Level 5-Day 35.Prince Charles 'Ugly Buildings'(2)

词汇提示

1.concrete 混凝土

2.stumps 树桩

3.municipal 市政的

4.siren 汽笛

5.demolished 拆除

6.layout 布局

7.monstrous 巨大的

8.carbuncle 痈肿

9.Renaissance 文艺复兴

10.curves 曲线

11.vertical 垂直的

原文

Prince Charles: 'Ugly Buildings'(2)

It would be a tragedy if the character and skyline of our capital city were to be further ruined and St Paul's dwarfed by yet another giant glass stump, better suited to downtown Chicago than the City of London.

It is hard to imagine that London before the last war must have had one of the most beautiful skylines of any great city, if those who recall it are to be believed.

Those who do, say that the affinity between buildings and the earth, in spite of the city's immense size, was so close and organic that the houses looked almost as though they had grown out of the earth and had not been imposed upon it - grown, moreover, in such a way that as few trees as possible were thrust out of the way.

Those who knew it then and loved it, as so many British love Venice without concrete stumps and glass towers, and those who can imagine what it was like, must associate with the sentiments in one of Aldous Huxley's earliest and most successful novels.

Antic Hay, where the main character, an unsuccessful architect, reveals a model of London as Christopher Wren wanted to rebuild it after the Great Fire and describes how Wren was so obsessed with the opportunity the fire gave the city to rebuild itself into a greater and more glorious vision.

What have we done to it since the bombing during the war?

What are we shortly going to do to one of its most famous areas - Trafalgar Square?

Instead of designing an extension to the elegant facade of the National Gallery which complements it and continues the concept of columns and domes, it looks as if we may be presented with a kind of vast municipal fire station, complete with the sort of tower that contains the siren.

I would understand better this type of High Tech approach if you demolished the whole of Trafalgar Square and started again with a single architect responsible for the entire layout, but what is proposed is like a monstrous carbuncle on the face of a much loved and elegant friend.

Apart from anything else, it defeats me why anyone wishing to display the early Renaissance pictures belonging to the gallery should do so in a new gallery so manifestly at odds with the whole spirit of that age of astonishing proportion.

Why can't we have those curves and arches that express feeling in design?

What is wrong with them?

Why has everything got to be vertical, straight, unbending, only at right angles -and functional?

翻译

查尔斯王子:“丑陋的建筑”(二)

如果我们首都的特色和天际线进一步被毁，圣保罗大教堂被另一个更适合芝加哥市中心而不是伦敦金融城的巨型玻璃桩所衬托，那将是一场悲剧。
如果那些回忆起来的人是可信的，那么很难想象，在上一次大战之前，伦敦一定拥有所有大城市中最美丽的天际线之一。
持这种观点的人说，尽管城市规模巨大，但建筑物与土地之间的联系是如此紧密和有机，以至于这些房屋看起来几乎像是从土地中生长出来的，而不是强加给它的——而且，生长的方式尽可能少地阻碍了树木。
那些当时了解并热爱它的人，就像许多英国人热爱没有混凝土树桩和玻璃塔的威尼斯一样，那些能想象出它是什么样子的人，一定会联想到奥尔德斯·赫胥黎(Aldous Huxley)最早也是最成功的小说之一中的情感。
在《安蒂克海》中，主人公是一位不成功的建筑师，他展示了一个伦敦的模型，因为克里斯托弗·雷恩想在大火后重建伦敦，并描述了雷恩是如何痴迷于大火给这座城市带来的重建机会，使其成为一个更伟大、更辉煌的城市。
自从战争期间的轰炸以来，我们对它做了什么?
我们马上要去它最著名的地区之一——特拉法加广场做些什么呢?
而不是设计一个扩展到国家美术馆的优雅的外观，补充它，并继续柱和圆顶的概念，它看起来好像我们可能会看到一种巨大的市政消防站，完成了那种包含警笛的塔。
如果你拆除整个特拉法加广场，让一个建筑师负责整个布局，我会更好地理解这种高科技的方法，但提议的东西就像一个可爱而优雅的朋友脸上的巨大红宝石。
除此之外，让我感到困惑的是，为什么有人想要展示属于画廊的早期文艺复兴时期的画作，却要在一个与那个时代的整体精神如此明显地格格不入的新画廊里展出。
为什么我们不能在设计中使用那些表达情感的曲线和拱门呢?
他们怎么了?
为什么所有的东西都必须是垂直的，直的，不弯曲的，只有在直角上——而且是功能性的?