基于视觉方法的历史街区“微改造”空间感知研究
|
摘要
历史街区改造是城市存量规划背景下的重要研究议题,近年来以保留现状格局为主的微改造模式被提出,目前其影响和成效被不断地争议与讨论。广州市恩宁路是具有深厚西关文化底蕴的历史街区,采用视觉方法结合内容分析、符号学及情绪评价解读其微改造空间的感知构筑,探讨微改造模式的影响,并试图揭示历史街区改造的感知建构机制。研究表明,微改造片区的感知强度最大,基础需求的满足实现了良好的情绪体验,参与型节庆活动能提升街区的感知度,而肌理维持和文化细节保留能进行历史感传递,促进怀旧情绪的触发。然在微改造模式的材料替换、功能转化等影响下,外来元素介入到感知实践中,导致文化符码和感知构筑的变动。本文尝试在采用内容分析法对视觉感知特质提炼的基础上,以情绪评定形式进行改造前、后感知差异的量化探讨,在空间感知的研究领域进行新方法实践。
In recent years, the micro-transformation mode, which is based on preserving the main status quo, has been proposed. The influence and effectiveness of the micro-transformation mode are constantly being disputed and discussed. Enning Road in Guangzhou is a historic district with profound cultural heritage in Xiguan, and its regeneration program has always been a research hotspot. It is believed that visual material can convey spatial practice experiences beyond language, by which people can explore the metaphor of space. Visual methodology combined with content analysis, semiology and measurement of emotion had been used to study the spatial perception of the micro-transformation space in Enning Road. The main goal is to explore the influence of the micro-transformation mode and attempt to reveal the spatial perception mechanism of historic district transformation. The study result shows that the perceived intensity of micro-transformation area is the highest. The satisfaction of basic needs offers good emotional experience. And the participatory festival activities can enhance the perception of the district. While the texture maintenance and cultural details of the buildings can preserve the sense of history and trigger the emotion of nostalgia. However, under the influences of the micro-transformation, like historic district's material substitution and function transformation, the involvement of extraneous elements in spatial perception practice leads to changes in cultural code and different spatial perceptions. This study attempts to use the content analysis method to refine the visual perception traits, and quantify the differences of spatial perception before and after the transformation in way of emotion measurement. In addition, the study adopts new methods in the field of spatial perception.
In recent years, the micro-transformation mode, which is based on preserving the main status quo, has been proposed. The influence and effectiveness of the micro-transformation mode are constantly being disputed and discussed. Enning Road in Guangzhou is a historic district with profound cultural heritage in Xiguan, and its regeneration program has always been a research hotspot. It is believed that visual material can convey spatial practice experiences beyond language, by which people can explore the metaphor of space. Visual methodology combined with content analysis, semiology and measurement of emotion had been used to study the spatial perception of the micro-transformation space in Enning Road. The main goal is to explore the influence of the micro-transformation mode and attempt to reveal the spatial perception mechanism of historic district transformation. The study result shows that the perceived intensity of micro-transformation area is the highest. The satisfaction of basic needs offers good emotional experience. And the participatory festival activities can enhance the perception of the district. While the texture maintenance and cultural details of the buildings can preserve the sense of history and trigger the emotion of nostalgia. However, under the influences of the micro-transformation, like historic district's material substitution and function transformation, the involvement of extraneous elements in spatial perception practice leads to changes in cultural code and different spatial perceptions. This study attempts to use the content analysis method to refine the visual perception traits, and quantify the differences of spatial perception before and after the transformation in way of emotion measurement. In addition, the study adopts new methods in the field of spatial perception.
引文
[1]冯江,李梦然."被打断的罗马"与被打断的广州—城市历史环境的现实困境与学科危机.建筑学报,2016(12):1-8.
[2]周尚意.英美文化研究与新文化地理学.地理学报,2004(S1):162-166.
[3]严若谷,周素红,闫小培.城市更新之研究.地理科学进展,2011,30(08):947-955.
[4]蔡云楠,杨宵节,李冬凌.城市老旧小区"微改造"的内容与对策研究.城市发展研究,2017,24(04):29-34.
[5]杨新海.历史街区的基本特性及其保护原则.人文地理, 2005, 20(5):48-50.
[6]王林,王骏.历史街区保护规划编制方法研究.城市规划, 1998(3):37-39.
[7]廖仁静,李倩,张捷,等.都市历史街区真实性的游憩者感知研究——以南京夫子庙为例.旅游学刊,2009,24(1):55-60.
[8]李山石,刘家明.基于文化创意产业的历史街区提升改造研究—以南锣鼓巷为例.人文地理,2013(1):135-140.
[9]刘垚,田银生,周可斌.从一元决策到多元参与—广州恩宁路旧城更新案例研究.城市规划,2015,39(8):101-111.
[10]李倩菁,蔡晓梅.新文化地理学视角下景观研究综述与展望.人文地理,2017,32(01):23-28+98.
[11] Robert H, Gunther K. Social Semiotics. Cambridge:Polity Press, 1988:3.
[12] RoseG,Tolia-KellyDP.Visuality/Materiality:Images,objectsandpractices.AshgatePublishingLtd,2012.
[13]林玉莲,胡正凡.环境心理学(第2版).北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2006.
[14]朱志远,宋刚."微改造"落地之时——恩宁路永庆片区改造设计回顾.建筑技艺,2017(11):66-75.
[15]陈宏胜,王兴平,国子健.规划的流变—对增量规划、存量规划、减量规划的思考.现代城市研究,2015(09):44-48.
[16]张平宇.城市再生:21世纪中国城市化趋势.地理科学进展,2004(04):72-79.
[17]阮仪三,袁菲.再论江南水乡古镇的保护与合理发展.城市规划学刊,2011(05):95-101.
[18]夏健,王勇.从重置到重生:居住性历史文化街区生活真实性的保护.城市发展研究,2010,17(02):134-139.
[19]何深静,于涛方,方澜.城市更新中社会网络的保存和发展.人文地理,2001(06):36-39.
[20]徐好好,李芃,李睿.五图五书:泮塘五约微改造记录.建筑学报,2017(01):113-117.
[21] JackL.Nasar,Theevaluativeimageofthecity.JournaloftheAmericanPlanningAssociation,1990,56(1):41-53.
[22] Wojcik M, Tobiasz-Lis P. Evaluating and interpreting the city using a photo projective method:The example. Geographia Polonica, 2013, 86(2):137-152.
[23] Allen J. Ambient power:Berlin's potsdamer platz and the seductive logic of public spaces. Urban Studies, 2006, 43(2):441-455.
[24]邱丽蓉. The Representation of Taiwan's Aboriginal Architectural Heritage Visual and Non-visual Presentation in Cultural Villages.(台湾)地理学报, 2010(60):103-131.
[25]郑震.空间:一个社会学的概念.社会学研究, 2010(5):167-191.
[26] Ulldemolins J R. Culture and authenticity in urban regeneration processes:Place branding in central Barcelona. Urban Studies, 2014, 51(14):3026-3045.
[27] O'Callaghan C. Lightness and weight:(re)reading urban potentialities through photographs. Area,2012, 44(2):200–207.
[28] Epstein-Pliouchtch L A M. Architects'places, users'places:Place meanings at the New Central Bus Station, Tel Aviv. Journal of Urban Design, 2009, 14(2):147-161.
[29]顾朝林,宋国臣.北京城市意象空间及构成要素研究.地理学报, 2001, 56(1):64-74.
[30]王敏,江荣灏,朱竑.人文地理学的"视觉"研究进展与启示.人文地理, 2017(3):10-19.
[31] Schlottmann A, Miggelbrink J. Visual geographies–an editorial. Social Geography, 2009, 4(1):1-9.
[32]戴光全,陈欣.旅游者摄影心理初探——基于旅游照片的内容分析.旅游学刊, 2009, 24(7):71-77.
[33]王敏,江冰婷,朱竑.基于视觉研究方法的工业遗产旅游地空间感知探讨:广州红专厂案例.旅游学刊,2017,32(10):28-38.
[34] Lombard M. Using auto-photography to understand place:reflections from research in urban informal settlements in Mexico. Area, 2013, 45(1):23–32.
[35] Rose G. Practising photography:An archive, a study, some photographs and a researcher. Journal of Historical Geography, 2000, 26(4):555-571.
[36] Rose G. On the relation between'visual research methods'and contemporary visual culture. The Sociological Review, 2014, 62(1):24-46.
[37] Rose G. Visual methodologies:An introduction to the interpretation of visual methods. Sage Publications Ltd,2007.
[38]徐磊青,杨公侠.环境心理学.上海:同济大学出版社, 2002.
[39] Russell J A, Mehrabian A. Evidence for a three-factor theory of emotions. Journal of Research in Personality, 1977, 11(3):273-294.
[40] Russell J A, Ward L M, Pratt G. Affective Quality Attributed to Environments:A Factor Analytic Study. Environment&Behavior, 1981, 13(3):259-288.
[41] Russell J A, Lanius U F. Adaptation level and the affective appraisal of environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1984, 4(2):119-135.
[42]李凡,杨蓉,黄丽萍.怀旧消费空间地方建构的比较研究.地理科学进展,2015,34(04):505-516.
[43]甘永洪,罗涛,张天海,等.视觉景观主观评价的"客观性"探讨.人文地理,2013,28(03):58-63+120.
[44] Albers P C, James W R.Travel photography:A methodological approach.Annals of Tourism Research,1988,15(1):134-158.
(1)唤醒维度在评定中考虑到语义差别和理解方便,采用“兴奋”作为描述词,评定前已对维度进行解释。
(2)照片来源:“第一届恩宁手机摄影比赛”参选照片集,永庆坊微信公众号。
(3)照片来源:新浪微博、网络论坛等基于网络搜索的多个照片来源。
[2]周尚意.英美文化研究与新文化地理学.地理学报,2004(S1):162-166.
[3]严若谷,周素红,闫小培.城市更新之研究.地理科学进展,2011,30(08):947-955.
[4]蔡云楠,杨宵节,李冬凌.城市老旧小区"微改造"的内容与对策研究.城市发展研究,2017,24(04):29-34.
[5]杨新海.历史街区的基本特性及其保护原则.人文地理, 2005, 20(5):48-50.
[6]王林,王骏.历史街区保护规划编制方法研究.城市规划, 1998(3):37-39.
[7]廖仁静,李倩,张捷,等.都市历史街区真实性的游憩者感知研究——以南京夫子庙为例.旅游学刊,2009,24(1):55-60.
[8]李山石,刘家明.基于文化创意产业的历史街区提升改造研究—以南锣鼓巷为例.人文地理,2013(1):135-140.
[9]刘垚,田银生,周可斌.从一元决策到多元参与—广州恩宁路旧城更新案例研究.城市规划,2015,39(8):101-111.
[10]李倩菁,蔡晓梅.新文化地理学视角下景观研究综述与展望.人文地理,2017,32(01):23-28+98.
[11] Robert H, Gunther K. Social Semiotics. Cambridge:Polity Press, 1988:3.
[12] RoseG,Tolia-KellyDP.Visuality/Materiality:Images,objectsandpractices.AshgatePublishingLtd,2012.
[13]林玉莲,胡正凡.环境心理学(第2版).北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2006.
[14]朱志远,宋刚."微改造"落地之时——恩宁路永庆片区改造设计回顾.建筑技艺,2017(11):66-75.
[15]陈宏胜,王兴平,国子健.规划的流变—对增量规划、存量规划、减量规划的思考.现代城市研究,2015(09):44-48.
[16]张平宇.城市再生:21世纪中国城市化趋势.地理科学进展,2004(04):72-79.
[17]阮仪三,袁菲.再论江南水乡古镇的保护与合理发展.城市规划学刊,2011(05):95-101.
[18]夏健,王勇.从重置到重生:居住性历史文化街区生活真实性的保护.城市发展研究,2010,17(02):134-139.
[19]何深静,于涛方,方澜.城市更新中社会网络的保存和发展.人文地理,2001(06):36-39.
[20]徐好好,李芃,李睿.五图五书:泮塘五约微改造记录.建筑学报,2017(01):113-117.
[21] JackL.Nasar,Theevaluativeimageofthecity.JournaloftheAmericanPlanningAssociation,1990,56(1):41-53.
[22] Wojcik M, Tobiasz-Lis P. Evaluating and interpreting the city using a photo projective method:The example. Geographia Polonica, 2013, 86(2):137-152.
[23] Allen J. Ambient power:Berlin's potsdamer platz and the seductive logic of public spaces. Urban Studies, 2006, 43(2):441-455.
[24]邱丽蓉. The Representation of Taiwan's Aboriginal Architectural Heritage Visual and Non-visual Presentation in Cultural Villages.(台湾)地理学报, 2010(60):103-131.
[25]郑震.空间:一个社会学的概念.社会学研究, 2010(5):167-191.
[26] Ulldemolins J R. Culture and authenticity in urban regeneration processes:Place branding in central Barcelona. Urban Studies, 2014, 51(14):3026-3045.
[27] O'Callaghan C. Lightness and weight:(re)reading urban potentialities through photographs. Area,2012, 44(2):200–207.
[28] Epstein-Pliouchtch L A M. Architects'places, users'places:Place meanings at the New Central Bus Station, Tel Aviv. Journal of Urban Design, 2009, 14(2):147-161.
[29]顾朝林,宋国臣.北京城市意象空间及构成要素研究.地理学报, 2001, 56(1):64-74.
[30]王敏,江荣灏,朱竑.人文地理学的"视觉"研究进展与启示.人文地理, 2017(3):10-19.
[31] Schlottmann A, Miggelbrink J. Visual geographies–an editorial. Social Geography, 2009, 4(1):1-9.
[32]戴光全,陈欣.旅游者摄影心理初探——基于旅游照片的内容分析.旅游学刊, 2009, 24(7):71-77.
[33]王敏,江冰婷,朱竑.基于视觉研究方法的工业遗产旅游地空间感知探讨:广州红专厂案例.旅游学刊,2017,32(10):28-38.
[34] Lombard M. Using auto-photography to understand place:reflections from research in urban informal settlements in Mexico. Area, 2013, 45(1):23–32.
[35] Rose G. Practising photography:An archive, a study, some photographs and a researcher. Journal of Historical Geography, 2000, 26(4):555-571.
[36] Rose G. On the relation between'visual research methods'and contemporary visual culture. The Sociological Review, 2014, 62(1):24-46.
[37] Rose G. Visual methodologies:An introduction to the interpretation of visual methods. Sage Publications Ltd,2007.
[38]徐磊青,杨公侠.环境心理学.上海:同济大学出版社, 2002.
[39] Russell J A, Mehrabian A. Evidence for a three-factor theory of emotions. Journal of Research in Personality, 1977, 11(3):273-294.
[40] Russell J A, Ward L M, Pratt G. Affective Quality Attributed to Environments:A Factor Analytic Study. Environment&Behavior, 1981, 13(3):259-288.
[41] Russell J A, Lanius U F. Adaptation level and the affective appraisal of environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1984, 4(2):119-135.
[42]李凡,杨蓉,黄丽萍.怀旧消费空间地方建构的比较研究.地理科学进展,2015,34(04):505-516.
[43]甘永洪,罗涛,张天海,等.视觉景观主观评价的"客观性"探讨.人文地理,2013,28(03):58-63+120.
[44] Albers P C, James W R.Travel photography:A methodological approach.Annals of Tourism Research,1988,15(1):134-158.
(1)唤醒维度在评定中考虑到语义差别和理解方便,采用“兴奋”作为描述词,评定前已对维度进行解释。
(2)照片来源:“第一届恩宁手机摄影比赛”参选照片集,永庆坊微信公众号。
(3)照片来源:新浪微博、网络论坛等基于网络搜索的多个照片来源。