|摘要: ||“Out of the Box”為一英語中常用的副詞片語，隱含有「跳出框架…」、或「跳出封閉的盒子…」之涵意，通常用於比喻擺脫制式方法、富原創性或突破性之行為、動作或思考。在此語境當中，「盒子」並不一定真實存在，但當這個片語用來指涉建築領域，尤其是現代主義建築(Modern Architecture /Architecture of Modernism)以及其身後的建築領域之發展時，其中的這個「盒子」(Box)，又使其成為帶有多重符旨與解讀詮釋方式的雙關詞彙…在本論文書寫的21世紀今日，重新回到「方盒子們」，探討如何「越其之外」(“out of the box”)的歷程，或許是今日重啟討論建築空間與形式理論回歸的可嘗試路徑與切入角度。|
“Out of the box” is a common adverb typically used to describe nonconforming, original, creative behaviors, actions, or thinking. In this context, the “box” does not necessarily exist. However, when used in the architectural domain, specifically modern architecture (or architecture of modernism) and the underlying development of the architectural domain, the “box” is used as a pun, a form of word play that suggests two or more meanings. In the current context, the 21st century, when this study was conducted, returning to the “box” and exploring how one should think “out of the box” are perhaps a potential path and point of view from which to discuss and regress architectural space and form theories.
The discussion provided in this study was based on several dimensions and perspectives. First, after the traditional vanishing-point architectural perspective was discarded following the relaxation of visual perspectives regardinglate modern architectural space, it initiated a cascade of spatial revolution and experiential development since the emergence of modern architecture. Second, since the industrial revolution, factories have concentrated on mass production and cultural accumulation, which contributed to the development of systematic, standard, and procedural operations for creating architectural space and forms. However, these characteristics in fact provided a platform and opportunity for subsequent spatial research and operations to integrate structural theories. Finally, in a globalized, social-networking environment that is stimulated by digital technologies, architectural domain has deviated from focusing on only narrative discourse and shifted toward a multidimensional network connection, presenting open and dynamic features. As a result, architectural theories and narrations have advanced toward diversification and fragmentation. In the current era where “keywords” are essential, architectural spaces have developed toward featuring open and diverging forms, smooth and flat forms, or compact and flexible forms—all of which are the architectural patterns presented before our eyes.
A review of the crossover period between the 19th and 20th Centuries showed that architectural narrations were just as diverse as those of the present era and the modern architecture was plagued by mismatching and perturbing forms. By contrast, architectural spaces in the current era are filled with architectural déjà vu. Space and forms are ultimately the core elements governed by architectural designs and dimensions designers and artists must confront. In light of this phenomenon, we must return to the primitive “box,” the origin of inspirations, and from thereon, walk “out of the box,” spread out, and disassemble one by one…