论“公园”

文章来源：俞孔坚. 论“公园”[J].景观设计学, 2012(1):22-23.

如果说景观是社会意识形态和价值观在大地上的投影，那么公园就是公民社会发展到一定阶段的产物，是民主、自由和平等的社会理想的物化和载体。公平性、公共性以及满足人的身心再生和自由的需要是公园的本质。

从发生学的角度来理解，公园有以下3个源头：一是乡村的公地（Common），往往是村落的宗教礼仪场所或必须 共享的资源集聚地，如西方教堂前的广场和草地，或中国村落中的宗祠和寺庙前的场地，围绕水井、水塘和大树的场地。在这里，不同的家庭和个体可以公平地利用场地，平等地相互交流，儿童们可以平等地一起玩耍。但是，在一个不平等的社会里，即便是在这样的有限的“公地”内，实际上人们的交流和使用空间的权力也并不是完全平等的，其公共性是有局限的。因此，公地是否名副其实，实际上依赖于社会本身的公平性。

公园的另一个源头是私家领地的开放或公共化，使私家花园变成公共花园（Public Garden），所以形式上仍然是私家园林，但服务的对象变了，诸如英国的许多早期公园、法国的凡尔赛以及欧洲许多贵族和皇家园林的开放而成为公园。较起真来，中文的“公园”一词，往往被望文生义地理解成“公共花园”，因而，在中文语境中，对公园的理解往往不充分。

城市被认为是公民社会高度发展的结果，公园的内涵因为城市的发展而达到最完美的体现。因此，公园的第三个来源是规划的城市绿地，它们被有意识地作为城市规划设计的重要内容，甚至是核心内容来规划建设，并成为城市的中心或社区的中心，纽约的中央公园便是其典型。类似地，在美国城市快速发展时代规划建设起来的城市，几乎都有一个同样性质的中央公园。西方世界的价值观，特别是美国的立国之本——平等、自由和民主——在公园中得到最充分的体现。

除了在汉语文字上“公园”一词不能充分表达“Park”的完整内涵外，中国的城市公园从一开始就是带着歧视和不平等来到半殖民地中国的。上海滩上“华人与狗不得入内”的“公园”给中文语境中的“公园”开了个坏头，强化了中文语境中的“园”而剥夺了“公”，也同时暴露了西方资本主义和殖民主义的虚伪。即使民主的新中国已成立60多个春秋，中国的城市“公园”在很大程度上仍然摆脱不了围墙中的“园”的概念。

记得2000年应邀设计广东中山岐江公园时，在我们提出要建一个没有围墙、融入城市生活、对接城市街道的设计方案后，竟然遭到许多专家们的反对。理由是诸如管理困难、“园不像园”的质疑，差点使方案夭折。好在中山市民和当地决策者受惠于孙中山先生思想熏陶滋育，故有敢为天下先的传统，一个没有界限的真正意义上的公园得以建成。虽然，公园的免费开放已在各地城市中普遍实行，但对于公园作为公民社会价值观的体现的认识，尚需进一步的提高。在中国数以千计的公园，特别是“中央公园”的建设中，“造园”和“造景”的意识仍然主导着规划设计和管理，而公园作为城市中最平等、最自由的场所和人文关怀却有待彰显。

时代在变，城市公园，特别是中央公园的功能也需要改变。我们除了要将“公园”真正从造景的“园”转变为公共的“场”（Common），以体现当代城市作为公民社会发展的最高阶段的形式和载体外，当代公园必须对当代城市所面临的生态与环境挑战作出应答。诸如雨洪管理、栖息地保护、都市农业等问题，都意味着中央公园的形式将会与经典的奥姆斯特德式的疏林草地景观有很大的不同。因此，在规划城市公园方面，当代景观设计师的工作将比以往更加富有挑战，也更加令人激动。

On Parks

If landscape is the projection of the social idealogy and values anthe land,then parks are the result of a divil society,embodying Sodal ideals,namely,democracy,freedom and equality.Parks are by nature public and democratic spaces,capable of fulfiling mans need for freedom and restoration,both physically and spiritually.

In terms of gene alocy of parks. there are three sources. Oneis the commore found in rural areas m the spiritual centre in s vilage,often a site of worship or meeting place such as the square and grassland in frant of a westem church,the yard before a Chinese ancestral hall or temple,and the surraundings of a well,a pond and a large tree.This is where different famlies and individuals can came lagether,to share and exchange,wherechildren can play together without discrimina fon. However, in an unequal sociely,communica tion and the rights to use such space are not completely equal,So even in these 'camman'they are in fact not real public space. As a result,whether the commoris are truly public depencis on the equality of the society itself.

Another source of parks are those origirally of the private realm,but have been made open and public.The farm remairs an that of a prisa te garden,but its fundion has changed.Examplesof these are the early gardens in Britain.Versailles in France and numerous noble and ro yal garders in Europe. Strictly speaking,the Chinese word for *park" is often literally taken as public garden.As a result,in the Chinese context,park is often misunderstood.

Cities are generally considered a product of an advanced modern society,inturn,its parks can be seen as the fruit of awell developed city. Therefore,the third source of parks is the planned urban green spaces.They are usually a key element withh a citys urban plamning and design,in some cases,even becomes the core of a city or community.Central Park in New York is a dassic example. Similarly, almost all the American cilies plamedand built in that rapid urbanizing era have a similar central park. The Western values of equalily,freedom and democracy,those upon which US was founded on, are best reflected in such parks. Not anly does the expression "park" in Chinese eschews some of the back ground of its English counterpart,urban parks were introduced into the then semi-colonized China with discrimination and ineguallyframtheverybeginning.Anapcalling precedent was set for parks in Shanghai,where a plate washung outside the entrance of a "park" saying "no admission af Qhinese people and dogs." In this case,the meaning of "aarden"is rehforged but the serse of belna "aublie" is lest whie the hypocrisy of western capitalism and cobnialism is laid bare. Ithasbeenmorethan60yearssincetherepublicofChinawas founded,but 'parks"in Chinese cilies are,to a great extent,sill not able to get rid of this concept of "garden".

I remember being invited to design Qijiang Park in Zhangshan City, Guangdong Province in 2000. We praposed to build a park without walls,a design where the park mingled into theurban life,connecling the urban streets. But our proposal was opposed by many experts. Their reasoning was that it wauld bediffcut to manage;they had supposed the park as a traditional garden,but our design would break their visibrs of "garden'Our design was almast aborted,But farturately,Sun Yalesens idedlogy stil rurs deep amangst its citizens and local policy nlakers,whose legacy can be seen by the citys narresale.They had the courage and pioneering spirit to build a park,borderless in the real sense. While urtan parks have generally been apen to the public for free,this serse of freedom in parks,as thereflection of values of civil sodety, is still not very strong. In coretructing the thousands of parks of China,particularly the"central parks",this conanpt of "gardening"and "landiscaping"stidaminxks the design,paring and management,whie the charadeisfcs of paks s the psces af equlty, freedam an humanistic care are yet to be found.

The limes are changing,and so are the furctiors of urban parks,particularly central parks,We should transform the 'parks'from landscaping "gardens" in to public 'cammon'so as to showcase modern cilies as the form and medium of civil society that has evalved to the highest level of social devebpment.Moreover,modern parks should respand to the ecolagical and ervironmental challenges fading modem cities. With storm.water management,ha hitat protection and urban agriculture,the form of central parks today will be significantly different to theopen forest and pastoral landscape typically seen in Olmsted's time. As a result, in the field of urban park planning, the warkof modern landscape architeds will be more challenging and exciting than before.