「抽象化」是後殖民理論與馬克思主義間論爭的關鍵。多數後殖民理論家認為資本的抽象化雖將具體勞動與物件轉化為跨界流動的抽象交換價值，其普世形式卻無法滲透殖民地底層的文化差異。馬派論者則認為所謂的殖民地差異往往是資本在全球流動伴隨生產的形式。為突破此二元思考，本文將日治時期台北城的陶瓷建材與都市網絡視作格式化的抽象體系，既是文化再現的媒介也是支撐資本流動的基礎設施。論文前半透過閱讀台灣總督府營繕課技術文本中的色彩環境論，探討技術官僚以建築色彩作為連結殖民地風土與殖民者記憶的修辭形式。本文後半則以大稻埕陳天來宅的白色磁磚立面為例，解讀殖民地資產階級對殖民色彩論的挪用變造，進而說明建築陶瓷表面如何重構殖民地都市空間的感知與表達形式。文末引介「真實抽象化」的理論框架，將陶瓷色彩視為資本流動中，坐落於標準格式與在地差異間，抽象勞動與具體勞動間的介面，並藉此提供另一可能的殖民批判路徑

One of the most contested notions between the postcolonial theorists and the Marxist critics has been the idea of abstraction. The former group holds that ＂abstraction＂ is defined by the subsumption of concrete life-world into the universally abstract labor and exchange value, and that the site of resistance lies in the irreducibility of colonial differences. The latter, by contrast, sees these differences as the side-products of capital's universalizing drive. This article argues that industrialized architectural objects-symbiotic with the global expansion of colonial capitalism with their universal standard and abstract format-provide an alternative to this dichotomy. Situating the architectural tiles in colonial Taipei as an operational interface between the city's colonial urban plan and local bourgeoises' display of power, I highlight the coloration on tiles as a visual module between abstract labor and concrete labor as well as between catastrophic memory and colonial management. The color modulation on tiles, I argue, served both as the logistical infrastructure for capital's circulation and a cognitive interface with which urban users reprogramed the colonial urban plan. This double role between medium and environment underscores what Alfred Sohn-Rethel and Albert Toscano term ＂real abstraction,＂ a notion that might help us re-conceptualize the ＂Marxism versus Postcolonialism＂ debate