这是一个改造项目。甲方希望拆除它之后能增值,双年展主办方考虑的是公共利益,同时入口又必须有一个实验性的效应;作为建筑师,我觉得既然是改造,对于时间和记忆,应该有一种鲜明的态度和立场。于是,私有与公共、普适与具体、大众化与先锋性、过去与未来,这些并存是对立面还是一个硬币的两面?如果把这些都考虑周全,估计建筑将是一个妥协的产物,但我总觉得它应该作为一种宣言式的存在,但又不仅仅作为一种宣言式的存在。 This is a renovation project. Party A hopes to add value after dismantling it. The organizer of the Biennale considers the public interest, and at the same time the entrance must have an experimental effect. As an architect, I think that since it is a revamp, there should be a clear distinction between time and memory Attitude and position. So are both private and public, pervasive and specific, popular and avant-garde, past and future, opposites or two sides of a single coin? If all these are considered, it is estimated that architecture will be a compromise, but I always feel It should exist as a manifesto, but not merely as a manifesto.