Dr. Yuan Ye received "architectural knowledge" magazine

How do you see the relevance between historical retention and architectural innovation? Is there any conflict between preserving historical culture and introducing new elements?

Roach said, "all history is contemporary history". History should not be fossilized in glass cabinets. For architects, the preservation of history has the same status as other "existences" in the base. Architectural innovation should establish a mechanism of dialogue with history on the premise of maintaining the authenticity of historical relics and respecting the information and spirit it conveys. The key is that we should not talk about each other and share different dreams in the same bed. We should know the spiritual pulse preserved by history. Like the treatment of harmony, tones can be different, but when combined, they will make the tone more full and convey more meanings and meanings.

Is there any conflict between preserving history and culture and introducing new elements? There is indeed a "degree" assurance here. "Degree" can be understood as the "attitude" of mutual respect, or the appropriate "scale", which should produce "dialogue" on a heavyweight or on the same value. Of course, the dialogue between grandparents and granddaughters may be more interesting, which requires architects to be "scriptwriters" and "directors" who can create dramatic conflicts and have the ability to control and resolve them. "Degree" is also "demeanor", which is humility and concession, but at the same time maintains its own uniqueness.

What kind of expression should good buildings possess? What standards should excellent buildings achieve?

Really good architecture has the attribute of "consistency" between form and content, just like the character of human being, and without trace. The so-called "sense of design" is weakened, and the integration of architecture, space and life is inextricably linked. Fei Mu's movie "spring in a small town" has such a feeling, and Artaud's architecture is the same. This is a "simple" architectural concept. But behind the "simple" formal language, clear intention should be conveyed, which should be accurate, affirmative, concise and unambiguous.

Excellent buildings are often not eye-catching, but can make people naturally enter, unconsciously indulge in space and environment, and can be fascinating. What impresses people deeply is not body, but atmosphere, which can lead people to a positive mental state.

In addition, the generation of excellent buildings should have clear logic, unity from part to whole, and proper handling of details. In the small, it should be durable; in the big, it should have a calm temperament, transcend the limitations of the fashion and style of the times, and have lasting spiritual charm. Like old wine, the more fragrant it is, the more lasting it is.

What do you think is the most essential quality of an architect?

Sensitivity to life, ability to observe and refine. Architects, like directors of life, must be sensitive to life. First of all, love life, and then can go beyond life, we can make an objective observation of life, that is, the ability to "look on with cold eyes", and can find the subtle relationship between life and material space. The ability to refine is very important. If the ability to be sensitive to life and observe is not the patent of architects, writers, film directors, painters and even journalists may emphasize these qualities more, then the language of observation and thinking can be transformed into the form of architecture and space, and the form can be given meaning and significance, which may be the only one. The architect can do that.