臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：「朗讀違章」與「建構蘭花屋」：當代臺灣違建論述之公共空間觀點與公共性詮釋
書刊名：建築與規劃學報
作者：邱啟新 引用關係
作者(外文)：Chiu, Chih-sin
出版日期：2015
卷期：16:1
頁次：頁21-39
主題關鍵詞：違建；建築論述；公共空間；公共性；Squatting；Architectural discourse；Public space；Publicness
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:49
  • 點閱點閱:52
當代都市違建論述呈現多元觀點，研究發現論述對治理違建之政策有潛在影響。本文探討近年台灣兩大以違建為主題之建築論述—一為2011年舉行於台北市中正區一處都市更新單元之「朗讀違章」空間裝置展與成果專書，二為2014年交通大學建築研究所國際競賽得獎作品「蘭花屋」計畫。本文探討建築專業者與學者之違建論述，檢視其治理層面意義。研究方法為文本分析，資料包含專書、報告書、演講稿、媒體報導，以質性研究之開放式編碼分析資料，萃取出「公共空間觀點」與「公共性詮釋」兩大面向探討其治理意涵，透過Henri Lefebvre 與Michel de Certeau之理論架構比較兩個案差異。分析發現朗讀違章認同違建佔領公共空間之行為，指出其挑戰現代主義建築與資本主義都市之公共性意涵，將違建視為一種「空間戰術」，創造「再現之空間」。蘭花屋則主張以能源屋之「空間再現」更新屋頂違建以收復公共空間，並提出居住權、環境永續性、都市美學之公共性意涵，屬於「空間戰略」之提案。結論指出兩種論述因陷入二元式思考所產生之盲點與侷限性，建議違建論述應將居民行為、都市政策與專業建築實踐整合討論，重視個案環境脈絡，方能提出較可行之設計與治理建議。
Contemporary discourse on squatting present various perspectives. Studies suggest influences from discourse on urban governance on squatting. The paper investigates two sets of architectural discourses on squatting. The first case is "Celebrating Squatting", an art show and a published book honoring the aesthetics of informality symbolized by squatting. The second is "Orchid House", an award-winning solar house proposal prepared for an international urban design competition. Research methods include content analysis of the book, the report, speech transcripts, and newspaper articles, as well as qualitative data analysis. The analysis draws upon Henri Lefebvre’s and Michel de Certeau’s theories to analyze the data, identifying public space and publicness as two dimensions emphasized by each discourse. “Celebrating squatting” sees squatting as contesting public space and resisting Modernist architecture and Capitalist city. Squatting represents spatial tactics producing representational space. Orchid House aims to reclaim public space from squatters by rebuilding a solar house as a representation of space. Housing rights, sustainability, and urban aesthetics are its three elements of publicness. Each discourse shows a dualist perspective on squatting, thus failing to benefit governance policies significantly. Conclusions suggest a holistic discourse that considers squatters’ behavior, urban policy, and architectural practice as each case’s context. In doing so, a discourse is more likely toinform urban policy and professional practice.
Other
1.侯力元(2014)。交大蘭花屋法國奪設計首獎獲評審滿分肯定，http://www.appledaily.com.tw/realtimenews/article/new/20140706/428614， 2015/02/09。  延伸查詢new window
期刊論文
1.Chiu, Chihsin(2013)。Informal management, interactive performance: Street vendors and police in a Taipei Night Market。International Development Planning Review，35(4)，335-352。  new window
2.曾少千(20080500)。空間故事與美學之用：寶藏巖泡茶照相館。現代美術學報，15，11-38。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.曾鵬光、陳佳欣(20120600)。建蔽率與容積率管制誘發開發商建築違建現象之探討--臺南市新建透天住宅之實證分析。住宅學報，21(1)，19-36。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.鍾起岱(20130900)。臺灣新舊違章建築日期劃分之研究。都市與計劃，40(3)，287-303。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.Bromley, R.(1978)。The informal sector: why is it worth discussing?。World Development，6，1033-1039。  new window
6.Bunnell, T.、Harris, A.(2012)。Re-viewing informality: Perspectives from Urban Asia。International Development Planning Review，34(4)，339-347。  new window
7.Chiu, C.(2009)。Contestation and conformity: Street and park skateboarding in New York City public space。Space and Culture，12(1)，25-42。  new window
8.Dovey, K.(2012)。Informal urbanism and complex adaptive assemblage。International Development Planning Review，34(4)，349-368。  new window
9.Ghertner, D. A.(2010)。Calculating without numbers: aesthetic governmentality in Delhi's slums。Economy and Society，39(2)，185-217。  new window
10.Ghertner, A.(2012)。Nuisance talk and the propriety of property: Middle class discourses of a slum-free Delhi。Antipode，44(4)，1161-1188。  new window
11.Gilbert, A.(2007)。The return of the slum: Does language Matter?。International Journal of Urban and Regional Research，31(4)，697-713。  new window
12.Huang, G.、Xue, D.、Li, Z.(2014)。From Revanchism to Ambivalence: The Changing Politics of Street Vending in Guangzhou。Antipode，46(1)，170-189。  new window
13.Roy, A.(2009)。Why India cannot plan its cities: informality, insurgence and idiom of urbanization。Planning Theory，8，76-87。  new window
14.Roy, A.(2011)。Slumdog Cities: Rethinking Subaltern Urbanism。International Journal of Urban and Regional Research，35(2)，223-238。  new window
15.Sauri, D.、Pares, M.、Domene, E.(2009)。Changing conceptions of sustainability in the design of Barcelona public parks (1983-2002)。Geographical Review，99(1)，23-36。  new window
16.曾鵬光、江哲銘、陳肇堯(20101200)。違章建築現象分類與其對外部環境衝擊之研究以臺南市為例。住宅學報，19(2)，59-80。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.Hart, Keith(1973)。Informal income opportunities and urban employment in Ghana。Journal of Modern African Studies，11(1)，61-89。  new window
18.陳永龍(20100300)。河岸邦查部落再生成與漂留族群生計重建：阿美族「都市原住民」自立家園的社會安全涵義。臺灣社會研究季刊，77，135-175。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.周素卿、劉美琴(20011200)。都市更新視域外的性別、遷移與貧民窟生活世界--以臺北市忠勤社區女性遷入者的經驗為例。地理學報，30，19-54。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.周素卿(20001200)。臺北市南機場社區貧民窟特性的形構。地理學報，28，47-78。new window  延伸查詢new window
21.張立本(20050200)。都市治理與社會運動的文化策略：臺北市寶藏巖違建運動。中外文學，33(9)=393，109-142。new window  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.李秋林(2008)。臺北市屋頂違建防治之探討(碩士論文)。國立台北科技大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Smith, Neil(1996)。The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City。Routledge。  new window
2.Robinson, Jennifer(2006)。Ordinary Cities: Between Modernity and Development。London：Routledge。  new window
3.Alexander, Christopher(1977)。A Pattern Language。Oxford University Press。  new window
4.Mitchell, Don(2003)。The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space。Guilford Press。  new window
5.Bunnell, T.(2004)。Malaysia, Modernity and the Multimedia super corridor: A critical geography of intelligent landscape。London：Routledge Curzon。  new window
6.Harvey, D.(2001)。Space of Capital: Towards a Critical Geography。New York：Routedge。  new window
7.ILO(1991)。The dilemma of the informal sector。Geneva：ILO。  new window
8.NCTU/Team Unicode(2014)。Orchid House Press Release。Hsinchu：Graduate Institute of Architecture。  new window
9.Zukin, S.(1996)。The Cultures of Cities。New York：Blackwell。  new window
10.Davis, Mike(2006)。Planet of slums。Verso。  new window
11.Lefebvre, H.、Nicholson-Smith, D.(1992)。The Production of Space。Wiley-Blackwell。  new window
12.Rapoport, Amos(1969)。House, Form and Culture。Prentice-Hall。  new window
13.Sassen, Saskia(1991)。The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo。Princeton University Press。  new window
14.de Certeau, Michel、Rendall, Steven F.(1984)。The Practice of Everyday Life。The University of California Press。  new window
其他
1.張素莉(2014)。『蘭花屋』的綠色屋頂革命，專訪交大UNICODE 能源屋計畫團隊（MOT/TIMES），http://www.mottimes.tw/cht/interview_detail.php?serial=286， 2015/02/09。  延伸查詢new window
2.龔書章(2014)。蘭花盛放的新時代建築：龔書章(Shu-Chang Kung) at TEDxTaipei 2014 演講影音檔，https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qmn89C9bOQU， 2015/02/09。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.王澍(2012)。違章是關乎存在感的建造實踐。朗讀違章。台北：田園城市。  延伸查詢new window
2.吳介禎(2012)。朗讀違章：庶民對建築的佔領。朗讀違章。台北：田園城市。  延伸查詢new window
3.褚瑞基(2012)。朗讀違章的閱讀一二。朗讀違章。台北：田園城市。  延伸查詢new window
4.謝英俊(2012)。展覽作品：後巷桃花源。朗讀違章。台北：田園城市。  延伸查詢new window
5.Proshansky, H. M.、Ittelson, W. H.、Rivlin, L. G.(1972)。Freedom of choice and behavior in a physical setting。Environment and the Social Sciences: Perspectives and Applications。Washington, DC：American Psychological Association。  new window
6.Castells, Manuel、Portes, Alejandro(1989)。World Underneath: The origins, dynamics and effects of the Informal Economy。The Informal Economy: Studies in Adavnced and Less Developed Countries。Baltimore, MD：John Hopkins University Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：736（臺灣：728，外國：8） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1669892 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67462995
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上