在海外专辑第一百零七期 – 周桐





A bosom friend afar brings distant land near. The Oversea album shares the lives of Chinese living abroad with all. The No.107 episode is about Tong Zhou who graduated from Tsinghua University and Columbia GSAPP.


Why going abroad?


Honestly It has nothing to do with design. I spent a great amount of time listening to music and most of the music I listened to when I was at college comes from 70&80s Downtown Manhat-tan.


What impressed you the most when you are abroad?

念书。哥大第一个studio, 来代课的建筑师Utzi Grau批评我的剖面“this just looks like an OMA building”,幡然醒悟, 不再执念于某种手法或是操作。

城市与人。 2020年夏天跟朋友参加了华盛顿广场公园的Black Lives Matter集会, 庙会般的体验完全颠覆了我对社会运动针尖对麦芒的理解。纽约人在抗议警察暴力与系统性的种族歧视的共识下彼此鼓励。志愿者,免费的食物、水、防疫用品, 卖diy纪念衫的日本青年……曼哈顿下城变成一个团结的社区, 街道、公园、公共交通无不成为市民空间。如同电影《颐和园》里郭晓东和郝蕾兴高采烈前去广场的片段, 游行也变成朋友们的消夏聚会。节日的氛围让警察和那天的宵禁显得多余, 我们回到布鲁克林, 在街角小公园里喝醉, 半年居家隔离的郁闷一扫而空。第二天, 纽约市长白思豪宣布宵禁解除。

School. Utzi Grau comments on one of my sections “this just looks like an OMA building”. Since then I take my attention away from techniques.

City and crowd. My friend and I joined the Black Lives Matter rally at Washington Square Park on June 6th 2020, which overwrote my understanding about social movements. During the ral-ly New Yorkers encouraged and supported each other under a same claim to end police bru-tality and systematic racism. We saw volunteers, free food and water, free mask and hand sanitizers, we saw young Japanese folks selling homemade T-shirts and Caribbean skaters. The whole downtown Manhattan became a community in solidarity. Parks, streets, public transit all turn into vibrant civic spaces. As if in the chapter that Yu Hong and Zhou Wei join the party alike parade on Tiananmen Square, our parade in New York became a joyful summer gathering. The festival vibe made NYPD and the curfew really absurd. We went back to Brook-lyn, got drunk in a small park and all that COVID-19 lockdown blues disappeared. The next day, Bill de Blasio announced that New York City would end its curfew.


What do you miss the most about China?

家人朋友, 卤煮拌面, 便利店和可以深夜晃荡的街道。

Families and friends, Luzhu and Banmian, 7-Eleven and street walk for all night long.


Will you come back? Why?

当然。纽约很好, 但没有很喜欢美国, 我不会开车。

Definitely. New York City is great but I’m never a big fan of United States. I don’t drive.


Is it more distinct to view China in a different environment after going abroad? Any thought?

说个故事吧, 17年即将离开北京前的一个晚上, 我在零点抄手碰到一位顶着绿色鸡冠头、戴着钉子项圈的朋克, 放着四四拍的低保真嘻哈节奏跟同伴rap battle。几个人桌上也就两碗抄手, 但是他们说的都不错。那种信手拈来的愉悦和毫无羁绊的fusion我到美国后就很少见到了。中国的自由很有限, 但这种野生的自由我在美国常常找不到。

Here’s the story. It was a random evening in 2017 when I was about to leave Beijing for NYC, I met a random punk at Lingdian Wonton Shop, I’m saying he was a punk with Mohawk and leather spike necklace, playing a 4/4 lofi hiphop beat and doing a rap battle with his friends. They were grooving well in the wonton shop. I don’t see that much straightforward pleasure and bold cultural appropriation in US. China has got very limited freedom but I hardly find that freedom of being wild in US.


What are the educational characteristics of your school?

哥大GSAPP跟GSD的气氛相似, 招生颇多, 强调多元。我就读的MSAAD项目在最后一个学期与March项目共享18个studio供学生选择。选择的教授直接决定了在学校的体验. 学校里有Steven Holl, Bernard Tschumi之类的大咖, 也有Hilary Sample、Kersten Geers、石上纯也这类红透半边天的青年建筑师, 我选的是Cristina Goberna(Fake Industries, Architectural Agonism), Jimenez Lai(Bureau Spectacular), Jing Liu(SO-IL)三位建筑师的design studio, 除去Jing以外的两位并没有很多建成项目, 可能对国内的朋友相对陌生。但特别庆幸自己没有选更大咖的建筑师, 因为大家多多少少都会在课余关注、那些studio在干什么(也更容易理解), 但尤其是Cristina和Jimenez两个强调立论和表达的studio, 若非亲身上阵, 很难学到东西。另外还选了一门Kenneth Frampton的建筑哲学课, 对我有点艰深, 但Frampton本人很chill, 带着我们了解了戈培尔、《意志的胜利》、纳粹德国的总体艺术, 现在回忆起来是很好的体验。

The vibe at Columbia GSAPP is much similar to Harvard GSD that diversity in every aspect is encouraged. Yet the fact that the school is in New York absolutely adds a lot unique flavor to students’ experience. The school space is compact but it has many students and professors and people usually have to meet each other here and there, and the end o year show is quite congested. There were 18 design studios we should choose for my last semester at GSAPP. Among them, there were big names like Steven Holl and Bernard Tschumi, as well as younger but trendy architects like Junya Ishigami, kersten Geers, Hilary Sample. I took Cristina Gober-na, Jimenez Lai, and Jing Liu studio. I like their work and academic agenda and I’m glad I didn’t join those big names since everyone is peeking at them and it was relatively easier to understand what they were doing. On the contrary, for Cristina and Jimenez who spent crazy amount of time establishing their argument and strategizing representation, one barely learn anything if not fully dedicated into every desk crit session. Besides design studios, I took Kenneth Frampton’s Philosophy of Architecture. It was quite deep but he was chill. We had a good time talking about Joseph Goebbels, Triumph of the Will, Nazi’s Gesamtkunstwerk.

▼Kenneth Frampton帮助修改的建筑哲学课的发言稿
Presentation draft for Philosophy of Architecture, edited by Kenneth Frampton


Who is your favorite artist (in wider range such as art, music, movie)? What is the influence?

Gordon Matta-Clark和Thomas Demand.

设计的目的通常是一个新的artifact的产出, 但Gordon让我开始关注庸常空间的来龙去脉, 质疑精致与舒适的意义, 并思考破坏与退化的力量。另外, Gordon在70年代早期经营过一家餐厅FOOD, 由一批纽约下城艺术家共同运转, 既是餐厅, 更是当时艺术场景中重要的活动场地,让我想起北京FruitySpace那种亲切熟悉的社区感。

喜欢上Thomas Demand源自我对带有电影气质的图像和音乐的兴趣。后来慢慢觉得, 他的作品中模型照片记录下的瞬间与三维的模型本身并不互相指涉, 也完全没有义务相互佐证, 他们完全独立于彼此, 更独立于与他们所复制的真实场景本身。在这个三角关系中, 没有哪种媒介显得更真实或者更具有历史性的价值, 当模型不再承担渲染真实的义务, 我乐意做的,与其说是建筑的模型, 不如说是模型的建筑。

Gordon matta-Clark and Thomas Demand.

Gordon’s “Anarchitecture” opened a new world of gaps, cuts, leftover space, damage and devolution to me. His work encouraged my thinking against the legitimacy of always producing brand new artifacts. Something we have all been valued such as comfort, privacy, and sophis-tication, should be categorically re-examined if they merely serve as a tool to tame extremely distinct individuals in a highly capitalized system, which absolutely feels no obligation to tell who we are.

I like Thomas Demand because of my interest in graphics and music piece that come with a cinematic quality. Later on I find out that the moment of the paper model he photographed doesn’t necessarily have to refer back to the model or the social/political incident the model replicated. During the process of replicating the original incident and recording the replica per se, the historical reality becomes obscured and a freedom of establishing a subjective reality shows up. That’s exactly the drastic difference between an architecture model and a model architecture.


When did you start to follow gooood? Any suggestions?

15-16年吧。感谢谷徳给了一个平台让国内国外、人与人之间的交流变得更加容易, 真心希望谷徳越办越好。

Around 2015-2016. I appreciate that gooood built a platform to bridge the gap between people as well as China and abroad. I wish gooood a bright bright tomorrow.










Critic: Jing Liu, Kevin Lamyuktseung

哥大Advanced Architectural Design项目的第三个设计项目, 课程定位是住宅(House),但是任务却是对布鲁克林一幢中产阶级公寓楼的改建,更接近于集体住宅(Housing)的概念, 因此指导老师Jing Liu并未对具体的功能排布、面积等作过多的要求, 也并不要求学生完成一幢完整的住宅设计, 而是鼓励思考纽约商业住宅商业定位与实际使用的错位, 探索新的居住可能。课程要求学生选取一幢历史上有重要影响的住宅进行分析, 指导后半学期的独立设计, 成果是模型与图纸。

This is the third design studio at GSAPP MSAAD program. The studio is imagined to be a house design studio but the actual context is set at a middle class condominium in Brooklyn. So the professor didn’t give us a hard time on program and floor areas. We were encouraged to challenge the design paradigm in New York residential buildings and explore a more radical way of living. Case study is required. Only drawings and a physical model is required as deliv-erables.

▼左:1924年在Schindler House的感恩节聚餐;右: Schindler House在建造中;下: Schindler House平面图 (图片来源:网络)

位于洛杉矶的Schindler Chace House是奥地利建筑师 Rudolph Schindler为自己与妻子 Pauline Schindler、以及友人 Clyde & Marian Chace夫妇在1922所设计建成的住宅。颇具波西米亚浪漫情怀的Rudolph Schindler身处洛杉矶艺术场景的中心, 彻夜的酒会与party上, 他与其他的现代主义先锋们捍卫着自己的独立人格与社群生活(Communal Living)。在Schindler Chase House的设计中: 传统的起居室、餐厅、卧室被一概抛弃, 取而代之的是每一个人专属的studio, 共享的厨房、洗衣房、车库、杂物间, 以及在屋顶凉棚下的睡篮(Sleeping Basket)。四个studio以L型的体量分为两组,以合叶(Hinged)的姿态各自看向一侧, 围合出两组相似但略有差异的庭院/花园。

Located in Los Angeles, Schindler Chace House is designed and built by Rudolph Schindler in 1922. Back then Rudolph Schindler was in the center of LA art scene, thanks to his obsession for a bohemian lifestyle, he lives a rather communal way alongside his friends and families. in Schindler Chace House, conventional living room, dinning room and bedrooms were aban-doned altogether. Four studios for each of the house owners were designed for their everyday activities. Sleeping baskets were placed on the roof for hot summer nights. And the kitchen, laundry, garage and utility room were shared by the two couples. The four studios were similar but not identical, as each two studios grouped into an L shape, looking towards their own gar-dens.

▼左: Bond 33外观;右:二层轴测图

课程改造/重新设计的对象是Downtown Brooklyn的一幢商业住宅楼33 Bond。选择入住的白领看中这种住宅的安全和配套设施, 但又没有经济实力租下一整个居住单元, 于是合租成为常态, 两居室、三居室又被分割为更小的封闭单元。这看似是一种集体生活, 但诸如厨房/餐厅等共享的空间常常处于一种尴尬状态, 在完全闲置与过度拥塞的两极来回摇摆, 而租客们往往很难与室友/邻居发生过多的交流, 而是出于社交的礼貌距离退回自己仅有一张床的卧室。

We imagined to renovate/redesign 33 Bond, a commercial condominium in Downtown Brook-lyn. Middle class workers like the facilities and security in the building but they usually can’t afford renting the whole apartment, so co-living becomes normal. The apartment units would be divided into smaller units, and the shared space such as kitchen, dining room are awkward since they’re either over empty or over crowded. So it’s hard for the residents to communi-cate with each other. Most people just go back to their bedroom.


Schindler Chace House中的社群生活(Communal Living)自然成为了思考的起点。受到杜尚1927年作品《门,拉里街11号》的启发, 我意识到在空间归属感(Belongingness)的坐标轴上, 存在着超越私人-半公共-公共三个坐标点的广阔光谱, 于是创造一组分层的(Layered)空间, 成为对社群生活(Communal Living)的解读与回应。

The communal Living in Schindler Chace House initiated my thinking. Also inspired by Marcel Duchamp’s Door, 11 rue Larrey, I saw a space that doesn’t belong to either private or public. Creating a group of layered space becomes my response to communal living.


主要的策略是从原建筑的柱网中生长出柔软格网(A Soft Grid), 抽象格网线在物理世界中由两种性质截然不同的建筑元素实现, 一种是实墙, 一种是玻璃。在物理厚度与可见度都有极大反差的两种元素之间, 模糊的归属感与空间的灰度逐渐显现。

The strategy is to grow a soft grid from the original grid. The abstract grid line is substantial-ized by solid wall and glass. Between these two elements with drastic characters, a fuzzy be-longingness and a whole spectrum from private to public showed up.

▼左:推敲模型的演化 ;右:玻璃受热后可以弯曲, 并自我支撑, 形成与墙体独立的结构系统

墙与玻璃则迅速唤起建筑师的形式直觉: 前者的厚度暗示了一系列关于剖碎(poche)的思考, 后者弯曲, 形成自我支撑的独立结构(Dan Graham)。剩下的工作便是在一次次的大尺度绘图练习中不断推敲这两个元素之间的关系与具体空间的尺寸, 卧榻、书桌、吧台、橱台、玄关、卫浴、种植、洗衣等活动一一出现在空间中。

The wall suggested thinking about poche. The glass would be self supported if heated and bent. The rest of the design is just situating the two elements on the drawing. Sleeping area, studies, bars, cabinets, bathrooms, gardens, laundry….activities appear in the space by themselves.

▼最终图纸,the final drawing

最后的平面中依旧设计了若干个住宅单元, 玻璃则成为灵活的、游走于私密与公共之间的元素, 而墙利用poche容纳了更多接近人体尺度的建筑元素, 成为介于家具、围护、结构之间的暧昧存在。

Several living units are designed and the glass becomes an element wandering across private and public space. The wall takes advantage of the poche to accommodate various architec-tural elements, becoming something between a furniture, an enclosure, or a structure.


▼模型,physical model

▼居住单元,residential units

▼弯曲玻璃两侧的空间展现了私密到公共的若干层过渡,The space on either side of the curved glass reveals several layers of transition from private to public






Critic: Cristina Goberna, Tigran Kostandyan
Team: Ruiqi Shang, Weisi Ma

No-negotiation Theater是一组建筑师精心准备的复制品(Replica), 由三个不切实际的剧场空间组成, 合成一出off-off-broadway剧院里上演的戏剧。它出现在社会矛盾的前沿, 却狡黠的服务于相互对立的意识形态(Ideology), 作为对立两方的双料间谍(Double Secret Agent), 它挑衅而非取悦, 它鼓动争论而非解决。

No-negotiation Theater is a group of replicas made by architects. It consists of three unrealis-tic theater spaces, making a real off-off-broadway play. It shows up at the frontline of social conflicts and serves as a double secret agent between opposite ideologies. It creates perpe-tration instead of pleasure, it triggers agonism instead of resolution.

▼Airbnb在东村的分布,Airbnb distribution at East Village, New York

2016年十月, 纽约州议会通过了一项法案,禁止纽约市内的A类住宅(包含三个或以上居住单元的住宅)在业主本人不居住的情况下进行三十天以下的短租行为。自Airbnb进入纽约以来, 许多房主因短租获利大而趋之若鹜, 租赁市场上面向本地居民的长租房源稀缺, 租赁价格走高。另一方面, 许多房源完全没有火灾报警器等安全设施, 而宽松的身份验证导致住客鱼龙混杂, 甚至有人借机做起了性交易和毒品生意. 在东村(East Village)、下东区(Lower East Side)等Airbnb短租极度频繁的社区, 许多常年居住的原住民被迫搬离, 将公寓让给短租客与游客。

On October 21st 2016, Governor of New York Andrew M Cuomo signed into law restrictions on short-term rentals less than 30 days in New York City. This is seen as a counter measure to stop short-term rentals, especially Airbnb, from taking apartment units off the market for full-time residents. On the other hand, the properties for rent on Airbnb aren’t always equipped with security facilities like fire alarm and smoke detector. Loose check on tenants’ identity bring unknown people into the neighborhood. Some people even take the advantage for drug business or prostitution. In East Village and Lower East Side where Airbnb is storming across the neighborhood, many full-time residents decide to move out.

▼70年代的LA MAMA Experimental Theater Club
LA MAMA Experimental Theater Club in 1970s

这对于东村(East Village)来说像是一个讽刺——在上世纪70-80年代, 纽约城市衰败、市政破产, 东村以其低廉的房价吸引了一大批艺术家入驻。之后的艺术、音乐 、文学、戏剧蓬勃发展, 直接定义了70-80年代的纽约非主流文化。尤其是LA MAMA Experimental Theater Club, Cafe Cino等一众off-off-broadway剧院在这里进行大胆的剧作实验, 庇护着大批年轻编剧与演员, 与商业化的百老汇剧场分庭抗礼。然而艺术场景的繁荣逐渐抬高了东村的地价, 艺术家撤出, 房地产商和政客亦顺水推舟, 在90年代末、21世纪初完成了东村的士绅化(Gentrification)进程。东村褪去了原始、自由、颇具左翼精神的社区氛围, 却没有换来完全的安全与宜居, 在2010年代共享经济的潮流中被裹挟, 逐渐变成游客与短租客的街区。

This sounds like an irony to East Village. in 1970-80s, New York City municipal finance almost went broke. At the same time, low rent in East Village attracted countless artists to live in the neighborhood. The neighborhood soon became a beautiful mess. Artists, musicians, play writ-ers here completely changed 70-80s New York subculture. LA MAMA Experimental Theater Club, Cafe Cino and many other off-off-broadway theaters boldly carried out play script ex-periment, sheltering many young play writers and actors. However, the booming art scene gradually brought housing price up. Its residents moved out and the real estate companies as well as the politicians pushed forward the gentrification process. East Village gave up its liber-al, left-wing community spirit but the promised safety and living quality is still up in the air. Here it comes Airbnb, the neighborhood even more belongs to visitors and short-term ten-ants.

▼96&98 St Marks Pl,96&98, St Marks Pl

由此开始一出空间剧目: 三幢被Airbnb占领的建筑被选中并部分拆除, 其居住功能被自然废止, 三个不同主题的剧场被挪用至此。他们遵循相似的原则: 这些剧场会以野蛮寄生的姿态反噬精致而趋同的共享经济短租空间; 这些剧场要挑战固定的舞台/观众空间布置; 这些剧场要挑战表演与观看的关系; 剧场的建造需要成为表演的一部分。

A play script is written now. Three buildings occupied by Airbnb would be selected and par-tially demolished. Its living function would be exchanged for three off-off-broadway theater spaces. They follow same ideas: Theaters should boldly resist commodification and homogeni-zation brought by sharing economy. Theaters should be applied with a parasite pattern to ur-ban space. Theaters should challenge fixed stage/audience configuration. Theaters should challenge the relationship between acting and watching. Construction of a theater should be part of the performance.


▼无限意识碰撞剧场,Theater of Ideological Encounter

St. Marks Place 96与98号的屋顶上, 一道深深的沟壑自上而下切过建筑的立面, 一对阶梯状的舞台从沟壑两侧升起。两边都有一个大喇叭,不断播放着己侧拾音设备拾取到的信号, 两方的声音信息因近距离的声波重叠而变得难以辨认。沟壑中央是一组幕布, 幕布两侧的人自以为是等待表演的开始的观众, 待幕布打开, 他们就会发现观众就是演员。自己既是观察者, 又是被观察者, 在这里, 剧目没有开始或是结束, 剧场即表演。

On the rooftop of 96&98 St. Marks Pl., a deep walled pit cuts into the façade of the original building. A pair of stages with stairs are extruded from both sides of the pit. The megaphones on both sides keep broadcasting that even the other side could hear the sound, reinforcing the impression of a perfect place not to be understood. By the way, there is a curtain along the axis of the theater. Participants on both sides consider themselves as spectators until the curtain opens so they realize the spectators are the actors and the actors are exactly the spectators. The play doesn’t start or end, the theater itself becomes its performance.

▼预谋占领剧场,Premeditated Theater of Occupation

▼任意剧场,Theater of Arbitrary

▼剧场占领街区,Block invasion plan

▼No-negotiation Theater 微电影片段,vimeo链接: https://vimeo.com/229499185






A City within a Building
Critic: Jimenez Lai, Nile Greenberg
Team: Jipeng Jing

Unreliable Narrator是一座容纳了一个迷你城市的巨大建筑 (A City Inside a Building)。它坐落于阿拉斯加最北端的市镇巴罗(Barrow)郊外。为了在极端的温度、日照、能源与风的条件下给四千两百位居民强有力的庇护, 普通城市中常见的部分(Parts)在这里被聚拢成一个巨大的整体(Whole)。庞大的体量使得居民只能体验其中的特定部分, 对于他们, 自己的空间认知——尽管是有选择的、碎片化的——恰如其分的描述了这座城市。如同盲人摸象般, 每一位居民都是一个不可靠的叙述者, 他们将毫无关联的空间素材剪切拼贴成自己的电影脚本, 努力构建着局部的真实。

Unreliable Narrator is a city inside a building. It is located in Barrow, Alaska. In order to shelter its 4200 residents under extreme climate conditions, necessary parts of a city are puzzled to-gether as a whole. Each resident here can only ever experience so much of the whole, and on-ly retain fragments of the parts. To them, what they retain in their experiences is as good as the whole building. Each resident naturally becomes an unreliable narrator, who construct par-tial realities, collaging the parts they know the way a filmstrip is spliced from a series of unre-lated parts.

▼左: The City in the City, Berlin: A Green Archipelago, O.M.Ungers, 1977;右: Arctic Town, Ralph Erskine, 1958

在这样一座巨大建筑中, 路网失去了意义, 交通通过传送带、电梯与走廊实现。各种功能区域——居住、商业、教育、医疗、工业——经过仔细计算后分散在建筑的各个角落, 但城市设计中严格的功能分区似乎没有必要, 就连各部分的具体形式也因为要从属整体而变得模糊, 布局、构成与设计的技巧在这里显得力不从心, 最后呈现的是一座拼贴剪接的拥塞(Congested)之城, 一座建筑的建筑(A Building of Buildings)。

Grid plan doesn’t help organizing such a big building. Circulation is made possible by elevators and conveyor belts. Miscellaneous programs are distributed in different areas after meticulous calculation. However, zoning code sounds unnecessary here. Architectural form of certain parts is obscured since they follow the whole. Composition, layout and design technique be-come useless. Instead, a bricolage of congested buildings seems better situated in such con-text. A building of buildings.

尽管城市的图景看起来十分混乱, Unreliable Narrator的居民们却不以为然, 由于个体活动范围的局限, 他们眼中的城市更像是几个他们熟识的部分(Parts)交叠重合而成的局部:

The city is quite a mess. But the residents don’t really care. The city in their eyes are episodes of parts they know overlapped together:

居民们在脑中随意剪接记忆中的空间, 并非出于故意, 但他们的描述似乎从未指向同一座城市。巴罗传统的捕鲸季节来临, 一位因纽特水手离奇身亡, 五位居民分别描述了他们当日的所作所为…

Residents would naturally process their memory of the spaces (sometimes they forget as well), although not on purpose, none of their description represents the same building. The an-nual whaling season has come, an Inuit sailor died on the shore. Five witness accounts to the same event…

▼城市的片段, 纸面插画, 900mmx2400mm
Fragment of the city, illustration, 900mmx2400mm

▼城市的片段, 剖切模型, 760mmx760mmx760mm
Fragment of the city, Lasagna cut model, 760mmx760mmx760mm







工业制盐在20世纪末的十年内击败了当地延续七个世纪的制盐传统,斯洛文尼亚皮兰盐田如今已经没有人在采盐。残存几座采盐工人的小屋, 也已经是断壁残垣了。一夜间, 三个巨大的木碑突然出现在小屋遗址上, 没有人知道它们是什么, 从哪里来, 作什么用。有好事者记录下了未知木碑的尺寸、结构与细节——除了大以外, 简单而无用。不过这样无害也无用的东西好像能赢得人们多余的宽容, 在这里观察嬉戏过一阵后, 没人去理会这些木碑, 也没有人把它们移走。几年后小屋终于坍圮殆尽, 人们又慢慢注意起这些木碑, 盐田的历史与人们的记忆仿佛也刻在了这些沉默而无用的东西上……疫情伊始的场景模型练习。
Over seven centuries salt production tradition was taken over by industrialized salt produc-tion in late 1990s, there’s no one processing salt at Piran Salt Pan now. Several small houses, where salt pan workers used to live, are still there, yet crumbling and near broken. Three wooden megaliths showed up overnight, nobody knows what are they and where they come from. Some folks measured the megalith and recorded them with photos and drawings. They are huge and nothing else. After a while, people lost interest in these boring wooden tomb-stones but no one moved them away either. A few years later, the small houses finally col-lapsed, people noticed these wooden megaliths again, as if the history and memory of the salt pan are also embedded on these big dumb objects…cinematic model shred at the beginning of pandemic.

▼被当地人记录下的木碑,The megaliths recorded on drawing







两股力量被迫离开自己的家园迁徙到一个未知的星球, 面临着内部与外部的危机与争斗, 焦虑、恐慌、猜忌、暗算, 一场冒险就此展开……疫情期间的场景模型练习。致敬Chris Marker。

Two expedition teams were forced to migrate from their homeland to an unknown planet. They’re faced with internal conflicts and external tensions. Here begins the journey…cinematic model shred at the during the pandemic. A tribute to Chris marker.

第一幕 | Scene 1
在那树下与The Chief见面。
Meeting the Chief at “the Tree”.

是The Chief促成了Ryan上校与Nicholas上尉之间的停战.
It was the Chief who prompted the truce between Captain Ryan and Lieutenant Nicholas.

这两支队伍都从人们记忆中的“蓝色星球”迁徙来到这个星球, 但这些幸存者中似乎没人适应这里。陌生的环境与奇怪的重力带来了许多麻烦, 甚至是恐惧与猜忌。
Both migrated from the “Blue Planet“ recalled long ago, none of these survivors seem to fit in here. The unfamiliar environment and weird gravity not only adds trouble, but terror and dis-trust.

然而The Chief和他的副手“双胞胎”从未真正维护和平。
And the Chief, with his best assistant, “the twins“, were never the real peacekeepers.

雨季, 他的计划正在发酵。
The rainy season has come. In this mind, something is brewing.

很快, Ryan上校发现自己没法利用短暂的和平带领他的人马安营扎寨, 因为他自己时不时被“双胞胎”的鬼影骚扰。
Captain Ryan found, before he could enjoy the truce and lead his men to settle down here, he himself surprisingly gets haunted by “the twins”.

不幸的是, 另一支队伍里, Nicholas上尉也有相同的困扰……
So does lieutenant Nicholas, unfortunately…

End of Scene 1. To be continued…


在海外地点:布鲁克林, 美国
学校:清华大学, 哥伦比亚大学
工作单位:Toshiko Mori Architect, SO-IL

When:  2017 to now
Where: Brooklyn
Name: Tong Zhou
School: Tsinghua University and Columbia GSAPP
Office: Toshiko Mori Architect, SO-IL
Contact: tongzhounyc@gmail.com



随机推荐工作 所有工作 »