试译 | 德克萨斯住宅——海杜克《美杜莎的面具》
以下为尝试翻译稿，请谨慎阅读。如有误导，概不负责。
幻觉的效应
源于超乎寻常的清晰
而非来自神秘或者模糊不清
本质上没有什么是比精确更奇妙的
罗布·格里耶谈卡夫卡
这十座德克萨斯住宅代表了一项持续十年的开始遏止简化倾向的基本训练。我想研究的不仅仅在于如何将建筑“组装起来”，还在于如何在概念上细化。我有简化的倾向。我的“战斗”是将事物推至极端，而非轻轻掠过（并自满于此，沾沾自喜）。这算是一种自我批判。
第一座德克萨斯住宅与实际项目有关，它与场地、结构、建造、细部相关联，并需要考虑场地和结构是否有效。屋顶结构是一个重要的讨论，还有一些其他的。其中一个是项目层面的，项目本身是非对称的，但却提出了对称的平面方案。在德克萨斯住宅1中有很多问题没有被解决--只提出问题。第二座德克萨斯住宅是1954年完成的。它是空心柱体系（和住宅1一样），里边藏有全部的新风和电线。整个系统在那个服侍空间中工作--一个不大但是被压缩的服侍空间。电气、机械和结构体系不断被讨论。
我并不空想，建筑师总要解决重力的问题。建筑周边有地平面，它是先在的，你总要面对与立方体结构相关的地坪的问题。也许你想做一个漂浮的立方体，但当你不得不处理重力问题时，漂浮的立方体是极难做到的。
我开始第二个房子以重拾第一个房子中很多未解决的问题。这个项目变得更加干净。这个项目仍然有以对称为条件的问题。这个问题在主平面中被解决，我引入了柱廊并再一次使用了空心框架柱截面的概念。这些柱子给我带来了巨大的问题，其截面尺寸从1英尺到6英寸、3英寸不等，进而引发了基座的问题。在这个方案（住宅2）中基座是一个非常重要的要素，因为它面临一个扭转的场地。而住宅1的总平是沿长轴完全对称的。住宅2有一片先在墙体。当车辆经过、停车、进入时会通过一条墙-廊，这个廊子正好作为一个接待区，客人可以在进入车库前先下车。下车后是在住宅的基座层，然后穿过一片凹地下到基地，然后上台阶。花园在另一侧，有树丛和泳池，然后突然一些其他的事情发生了：客房开始偏离整体的对称轴。在结构方面住宅2做的更好，因为我开始处理工字梁的问题。在住宅1中，我在处理结构子系统，梁截面既要承受正向又要承受反向作用。在住宅2的屋顶我通过一套完整的钢格构翅片元素（置入翅片）解决了这个结构截面问题。
第五座房子面临非对称条件下的九宫格问题。它在一个纯净的九宫格结构中引入了密斯的流动形和流动空间。我试图通过引入直角元素来引发建筑中要素和空余空间的扭转，这个扭转不只是物理上的扭转而是由点状要素的张力带来。有趣的是当我以密斯式作为前提。立面最后生成，但却最为接近密斯式前提。它们在那里相遇。我意识到如果我沿着这个方向处理立面，那么我将必须更加巧妙地处理它们。
我有思考柱体表皮与其体量的关系。特定的柱体表皮对应特定的体量，特定的柱表皮对应特定的平面--这总是一种紧张的状态。我持续操作这对关系，直到得到四种特定的条件，然后再逐个推敲它们。换句话说，有一个潜在的体量，要想办法捕捉到它。我想要谈论古老的命题；住宅5是一个现代的设计。我对它一直不太满意。因为立面原因，我放弃了它，这些立面以新古典的方式开始。(我轻率地使用了新古典这个术语)。自由平面和新古典立面，这两个共时的条件都可以转译到立面。这正是它令人沮丧的地方。
德克萨斯住宅是建筑形式和空间生成原则研究的结果。我尝试理解与建筑职能有关的某些本质，以期拓宽“词汇量”。对工作方式的探索以及特定想法的有机发展是这项研究的一个主要作用。它使思想和双手的解放成为可能，而这也许能指向某些形式及空间的看法和转变。
艺术作品是特定塑形的体现，思想和双手是同一的，都基于基本的原则。这些意识以及通过并置点、线、面、体等基本关系补充这些基本原则，打开了论证的可能性。
最初的动机是主观的，但是一旦这个主观的起点被确立，一旦感受到最初的直觉，那么有机体必将沿自然进程发展; 而形式的发展是继续还是停止，取决于才智的运用——作为狂热的生活元素的才智，而非学术工具。
点、线、面、体问题，正方形、圆形、三角形的真相，中心-边缘-正面-斜面-凹进-凸出、直角、正交、透视的奥秘，对球体-柱体-锥体的理解，结构-建造-组织问题，尺度、基址问题，对柱-梁、墙-板的兴趣，有限领域与无限领域的范围，平面、剖面的意义，空间扩张-空间压缩-空间张力的意义，参考线、网格的方向，隐含的延展力，图形与实地、数值与比例、尺寸与尺度、对称与非对称、菱形与对角线的关系，隐藏的力量，配置的观念，静态与动态，这些全都开始以词汇的形式出现。
这些项目起初并不了解上述这些，只知道要探索基本秩序。随着作品的发展、作品的分析、作品的评论、作品的成形，而逐渐了解到。为使原则有意义并提出有机的启示,就必须有一个特定的形式。这些论点和看法都蕴含于这些作品和图纸之中。我们希望形式的冲突能指向一种清晰，这种清晰也许是有用的，甚至是可转移的。
德克萨斯住宅1
基地设想位于德克萨斯州山区某个斜坡上，在斜坡上有一条沟壑。
在这个房子中的一些问题仍没有被解决。一是非对称的功能被布置到对称的形式结构里。与基地相关的考虑也有同样的问题，尽管这也许可以抵消房子本身的不对称性。至于那些结构柱（小柱子）与地面的交接方式也依旧是一个悬而未决的问题。将来我还会回过头讨论这些问题。
柱-梁-板体系。
主要分隔：16英尺（中线距）。
结构：钢框架。
钢框架漆成白色。结构墙漆成灰色。填充墙喷涂灰白色。部分填充墙用半透明和透明玻璃。木材也有使用。
德克萨斯住宅2
住宅2非对称功能做出了更干净的对称的结构形式方案,但仍不够彻底。我很长一段时间都痴迷于钢柱与花岗岩基座的连接。出现了对称的建筑被放置在一个不对称的基地的争论。在住宅1和住宅2，我都考虑了“柱廊”的元素；据说今天很少再有“柱廊”的提案。柱减少-压缩、在平面相互对位。在梁之间的间隔系统中加入了由钢翅片构成的天花板格网。
柱-梁-板体系。
主要分隔：16英尺（中线距）。
结构：钢框架。
钢框架漆成白色。结构墙漆成灰色。填充墙喷涂灰白色。部分填充墙用半透明和透明玻璃。木材也有使用。
基础:花岗岩。
德克萨斯住宅3
带外围柱的砖石承重墙和中庭的引入，以及金属屋盖、玻璃开槽墙端和从空隙间滑动的钢构件，定义了这座房子的发展。功能包括卧室、公共部分以及生活中心，包括庭院、图书馆和音乐室。对角线关系曾经短暂地被尝试。如住宅1和住宅2一样，天窗照明是一个主要因素。住宅3于1954年开始，断断续续地进行到1960年，尽管庭院开辟了一些特别的可能性，但它从未被彻底完成。
柱-墙承重梁-板体系。
分隔体系：1英尺、12英尺、9英尺、12英尺...
结构:混凝土、砌体、混凝土梁板。
墙面水泥粉刷，钢饰板涂成灰色,其他表面涂成白色。玻璃:半透明和透明。木材也有使用。
德克萨斯住宅4
在所有德克萨斯住宅中，住宅4可能是完成度最高，问题解决最彻底的一座。通过窗棂切分将内部有机体还原要素表达到外围玻璃立面上的的概念揭示了安静的切分音符。此外，贯穿整个住宅的玻璃槽几乎将整个体量沿垂直方向分割成三个独立的部分。在这里，非对称项目与非对称的结构形式相匹配。开槽,分离的结构引发了特殊的自然和人工照明以及某种屋面排水系统的可能性。关于这个场地有两个提案，一个作为内部平面的反映，另一个则不。我花了很大的精力在板的切分上。
砌体承重墙，钢屋盖。
分隔体系：16英尺（中线距）。
结构:钢筋混凝土梁板体系。
钢构件漆成灰色。其他表面涂成白色。玻璃:半透明和透明。木头也有使用。
德克萨斯住宅5
在所有开始于德克萨斯的九宫格研究中，5号宅是最纯粹表达九格、十六柱体系的一座。这是向密斯·凡·德·罗致敬的一个作品。我想在结构网格中深入观察“流动空间”。在某种程度上,这是一次最简单也最复杂的探索。我记得操作柱表皮对抗流动元素。这个住宅相当紧凑，四十九英尺见方，我相信如果建造的话，由于元素的特别布置，它将揭示空间的扭曲。我的朋友罗伯特·斯拉斯基已经研究从直角系统获得扭曲的问题研究了很多年，在他看了（这个作品）效果很好。
立方体客房、三面围合花园、矩形泳池池、墙之间的汽车入口，以及车库元素在参与者中引发了相当大的讨论。
柱-梁-翅-格构体系。
分隔体系：16英尺（中线距）。
结构:钢框架。
钢框架漆成白色。
玻璃和木材也有使用。
德克萨斯住宅6
与住宅4相似，但住宅6将尺度增加到三层高，且多了一个独立的楼梯塔楼。减法的过程：车库-公共设施-客房-公寓体量从主体建筑中排出在外，从而形成住宅内和外的双重体量。
于是平面和立面都成为了九宫格。立面设计中令人惊喜地发现由于移除空余体量造成跨度增大从而形成的深度更大的梁与普通尺寸的梁协同工作。
不知道为什么，每次看地下室的平面总让我想起埃德加·艾伦·坡的小说《阿芒提拉多的酒桶》。
出于某种原因，总平面显得过于简单、太过竖向，或许...如果...
砖石承重墙，钢屋盖。
分隔体系：1英尺、12英尺、1英尺、12英尺、1英尺、12英尺、1英尺。
结构：混凝土梁板体系。
钢框架漆成灰色，其他表面涂成白色，玻璃半透明或透明。木材、灰泥、水泥、石膏等也有使用。
高度抛光金属可用于屋盖。
德克萨斯住宅7
德克萨斯住宅系列最后一座，接下来就是菱形住宅的研究。这个住宅的研究目前仍在继续。其想法是探索一种柱-垛-墙结构体系。另一个探讨是关于增大视觉尺度，这个问题因外立面而起。
这个项目的空间复杂而相互交织，从外立面看只有三层但实际上却是个六层建筑。方案与空间表皮相关联，空间分割与围合相倒置，寻求一种模棱两可。
从主要与室外相连的地上楼层到地下室，形成了某种漩涡效应：柱、垛，墙及围合的体量之间。
尽管这些一直被深入地思考，但我至今仍选择不去确定方案、建造、结构、材料及完成的最终定稿。
以下英文原稿
The hallucinatory effect derives
From the extraordinary clarity
And not form mystery or mist. Nothing
Is more fantastic ultimately than precision
Robbe-Grillet on Kafka
TheTexas Housesrepresentten years of a basic training that began to exorcise the reductive tendency. I wanted to learn not only how to put buildings together, but how to detail conceptually. I have a tendency to reduce. My battle is to bring thing up to the edge and not to go over (and then be content with it). It is a form of auto criticism.
The first Texas House had to do withprogram, it had to do with site, it had to do with structure, it had to do with construction, it had to do with detail. And the struggle of how the site and structure worked. The roof framing was an essential argument, and there were others. One was of the programmatic aspect, the program being asymmetrical, yet instituting a symmetrical plan scheme. There were a number of things that were unresolved in Texas House 1 ——they brought up questions. The second Texas House was done in 1954. It was a system of hollow columns (as did House 1) and they held all the air, all the wire; the whole system was working in there, in service space —— not big service space but ones that were compressed. Electrical, mechanical, and structural systems were being argued constantly.
I do not deal with fantasies. Architects always have to deal with the problem of gravity. That there is a grade plane. The grade is always there, you always have a problem of grade relative to a cubic configuration. You may want to have a floating cube, but it is very hard to have a floating cube when you have to deal with the problem of gravity.
I started the second house to take up some of the unresolved problems of the first. The program became clearer. There was still the problem of a symmetrical condition. That was handled in the major planning, verandahs were introduced and again I used the idea of the hollow column-frame sections. The columns gave me enormous problems, the sizes went from a foot, to six inches, to three inches, which then raised the problem of the plinth. In this case (House 2) the plinth was a very important condition because it related to a site that was beginning to turn, to rotate. The first Texas House site plan was perfectly symmetrical about the long axial condition. In House 2 there’s a wall condition. A car approaches, stops and enters through a wall-porch which acts as a reception area, letting the people off before going into the garage. You’re left on the level of the house plinth and you go down into the site across a sunken area and then up steps. The garden is on the other side, with trees, a pool, and then all of a sudden something else occurs: it’s a guest house which begins to move away from the whole symmetrical condition. House 2 is better from the structural aspect, because I started dealing with the question of the I-beams. In House 1 I was dealing with a structural sub-system; the sections had to do with directions and counter directions. In the roof of House 2 I solved the problem of the structural sections by making a whole steel-grid fin condition (dropping the fins in).
The Fifth House confronts the problem of the nine squares in an asymmetrical condition. It introduces the Mies problem of floating shapes and floating conditions in a pure nine square structure. I wanted to start warping the architectural section by setting up right angle conditions, where the elements would warp as well as the void space, not just physically but by the tension of the pointal conditions. The interesting part is that I began with the Miesian condition. The elevations were the last, and the closest to a Miesian condition. They were dropped at that point. I realized that if I followed that path with the elevations, I would have to be dealing with them exquisitely.
I’m thinking about the relationship of the column surfaces to the volume. A particular column surface to a particular volume, a particular column surface to a particular plane – it’s always a heightened condition of tension. I remember working the relationships so that I could get four special conditions and bounce off each of them. In other words, there’s a phantom volume and caught it. I wanted to talk about antiquated conditions; House 5 is a contemporary plan. I was never satisfied. I dropped it because of the elevations, they started in a neo-classic manner. (I use the term neo-classic loosely). It was a free plan and a neo-classical elevation, a contemporaneous condition which I was able to translate into the elevations. Thus the frustration of it.
The Texas Houses are the result of a search into generating principles of form and space in architecture. There is an attempt to understand certain essences in regard to architectural commitment with the hope of expanding a vocabulary. The discovery of the workings and dictates of an organic development of specific ideas becomes a necessary function of the search. A liberation of mind and hand becomes possible which perhaps leads to certain transformations and visions of form regarding space.
The realization that works in the Arts are the embodiment of specific plastic points of view, that the mind and hand are as one, working on primary principles, and of filling these principle through juxtaposition of basic relationships within the vocabulary of point, line, plane, volume, opened up the possibility of argumentation.
The first moves are arbitrary but once the arbitrary beginning is committed, once the initial intuitions are experienced, it then becomes necessary that the organism proceeds through its natural evolution; and whether the evolution of form continues or stops depends upon the use of the intellect not as an academic tool but as a passionate living element.
The problems of point-line-plane-volume, the facts of square-circle-triangle, the mysteries of central-peripheral-frontal-oblique-concavity-convexity, of right angle, of perpendicular, of perspective, the comprehension of sphere-cyclinder-pyramid, the question of structure-construction-organization, the question of scale, of position, the interest in post-lintel, wall-slab, the extent of a limited field, of an unlimited field, the meaning of plan, of section, the meaning of spatial expansion-spatial compression-spatial tension, the direction of regulating lines, of grids, the force of implied extension, the relationships of figure to ground, of number to proportion, of measurement to scale, of symmetry to asymmetry, of diamond to diagonal, the hidden forces, the ideas of configuration, the static with the dynamic, all begin to take on the form of a vocabulary.
The projects were begun not knowing all the above beforehand, but knowing that the basic orders needed to searched for, becoming known as the work progressed, as the work was analyzed, as the work was criticized, as the work was formed. In order to make principles meaningful and to have them put forth organic revelations, there had to be a given form. The arguments and points of view are within the work, within the drawings. It was hopped that the conflicts of form would lead to a clarity which could be useful and even perhaps transferable.
Texas House 1
The site was imagined to be located somewhere in the hill country of Texas on a slope with a gully in it.
A member of arguments within the house were not resolved. One was that of an asymmetrical program placed in a symmetrical form-structure; the same problem occurred relative to the site, although this could perhaps offset the house asymmetry. The structural columns (the small ones) as far as their penetration to the ground, as still an open question. Someday I will return to these questions, among others.
Column-beam-panel system.
Major bay: Sixteen feet, o.c.
Structure: Steel frame.
Steel frame painted white. Panel frame painted grey. Panel infill painted off-white toward grey. Panel infills also glass, translucent and transparent. Wood also used.
Texas House 2
The asymmetrical program of House 2 moved toward a clearer solution of the symmetrical structure form, but not entirely clear. The obsession with having the steel columns join the granite base occupied me for a considerable time. The argument of a symmetrical building placed in an asymmetrical site emerged. In both House 1 and House 2 I considered the element of verandas; it is said that today there are few verandas proposed. Column reduction-compression in plan acted as a counterpoint to each other. A ceiling grid of steel fins was placed into the bay system between beams.
Column-beam-panel system.
Major bay: Sixteen feet, o.c.
Structure: Steel frame.
Steel frame painted white. Panel frame painted grey. Panel infill painted off-white toward grey. Panel infills also glass, translucent and transparent. Wood also used.
Base: Granite.
Texas House 3
The introduction of masonry bearing walls with peripheral columns and a central court informed the development of this house, as did metal-capped, glass-slotted wall ends and the slippage of steel elements out from void slots. There was a bedroom side, a utility side, and a center for living, including court, library and music. A diagonal relationship of program was attempted . . . tentatively. As in House 1 and House 2 clerestory lighting was a major element. House 3 was started in 1954 and was worked on and off until 1960; it was never fully completed, although the garden opened up particular possibilities.
Column-wall bearing beam-slab system.
Bay system: one foot, twelve feet, nine feet, twelve feet, etc.
Structure: Concrete, masonry, concrete beam-slab.
Walls of stucco, cement finish. Steel trims painted grey, other surfaces off-white. Glass: translucent and transparent. Wood also used.
Texas House 4
Of all the Texas House, House 4 is perhaps the most complete and most resolved. The idea of the reductive element expression of the internal organism upon the peripheral glass facades by mullion notation revealed quiet syncopations. In addition, the glass slots which penetrate through the whole house tend to separate the single volume into three separate parts relative to the vertical plane. Here the relationship of asymmetrical program coincides with asymmetrical structure-form. The slotted, separated structures provoked the possibility of special natural and artificial lighting, along with a roof drainage system. There were two propositions about the site; one being a reflection of the internal plan, the other not. I worked hard on the slab cutouts.
Masonry bearing walls, steel-capped.
Bay system: Sixteen feet, o.c.
Structure: concrete beam-slab system.
Steel painted grey. Other surfaces off-white. Glass: translucent and transparent. Wood also used.
Texas House 5
Of all the nine square investigations that were begun at Texas, House 5 is the purest expression of the nine-bay, sixteen column system. It is a homage to Mies van der Rohe. I wanted to take a deep look at the free-floating elements within the structure grid. In a way it is at once the most simple yet also the most complex investigation. I remember playing off singular columnar surfaces against the floating elements. A rather compact house, forty nine feet by forty nine feet, because of the specific placement of the elements, I believe that if built it would reveal a spatial warp. My friend Robert Slutzky had been working for many years on the problem of obtaining warps from right-angle systems, which in his case worked beautifully.
The cube guest house, the three-sided walled-in garden, the rectangular pool, the car entry between walls, and the garage element set off quite a discussion of size among participants.
Column-beam-fin-grid-system.
Bay system: Sixteen feet, o.c.
Structure: Steel frame.
Steel frame painted white. Glass and wood used.
Texas House 6
Similar to House 4, House 6 has increased its size to three floors and a separated stair tower. A subtraction process: the garage-utility-guest-apartment is a volume that has been removed from the prime house, thereby creating a two-level volume outside and inside the house.
Now both plan and elevation become a nine square grid. It was extremely exciting to discover in elevation the beam of greater depth which appeared in conjunction with the normal beam size as a result of the increased span created by the removal of the void volume.
I don’t know why, but when I look at the basement plan I always think of Poe’s story, The Cask of Amontillado.
The site plan for some reason seems too austere, too vertical, maybe . . . If it . . .
Masonry bearing walls, steel-capped.
Bay system: One foot, twelve foot, one foot, twelve foot, one foot, twelve foot, one foot.
Structure: Concrete-beam-slab system.
Steel painted grey. Other surfaces off white. Glass translucent and transparent. Wood, stucco, cement, plaster, also used.
Highly polished metal could be used for capping.
Texas House 7
The final house of the Texas series. The Diamond Houses followed. This house is still being worked upon. The idea was to investigate a column-pier-wall construction system. Another search was to increase the visual scale; the external facades pose this problem.
The program is for a very complex interweaving of space. It appears that three floors from the exterior but in reality there are six. The program interlocks with the system of space enclosures. Isolated and separated inversions and ambiguities were sought.
From the upper floors, which are primarily open to the exterior, down to the basement, there is developed a whirlpool effect: columns to piers to walls to contained volume.
Although they have been thought about intensely, I prefer at this moment not yet to determine the final designation of program, construction, structure, materials or finish.
1. 本篇英文原稿及插图来自于Mask of Medusa，by John Hejduk；
2. o.c, on center, 建筑图纸中的缩写，这里可以译为中线距；
3. 前文有提到，本来德克萨斯住宅系列研究计划每年一座一共做十年，但当做到第七座的时候情况突然发生变化，开始转向了菱形住宅。
