Skip to content

听见城市的声音

听见城市的声音

我们翻译这篇文章的理由

我们正身处一个对科技的需求与日俱增的年代。只是科技的进步有时也会带来感官的退化,科技在成为我们与城市之间媒介的同时也在削弱原有的联系。在依赖高德地图和大众点评的今天,我们常常忽略城市本身的丰富内涵。

——邬璐雪

👇

听见城市的声音

作者:Kathleen Vandenberg

译者:邬璐雪

校对:朱小钊

推荐:不 锁

策划:邬璐雪& 朱小钊

City on mute

沉默都市

When you stare at your phone or use Uber to navigate your neighbourhood, you flatten the rich texture of urban life.

如果你去附近的街区还依靠手机导航或直接坐优步,那么你将错过城市生活更丰富的一面。

Wandering north up the Broad Walk, within the expansive and exquisitely manicured grounds of Kensington Gardens in west London, just past the grand Kensington Palace and up the whimsically curved ‘Wiggly Walk’ bordering the Sunken Garden, one soon arrives at the Orangery. On a clear summer day, the brick and glass façade of this garden pavilion casts a warm glow upon those gathered on its stately veranda to sip hot tea and indulge in brunch. I found myself there on a recent sunny afternoon, perched on wrought-iron chairs with a student of mine, enjoying the expansive view of the park to the south, while we waited for her classmate to arrive. The late afternoon sun was filtered through wispy luminescent clouds, the traffic of the encircling streets muffled by abundant hedges, the area sweet with the scent of grass and roses. Squirrels hopped nimbly from path to path on the lookout for treats, and the sounds of the nearby playground and carousel provided a muffled soundtrack of merriment.

位于伦敦西部的肯辛顿公园面积广阔、草木扶疏,沿着园内的宽阔步道一路向北,途经宏伟的肯辛顿宫,再沿着低地花园旁的蜿蜒小道向前走,不久便能到达橘园。在晴朗的夏日,温暖的阳光透过橘园砖墙上的玻璃窗洒满偌大的露台,人们汇聚于此,喝上口热茶,尽情享受着早午餐。最近,我也和一个学生在此度过了一个午后。我们坐在铁艺凳子上,欣赏着南边广阔的风景,等待着她的同学到来。傍晚,阳光透过稀疏的云朵露出微光,四周街道上嘈杂的车流声在层层树篱的阻隔下早已消失无形。园内弥漫着绿草和玫瑰的芳香。四处觅食的松鼠在小径间敏捷地跳跃。附近的游乐场和旋转木马传来隐约可闻的欢笑声,仿佛轻柔的配乐一般。

All of this was very pleasant indeed, and it might feel wrong to complain about having to wait in such a spot, but as 15 minutes passed, then 20, and then 40, and still the missing student did not appear – the only evidence of her existence the incessant pinging of her texts arriving on her classmate’s cellphone – what had only shortly before felt calming and restorative became merely a backdrop to an all-too-familiar drama. The missing student – apparently utterly unfamiliar with the area in which she had resided for six weeks and thus unaware that the Orangery was a very convenient, safe and lovely half-mile walk from the front door of her residence – had called an Uber. What could have been a stroll along the scenic and lively Broad Walk, offering glimpses of the heavy-scented buds of Flower Walk and taking her past the swans and geese of Round Pound, had instead become a frantic, expensive and time-consuming ride on the roads encircling the park. She arrived, 45 minutes late, frazzled and apologetic, gulping down her cold tea, still unclear exactly where she was or how she had arrived there.

这一切足以让人心旷神怡,在景色如此优美之地多等待一时本不该抱怨,但时间慢慢过去,15分钟,20分钟,40分钟,那位学生迟迟仍未出现,只有手机上不断传来的消息提示声。方才还让人心旷神怡的美景上很快便要上演一出司空见惯的闹剧。从那位学生搭乘优步的行为可以看出,她对这片已经生活了六周的地方了解甚少,完全不知道从她住的公寓大门只要步行半英里就能到达橘园,而且路途安全,景色秀丽。她本可一路散步,欣赏步道沿途充满生机的美丽景致,感受花园小道的馥郁芳香,驻足观看圆池旁成群的天鹅和野鸭,却最终打车在公园外疯狂乱转,费钱又耗时。她最终迟到了45分钟,到橘园时已疲惫不堪,脸上写满了歉意。她大口喝着早已变凉的茶水,对自己如何到达以及身处何方仍一头雾水。

The problem is not so much that she drove instead of walked such a short distance – of the many millions of journeys people make in London every day, only a quarter are on foot – it is that she wasn’t even aware enough of her urban environment to know that walking was a much shorter, more direct and more pleasant route to her destination. My student’s inability to locate herself in space, her failure to navigate her environment on her own and her reliance on and complete faith in technology to get her where she wants to be mark her as a member of the 21st-century urban crowd. What she had done – outsourced navigation to her phone, or to the satnav of her Uber driver – has become just another fact of life for so many who make their way along the streets of modern cities.

这么短的距离她选择搭车而非走路倒也不是什么大问题,毕竟伦敦每日都有数百万的出行人次,其中大部分选择驾车出行,只有四分之一的居民选择步行。真正的问题在于她对自己所在的城市环境甚不熟悉,因此才会完全不了解其实步行才是更短、更直接、也更舒心的出行方式。不知身在何处、无法自行判断路线、高度依赖科技,这位学生身上的种种特征正反映了21世纪城市居民的普遍困境。她对于导航和优步司机的依赖正是很多人穿梭于现代都市之内的缩影。

And there are a lot of us – according to data from the World Health Organization, more than 50 per cent of the world’s population now live in cities, with that number expected to increase to 60 per cent by 2030. And of those who do walk, a good portion are using smartphones to navigate. For example, in my home country of the United States, approximately 77 per cent of people own smartphones. And a Pew Research Center survey from 2014 reveals that roughly three-quarters of adults in the US said it was OK for people to use their phones while walking down the street, riding public transit or waiting in line. Another Pew study, from 2012, found that three-quarters of smartphone owners were using their phones for location-based information such as mapping and reviews of nearby attractions. And in 2016, a report in The Wall Street Journal noted that, between 2010 and 2014, there had been a 124 per cent rise in emergency-room visits by pedestrians distracted by mobile devices. An NBC video from 2017 shows a 67-year-old woman in New Jersey falling head first into an open cellar – gapingly large, with the doors standing well above the sidewalk – providing a stunning visual of just how distracted some of us have become. Some cities in Germany and China have even responded by building or adapting pedestrian lanes and intersections to counter the problem of texting walkers.

不止伦敦人如此。世界卫生组织的数据显示,全球城市人口占比已超过50%,这一数字在2030年将提升至60%。大部分选择步行的居民也是依靠手机导航。比如在我的家乡美国,大约有77%的人拥有智能手机。皮尤研究中心2014年的一项调查显示,大约有四分之三的美国成年人认为可以在走路、乘坐公共交通工具、排队等待时使用手机。皮尤研究中心2012年的另一项研究显示,使用智能手机的人群中有四分之三会用手机搜索周边地图、景点介绍等信息。2016年《华尔街日报》的一篇报道指出,在2010年到2014年之间,送入急救室的行人数量增长了1.24倍,而走路看电子设备就是罪魁祸首。2017年美国全国广播公司的一段令人震惊的视频显示,新泽西州有一位67岁的妇女一头栽进了一个敞开的大型地下室之中,但地下室的大门远高出人行道一大截,这说明有些行人走路是多么心不在焉。在德国和中国,一些城市为了解决行人走路看手机的问题,甚至重新对人行道和十字路口进行修建或改造。

Our inattention to our lived environment is not universal, of course. Hunter-gatherer societies still exist in places where survival is dependent on an ability to read nature. But the majority of cultures have seen their disconnection from the environment (natural or built) grow over millennia. In his book The Spell of the Sensuous (1996), the American philosopher David Abram points to the alphabet as the earliest technology to estrange humans from the natural environment. Where once hunter-gatherers were dependent on a sensuous connection with nature – intimately familiar with the scents of the animals they hunted, sensitive to the sounds of predators, able to navigate by sight – writing ensured that the human gaze was deflected from the real world to its representations.

当然,并非所有人都如此漠视周遭的生活环境。世界上有些地方仍停留在狩猎采集时代,当地人民要想存活,必须对周围的环境十分了解。但数千年来,生活在主流社会的人们与周遭的自然环境和人造景观都日渐疏离。美国哲学家大卫·艾布拉姆在《感官的魔力》一书中指出,最早导致人与自然环境疏离的科技就是字母表。曾经狩猎采集部落的人必须依赖感官与自然界建立联系,比如熟识猎物的气味和捕食者的声音,靠观察确定方位等,但文字的出现导致他们对真实世界的直观认知趋于形式化。

That this deflection is now achieved through glossy, colour screens rather than the crudely drawn pictographs of early times matters little. For most, especially those of us in cities, it has been a long time since our relationship with our environment has gone unmediated by technology, and we are not likely to feel the loss of a direct and sensuous connection to the earth acutely. It is, after all, not necessary for the urban inhabitant to sniff the air for a predator, to know which plot of dirt hemmed in by concrete ledges might best support grains. There is no need to know how to identify the droppings of animals in city parks and, even without weather apps, there is no pressing need to scan the sky for showers or note drops in the barometer to assess when the rain might come – the indoors is seldom more than a few steps away. For most, the day will not change in any appreciable way if they no longer can (or simply never could) locate Polaris in the winter sky or if they confuse a chestnut underfoot with a pecan.

将人类对于周遭环境的认知偏差归咎于光滑的彩色屏幕还是粗糙的象形文字,这并非问题的关键。对于大部分人,尤其是城市居民而言,在科技的影响下,我们已经长期与周遭的生活环境相疏离,因此我们也不太能意识到自己早已丧失与环境直接的感官联系。城市居民无需嗅出捕食者的气味,了解混凝土下的哪块土地更适合种植谷物,或分辨公园里动物的粪便。即便没有天气预报,我们也不再迫切地需要通过观察天空或气压计的变化来判断降雨时间,毕竟一般多走几步总能到达室内。对大部分人而言,即便他们不再能(或从来不能)指出北极星在冬日天空中的位置,或分清脚底下的是栗子还是山核桃,他们的生活也不会受到显著影响。

The real problem is what is being passed by and through, unseen or misunderstood, in the built environment itself. The urban landscape might be ignored, but the city is not silent. By design, it speaks. It nudges; it moves; it motivates; it persuades. The imposing curve atop St Paul’s Cathedral, the severe and minimalist thrust of the Shard, the golden glow of Prince Albert’s statue perched high above Kensington Gardens – these draw our eye upward, their height signifying their power, their vertical lines and dominating scale drawing our eyes heavenward in worship of God, and money, and monarchy. They speak to, among other things, England’s imperial history, global and cultural dominance, and financial might.

真正的问题在于,我们错过、忽视或误解了脚下这座城市中的某些元素。虽然城市景观可能受到忽视,但并不意味着伦敦是座沉默的城市。通过规划设计,伦敦诉说着自身的故事,影响甚至改变着人们的观念和行为;它激励着每一个居民,又对他们谆谆告诫。圣保罗大教堂顶部壮观的弧线,碎片大厦极简抽象的尖角,矗立在肯辛顿花园的阿尔伯特亲王雕像上泛着的金色光辉,它们都引导着人们的目光向上延伸。高度象征着权力,笔直的线条和庞大的体积引领着我们望向天际,尊崇上帝、财富和君主制度。此外,它们也彰显了英国漫长的帝国历史、不可撼动的全球霸主地位以及强大的经济、文化实力。

The socioeconomic divide looms large in the urban environment. Our cities communicate socioeconomic, racial and gender boundaries as clearly as Charles Booth’s 19th-century poverty maps. Our cities broadcast rules about who is invited in and who must be kept out. When we silence the city to pick up our phones, when we turn our gaze from the city’s stories to digital maps, we see only distorted selections of reality, bounded by frames, decontextualised, giving us the false sense that our journeys are imposed on the city, mapped over it rather than through it. These maps and apps flatten, simplify and neutralise space that is in reality three-dimensional, complex and rhetorical. The cool, smooth touch of the smartphone screen gives no hint of the possibilities for tactile interaction or architectural nudging. Every line mapped from point A to B seems equally accessible to everyone, regardless of age, class, race or gender. Issues with road construction and traffic are the only obstacles noted, as if the city were a playground open to all.

社会经济水平的悬殊差距在城市中体现得淋漓尽致。正如查尔斯·布斯在19世纪制作的伦敦贫困地图一般,在城市中,不论是社会经济地位分化还是种族性别差异都十分明显。何者欢迎入驻,何者又遭到排挤,每一座城市都有着明确的规则。当我们选择拿起手机时,城市便陷入了沉默。当我们紧紧盯着手机地图,而忽略了城市中蕴含的丰富故事时,我们便会受到地图线路的限制,脱离身边真实发生的情景。最终,我们目之所及的只有一部分失真的城市图景,并形成一种凌驾于城市之上而非穿行于城市之中的错误感知。这些地图和软件让原本立体、复杂甚至戏剧性的现实空间变得平面化、简单化和无差别化。如果每个人都只是面无表情地划动着手机,那么我们将无法通过感官感受周遭环境,也无法感受城市中不同建筑的塑造作用。往返任意两地往往有多种路线,但在地图上,这些路线不会因为年龄、阶级、种族和性别差异而有所区别,唯一的差别只剩下道路建设和交通状况。这时,整座城市彷佛变成了一座对所有人开放的游乐场。

It is at street-level, at walking pace and, perhaps most importantly, without screens, that one can stay fully attuned to the messages conveyed by the built environment. Though we might have long ago fled our hunter-gatherer roots, when untethered to electronic devices we remain fully human, our senses our surest guide to what appeals and engages. As the Danish architect Jan Gehl explains, ‘the speed at which we move is crucial. Rooted in biological history, the human sensory apparatus is designed to perceive and process sensory impressions while moving at about 5 km/h.’ It is built to scan the horizon, to take in the periphery. The faster we go, the greater our tunnel vision, as the urban planner Nick Jackson of Toole Design in Boston puts it. The slower we go, the more we look around us, the more likely we are to react to design elements such as signage prohibiting behaviours, intricate facades dominating private spaces, roads paved without cycle tracks for cyclists, large potted plants discouraging loitering, or ornate gates closing off access – in other words, the rhetoric of the urban landscape.

捕猎采集时代虽然已经远去,但只有当我们收起手机、漫步街头时,才能完全理解周围景观传达的信息,人性才能完全得以彰显。感官将带领我们去往那些真正吸引我们的地方。正如丹麦建筑师扬·盖尔所言:“我们走路的速度很重要。生物学历史表明,当走路速度维持在5km/h左右时,人类的感官才能进行感知和处理。”我们的感官天生就是用来感受周边的环境并好好地体味它。波士顿图尔设计所的城市规划师尼克·杰克逊也曾表示,我们走得越快,视野就越狭窄,当我们放慢速度时,视野才会更加开阔,也越有可能发现环境中的“修辞性”设计元素,例如禁止标识、私家建筑复杂的外表、没有自行车道的道路、妨碍逛街的大型盆栽以及紧闭的精致大门等。

Public spaces in cities are palimpsests, under constant erasure and revision, and the traces of power and privilege that shape their every line are visible to the observant and the engaged. Just as prestige is inscribed in public space – in towering financial districts, the spires of churches, the raised arms of mounted soldiers cast in bronze, the well-tended gardens of Palace Gardens Terrace in Kensington – so too is its opposite. The poor, having far fewer amenities and far less access to travel, restaurants and good housing, depend far more on good sidewalks, accessible and clean public parks and high-quality public spaces in which to gather and socialise than the middle class and wealthy, as Enrique Peñalosa, the mayor of Bogotá and a champion of public spaces, argues. In 1800s London, the wealthy of the West End remained oblivious to the crowding, poverty and disease of the East End; in the same way, modern visitors to Whitechapel – focused on the digital maps that get them directly to the trendy Cereal Killer Café on Brick Lane and the Instagrammable street art around Old Spitalfields Market – can easily miss the council housing in nearby Tower Hamlets (recently scheduled for demolition before a successful pushback by residents).

城市的公共空间就像一副手稿,只要你认真观察或深入其中便能发现,经过不断拆除和重建,权贵之人塑造了城市的每一根线条。不论是高楼林立的金融区、教堂的尖顶,还是骑兵铜像高举的手臂、肯辛顿宫殿花园阳台上精心照料的花圃,都是权贵的象征。但公共空间中也同样充斥着相反的元素。波哥大市长、优质公共空间的倡导者恩里克·佩纳罗萨认为,相比中产阶级和富人,穷人们更缺乏完善的生活设施、旅游资源、餐馆饭店以及优质的住房资源,他们更需要完善的人行道、免费干净的公园,以及高质量的公共空间进行聚会和社交。在18世纪的伦敦,西区的富人对东区拥挤不堪、一贫如洗、疾病肆虐的现象视而不见。如今去白教堂游玩的游客也同样只是盯着导航,直奔位于砖巷的“麦片杀手”网红咖啡馆,观看旧斯皮塔佛德市场周边ins风的街头艺术,却容易忽视哈姆雷特塔边因居民强烈反对才免于拆除的市政住宅区。

And many cities work hard to manipulate the built environment to discourage the presence of those it deems ‘undesirable’, which, for the most part (except for skateboarders) means the homeless. Hence the addition of so-called ‘defensive architecture’: built elements that nudge people out of spaces. These range from spikes on the tops of railings that prohibit climbing into public parks locked for the evening, to armrests in the middle of public benches to prevent napping. Ledges, windowsills and entryways are often studded with rounded metal spikes, not sharp enough to be dangerous but prominent enough to discourage sitting or lying down. Gated alleys, sloping bus-station seats and enclaves equipped with shower rails to drench the unwanted – all are current installations in cities such as London, which sees more than 700 people sleeping on the street a night. Such modifications to the urban landscape constitute a rhetorical practice often unnoticed by even the most well-intentioned urban inhabitant, and therefore go unchallenged.

除了滑板爱好者之外,城市中“不受欢迎的人”大部分都是流浪汉。许多城市为了减少流浪汉的数量,正大力改造城市景观,因此城市内出现了所谓的“敌对性建筑”,即限制公共空间中某些行为的建筑元素。比如为了防止有人半夜翻栏杆进入关闭的公园而设置的尖钉;为防止有人在公共长椅上打盹而在长椅中间添加的扶手;窗台、窗沿和入口处一般都镶有的圆形金属尖钉,这些尖钉不大尖锐,因此并不危险,但足以防止行人坐下或躺下。还有带门的小巷、汽车站倾斜的座椅和空地栏杆上为了驱逐闯入者设计的洒水装置等。这些建筑元素在伦敦这样的城市十分常见,即使伦敦每晚都会有700多人露宿街头。这些细微的改造便是城市建筑中“修辞性”设计的体现,即便是最热心的居民都经常难以察觉,因此也无法得到任何改进。

While we stare down at our mapping apps or outsource our navigation to the nearest Uber to speed down city streets, architects, city officials, urban planners and design firms, among others, are paying increasing attention to the ways in which urban design speaks to urban inhabitants. The American urbanist William H Whyte (1917-1999), who wrote the seminal texts The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980) and City: Rediscovering the Center (1988), set the stage for much of the data collecting and spatial observation now being conducted in cities. His groundbreaking work continues to have a huge influence on those, such as the aforementioned Gehl and the American urban planner Allan Jacobs, who are devoted to improving our experience of space and place. The question facing people invested in the life of cities is one of motivation – how, other than through explicit signage, penalties and prohibitions, can they influence the way we move through the city’s public spaces? More specifically, they study how the built environment can be designed so that people are ‘nudged’ to act in ways that are safe, sustainable and socially desirable. Small-scale interventions – chairs that can be moved, water features that add soothing sounds and visuals, the inclusion of ledges and edges on which to perch – have all been found to make spaces more inviting. Good lighting, the exclusion of bushes that might create hidden areas for illegal activity and safe bike paths for those without cars all make an area safer.

我们习惯于查看导航软件或呼叫最近的优步专车,因此经过城市中的大街小巷总是行色匆匆,但许多建筑师、市政官员、设计公司都越来越重视加强城市景观与居民之间的互动。美国城市设计师威廉·H·怀特的两部著作——《小城市的社会生活空间》与《城市:重新发现中心》,为如今城市的数据收集统计和空间监测工作奠定了基础。其开创性的工作也对一些人产生了深远影响,包括前文提到的扬·盖尔以及美国城市规划师阿伦·雅各布斯,后者致力于改善人们在公共空间中的体验。除了设置明确的标识、采取惩罚和禁止措施之外,如何影响城市居民行走于公共空间的方式,或者具体来说,使人们的行为方式朝着安全、可持续、社会化的方向转变,这是那些致力于改善城市生活的专业人士面临的一大问题,同时也是他们一大动机。设置可移动的椅子,建造具有怡人听觉或视觉效果的城市水景,增添可以休息的建筑物边沿等,这些小规模的干预措施都将提高公共空间的吸引力。此外,提供良好的照明条件,去除可能为犯罪活动提供隐蔽场所的灌木丛,建设安全的自行车专用道等措施也会提高一个地方的安全指数。

These professionals work on how the city can be made to ‘speak’ to its residents in ways that encourage democracy, safety and conviviality. But the German psychologist Julia Frankenstein warns that, in relying on GPS, we might be diminishing our cognitive maps, our sense of what is around the narrow routes we are shown on our screens. We might be learning to ‘strip-map’ our environment mentally.The people staring at a digital map neatly tracing a decontextualised line from the intersection outside Gloucester Road Tube station to the Whole Foods Market on Kensington High Street might not even see the beautiful, ornate railings and gates that enclose the private gardens they pass by, much less realise that they are not just aesthetically appealing but also mark the wealthy’s exclusive claim to some of the best green spaces in central London. The person staring down at a phone to get to the nearest Pret sandwich shop might fail to notice the allure of the nooks and crannies that line the streets of Hampstead Village.

这些专家致力于研究如何发挥城市与居民之间的沟通作用,以此推动民主发展、提升安全感和幸福感。德国心理学家茱莉亚·弗朗根斯坦告诫道,过分依赖导航可能会削弱我们脑中的感知地图,对电子路线上真实环境的感知也将衰退。人们会逐渐习惯在脑中将周遭的环境“线条化”。从格洛斯特路地铁站外的交叉口到肯辛顿大街的全食超市,如果人们只盯着电子地图上的简易路线,那么他们将错过沿途私人花园装饰华美的栏杆和大门,更不会意识到这些元素不仅具有审美吸引力,更象征着富人们对于伦敦市中心这片最具价值绿地的所有权。那些去最近的三明治店都要紧盯手机导航的人可能也将错过汉普斯特德村的街角美景。

History, too, is written in public spaces. The monuments and memorials to be found all over London – within cathedrals, atop hills, on the borders of the Royal Parks, alongside city pavements and dominating medians – offer the public narratives that frame collective historical memory, legitimising some losses while ignoring others, foregrounding certain figures and marginalising others, encouraging pride and containing grief, so as to prevent it from infecting everyday life. The huge statue of Prince Albert readily grabs the attention of even the most inattentive pedestrian in Kensington Gardens, but how many urbanites following their screens to Borough Market by London Bridge slow down enough to see Cross Bones, the small medieval graveyard in Southwark, or look closely enough to read of the thousands of unnamed ‘outcasts’ buried there. Their bodies, neglected or exploited in life and discarded in death, tell stories about infant mortality, poverty, prostitution and shame – stories that are not likely to reach the eyes of the distracted screengazer.

城市的公共空间同样承载着厚重的历史。在伦敦,不论是教堂、山顶、国家公园旁,还是城市步道或中央分隔带,纪念碑和纪念馆都随处可见。它们凝聚着一个集体共同的历史记忆,代表着这座城市对于过往得失的认同或忽视,对于历史人物的尊崇或排斥,铭记引以为傲的过去也承载难以为继的悲伤,以免它影响如今的平静生活。在肯辛顿公园,即便是最心不在焉的行人都能注意到阿尔伯特亲王的巨大雕像,但是当人们跟随导航前往博罗市场时,又有多少人会在途径伦敦大桥时放慢脚步,看看萨瑟克区的那座中世纪墓地——十字骨墓地(Cross Bones),又或是走进墓园,近距离凝望那成千上万埋葬于此的无名放逐者。他们生前被人忽视、遭人利用,死后更是惨遭丢弃。这个墓园诉说着许多关于死婴、贫穷、卖淫、耻辱的故事,这是那些盯着手机、心不在焉的人难以了解的。

When, like my student, we lose ourselves in our reliance on digital tools for navigation, when we must look at an app to know that the River Thames is south of us, or must be directed turn by turn by Siri in order to make it from the Royal Albert Hall to Gloucester Road station, we not only deny ourselves the pleasures of the 19th-century flâneur, contribute to city pollution and incur a slight risk of ‘death by GPS’, we become unaware of the ways in which our cities are built to encourage, discourage, reroute, entice or keep out certain inhabitants, as well as the ways in which they are designed to celebrate the stories of some while marginalising the histories of others. When we silence the city to pick up our phones, the urban environment goes unread, its inhabitants unaware of the multiple monumental and mundane elements that shape their attitudes, actions and access, as well as those of their fellow citizens.

当我们像我的学生一样过度依赖导航从而迷失自己时,当我们必须通过导航才知道原来泰晤士河就在南边时,当我们必须全程依靠Siri的实时指令才能从阿尔伯特皇家大厅到达格洛斯特路地铁站时,我们不仅丢失了19世纪都市漫游者的乐趣,也加剧了市区污染,抬高了“死于导航”的风险。对于城市中的建筑,我们不仅无法理解它们身上所承担的鼓舞、压抑、吸引、排斥以及改变居民出行路线的功能,也难以体察到这些建筑本身所体现的对于某些历史事件的宣扬和抹杀。当我们拿起手机埋头观看时,城市便陷入沉默,城市中的种种景观乏人问津。对于那些塑造了城市居民生活态度、行为方式和接触沟通方式的或标志性或日常的元素,我们置若罔闻,对周围的人群也深感漠然。

👇

参考阅读:

“我们走过社区,街道,广场,公园… 感受着那一份独特的情绪和气息 一本正经的城市空间 也可活力,可优雅,可有趣,可让人思考”

公众号:景观邦当景观开始骚动

当代人日益享受着科技进步带来的生活的便利和愉悦,对现代科技产生了越来越强的依赖性进而导致了人类主体的异化。

http://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?dbname=cjfd2017&filename=qnwj201721046&dbcode=cjfq

“科技异化造成了人在现代化的大机器面前失去了本真的自我,从而形成了现代人的生存危机感和生活无意义感.对科技异化的考察应该立足在人的生存矛盾上,这种矛盾已经不仅仅涉及到人在世界中能否生存以及如何生存的问题,更涉及到自身的生存意义问题.在一系列科技负面效应的威胁下,人应该如何再重新获得自己生命的价值和意义,这是我们在探索如何解决异化矛盾、摆脱科技异化造成的生存困境特别是生存意义危机问题时必须给出的答案.”

http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=cbxk201102003#

圆桌派S4 EP29 “通常游客旅行只知道“西装革履”的一个城市名胜古迹、地标建筑名,而未逛城市“肌肤相亲”的菜市场,那可谓不识该城真面目啊!”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOpYEWZYzwQ&list=PLmj5g7olDDq53V3A3qmw9B_snM6bZqTez

听见城市的声音

  • 本文原载于 aeon

  • 原文链接:https://aeon.co/essays/how-smartphones-silence-what-the-urban-landscape-tries-to-say

一、了解取经号 |我们是谁,在做什么,如何加入
二、学习贴士|如何打印输出PDF如何使用微信读书订阅取经号
三、翻译服务| 咨询邮箱:[email protected]
四、社交媒体 |微信公众号:取经号;微博:取经号JTW
五、译文归档 | 访问网站:qujinghao.com
六、学习社群 |翻译社(暂停中)

听见城市的声音

Be First to Comment

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注