybe we all do. But the work displayed here is especially aggressive, and short on nuance, subtlety, and seduction. Perhaps to the New Museum’s credit, much of it would never be shown in any other major New York museum. It’s hard to imagine Kiki Smith’s life-size sculpture of a man performing autofellatio displayed in MoMA’s atrium, for example. Or Pawel Althamer’s live crucifixion reenactment at the Whitney. The sheer amount of transgressiveness, at least, brings a bracing real-life quality of grit and truthfulness to the show. It’s also in keeping with the museum’s stated aim, “to support new art … not yet familiar to mainstream audiences.” There’s plenty of work here that people outside the community of specialists and aficionados don’t often get to see.

The art world has not embraced the show (to put it mildly), and here’s why. In playing to its largest audience to date, the New Museum is not only pandering, but trying to trump the competition with the undeclared game of “collect the collector.” At the show’s core is a distorted and depressing reality: Joannou’s collection is drawn from a tiny slice of the art world—the superrich, the super-hyped and the supermale. (Barely a quarter of the work is by women.) It includes far too many famous artists who sell to major collectors for vast sums. It’s a history of the winners of one particular game—a narrative that’s simultaneously blinkered, elitist, and annoying.
What especially irks me is that the curating tells us more about Koons than it does about contemporary art, and he says it better in his own work. On his own, he takes sex into strangely decorative, materially obsessive, convoluted, and psychotic directions: A bouquet of flowers is all about vulvas and desire and much more. A lot of the art he selected here is less nuanced, simply body-obsessed and often heavy-handed. Koons has said that he “tried to choose iconic pieces … works that seemed to have a really strong voice.” He succeeds occasionally, like when he plays with monumentalism (size apparently does matter). The standoff between Charles Ray’s bizarre eight-foot businesswoman and Liza Lou’s beaded sculpture of a gun-toting Pam Grier enacts Koons’s idea of a psycho-sculptural race war. (Another terrific Ray piece nearby, Revolution Counter-Revolution, is a carousel rigged so it appears to be going backwards and forwards at once.) Roberto Cuoghi’s nineteen-foot Assyrian-Babylonian god and David Altmejd’s mixed-media The Giant—an overscale naked man with squirrels nesting in his limbs—reign, alternately threatening and chimerical, over their respective rooms.

There’s another theme of terror, foreboding, and paranoia. Cady Noland’s 1989 figure of Lee Harvey Oswald, tucked away in a staircase nook, should be installed on the Mall in Washington, a haunting monument to what William Burroughs called “the evil … there waiting” in America. Maurizio Cattelan’s shrouded marble bodies lined up on one floor constitute a chilling allegory to both fear and history, and are made all the more eerie by a nearby Tino Sehgal performance in which a singer intones “This is propaganda, you know you know, this is propaganda.” The room becomes a morgue with a manic mourner. And Robert Gober’s uncanny, surreal paired installation, Highway and Two Spread Legs, in which mannequin legs stick out of a wall papered with cartoon roads, implies how alive museums can be.

But, overall, there’s too much junk: Matt Greene’s amateurish paintings, and sculptures by Takashi Murakami, Paul McCarthy, and Tim Noble and Sue Webster. And what is lacking throughout is a coherent vision.

I hope “Skin Fruit” is the final scene of the New Museum’s uneven first act in its new building. For two years, the institution has emphasized cheek, playing to the obsolete mind-set of “Love it. Hate it. See it!” It’s time to change the formula. Shock value, savvy, and being adversarial are fine if they are backed up by credibility and vision. Too many shows here have lacked both.

@Source from: http://nymag.com/arts/art/reviews/65115/

愛馬仕主題宴／Fantasy 不可缺少的因子@Fashion

2004年Colours and Fantasies色彩與幻想的主題宴，彩色帳幕場景，也曾在台北成功「複製」。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供

2005年愛馬仕本著對自然的嚮往，移師埃及南邊阿思旺（Aswan），為年度主題「如江河匯流」營造河流的冥想。記者袁青／攝影圖／HERMES提供

聯合報╱記者袁青

愛馬仕不隨俗的時尚主張，充分反映在每一年自訂主題的Hermes Annual Theme「愛馬仕主題宴會」。

1987年，愛馬仕選定Year of fireworks(煙火)為題，慶祝品牌成立150年，從此，遠洋、戶外、駿馬、太陽、道路、音樂、非洲……天馬行空的想像力，不但激發團隊創意，更形成豐沛的文化資源，建構了愛馬仕品牌獨具的內涵。

愛馬仕總舵手，也是派對的主導人Jean-Louis Dumas曾說過：「Fantasy是愛馬仕生活中不可或缺的。」

只是，驚喜是個起頭，主題派對也不過是擦出火花的引線，提倡「生命應該浪費在生活裡美好的一切」，或許才是愛馬仕永遠不變的主題。

@Source from: 【2010/03/28 聯合報】@ http://udn.com

愛馬仕主題宴／那夜，幻遊在HERMES童話中…@Fashion

愛馬仕運用奇幻的光影，把狩獵博物館布置得讓人如入童話中。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供

愛馬仕席設巴黎私人狩獵博物館的年度主題宴，場面繁美、豐盛且處處有驚喜。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供

奇形怪狀的「標本人」構成童話主題盛宴裡一道道上菜前的「甜點」。記者袁青／攝影圖／HERMES提供

身著法國路易王朝制服的侍者，開啟愛馬仕主題宴奇遇的大門。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供

奇幻樹林中，綠樹人成了愛馬仕盛宴迎賓的最佳導引人。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供非報系

白雪公主和巫婆鬥法，是童話主題派對裡的開場高潮之一。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供

水晶燈、美酒佳餚和歡愉氣氛，愛馬仕每年以不同形式和手法，將年度主題具體呈現的創意，令人印象深刻。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供

法國百年「聖路易」水晶也來助陣，光這場盛宴的水晶器皿就市值千萬台幣，盛況可見一斑。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供

來自全球重要賓客在愛馬仕巴黎年度派對中，盡情享受童話般奇幻情節和層出不窮的大驚奇。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供非報系

花草精靈化作派對最佳活動「道具」，把童話主題氣氛推向一波又一波的高潮。記者袁青／攝影　圖／HERMES提供

聯合報╱記者袁青

巴黎初春，沒有星星的夜空，奇異而蠢動的欲望，在幽暗的角落伺機窺探、期盼著。
巴黎市一處私人「狩獵博物館」烈焰熊燃的大院子，裝扮成路易十六時代的侍者穿梭著，盛裝的賓客啜著溫熱的雞尾酒，齒頰間滿是肉桂和八角香料的氣息，像似在野地狩獵時，為驅寒做準備。但沒人知道，今晚誰是獵人？誰是被追逐的獵物？

有愛馬仕，生命充滿童趣
100多年來，愛馬仕說故事的本領，極為出神入化，每一季帶著普羅大眾進入屬於品牌的主題情境。
在一群獸面人身的侍者圍攏下，被示意戴上金色、藍色和淡粉紅的面具；微微湧上的酒意，勾動著三分忐忑和好奇，一腳踩進燈光迷濛的入口，這一刻起，化妝舞會裡，不分種族、階級、身分和性別，每個人都扮起童話故事裡的角色。白雪公主被囚禁在玻璃櫃裡，忽然現身的巫婆，送上一枚蘋果；海龍宮中浮游的蝦兵蟹將，引領戴著野生動物標本頭套的角色扮演者進場，一切變得那麼童真起來…
潛意識中，不屬於現實的詭異氣氛正醞釀著，終於，在迴旋樓梯轉角處「白馬王子和公主相遇」的感動中，暫時收場。
當晚380位愛馬仕全球賓客在微濛光影中，逐一找到自己的座位，彷彿又回到「人間」。在愛馬仕，沒什麼不可能
沒有任何桌飾的餐桌，一副簡單的刀叉就著免洗餐盤，「怎麼這麼寒酸呀？」正當心裡嘀咕著眼前「盛宴」竟是這般場面，錯愕不已時，突然…
號角聲揚起，全場高掛的數盞「聖路易」水晶吊燈一一亮起，換上宮廷制服的侍者，把鮮花、美麗的桌巾、水晶燈檯、銀器、餐瓷，以及紅的、紫色、綠色和靛藍色的雕花水晶杯，悉數布置妥當。
愛馬仕第三代傳人杜馬先生高高舉杯致意，他說：「在愛馬仕，沒有什麼不可能！」美酒、佳餚，就著戴上皇冠的公主和王子迷你縮版甜點，讓人的味蕾隨著童話跳躍起來。
從期待到等待，今晚，拋起又落下，一再被驚喜和寵愛的情緒牽動，high到最高點！因愛馬仕，故事傳誦不絕
置身狩獵博物館如叢林般的玻璃屋場景中，水晶幻化的迷彩，倒映著飄搖的燭光，眼前是人、是獸，是古代、是今朝，是真實？還是虛幻？
觥籌交錯間，每個人都化成愛馬仕2010年童話主題派對中，既美麗又幻祕的主角。
午夜，私人博物館古老壁鐘憑空敲了幾下，宛如倉皇掉落玻璃鞋的公主，奔下台階。水晶燭檯，殘蠟點點，拾起散落的面具和滿地玫瑰花瓣，誰說散場了？
因為愛馬仕，巴黎總會有說不完的「故事」。

@Source from: 【2010/03/28 聯合報】@ http://udn.com/