英格兰风土建筑研究的历程

Vernacular Architecture Studies in England

英格兰风土建筑的研究成型于2 0世纪中叶,此前很少有人将其视为值得研究的历史对象。文章回溯了该领域研究的缘起与发展脉络,强调了研究进程中体制和立法的作用,同时考虑了更为广泛的文化影响,譬如流传甚久的英国人与乡村遗产的深情款款。自中世纪以降,社会和经济流动性日益增高,故在这部分将风土地位问题置于社会的影响中考量。文章试图解析风土"合法化"的一系列阶段,亦即其如何自默默无闻、被轻视的过去被提升为公认体现珍贵传统价值、稳定性,以及地区或国家身份的载体。继而讨论了风土研究如何成为一个独立的学科,并特别关注了其方法论的发展,尤在于风土建筑材料和社会实体方面的辨别、断代、分析和诠释等日益复杂精密的程序中涉及到的田野实录、档案调查与科学研究。英国的情况从历史性或史学性的角度来看,并不能代表世界各地风土传统的情况;研究人员大多从历史角度而非人类学角度进行研究;但是英国业已形成的方法论,为不同环境下的风土建筑研究提供了有益的参照和指导。

The study of vernacular architecture in England first acquired distinct form in the mid-20th century and has seldom been treated as an object worthy of historical study in itself. This paper explores the emergence of the area of study and examines the main lines of its development, noting in particular the role of institutions and legislation in fostering research, but taking account additionally of broader cultural influences such as the prolonged English love-affair with the country＇s rural heritage. It looks at the problematic status of the vernacular in a society characterised-from the medieval period onwards-by relatively high levels of social and economic mobility. It then attempts to isolate a series of stages in the ＇legitimisation＇ of the vernacular, raising it from obscurity and obloquy to a position in which it is widely acknowledged as embodying cherished values of tradition, stability and regional or national identity. A discussion of the emergence of vernacular studies as a distinct intellectual field follows. Particular attention is given to the development of field-based, documentary and scientific research methodologies in the elaboration of increasingly sophisticated strategies to identify, date, analyse and interpret vernacular buildings as both material and social entities. The paper concludes that English circumstances, both historically and historiographically, are far from representative of vernacular traditions around the world; in particular that they haveattracted researchers wedded in the main to historical rather than anthropological perspectives; but that the methodologies developed offer useful comparisons and pointers to those working in very different environments.