规划专业外文翻译资料----华盛顿1901年规划

《规划专业外文翻译资料----华盛顿1901年规划》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《规划专业外文翻译资料----华盛顿1901年规划（5页珍藏版）》请在毕设资料网上搜索。

1、 毕业设计（论文）外文资料翻译 系别： 建筑系 附件： 1、外文原文 The 1901 plan for Washington D.C. The first explicit attempt to utilize the vaguely classical Beaux-Arts architectural style, which emerged from the Worlds Columbian Exposition of 1893, for the explicit intent of beautification and social amelioration was the Senat

2、e Park Commissions redesign of the monumental core of Washington D.C. to commemorate the citys centennial. The McMillan Plan of 1901-02, named for Senator James McMillan, the commissions liaison and principal backer in Congress, was the United States first attempt at city planning. The original plan

3、s of Pierre LEnfant had been largely unrealized in the growth of the city, and with the countrys growing prominence in the international arena, Congress decided that Washington D.C. should be brought to the magnificence decreed in LEnfants plan. The members of the commission convened by the Congress

4、 included Daniel H. Burnham, former Director of Construction of the Worlds Columbian Exposition； architect Charles McKim, of McKim, Mead, & White, New York City； sculptor and Worlds Fair alumnus Augustus Saint-Gaudens； Frederick L. Olmsted, Jr.； and Congressional liaison Charles Moore. Together they

5、 sought to revitalize the capital city through the monumental forms of the Beaux-Arts style. Using their experience at the Worlds Fair as a jumping-off point, the commissioners sought to accomplish a number of goals: to obtain a sense of cultural parity with Europe； to establish themselves as cultur

6、al and societal leaders in the rapidly growing professional class； to revitalize Washington D.C.s “monumental core” as an expression of continuity with the “founding fathers” as well as an expression of governmental legitimacy in a changing and confusing era of expansion； and finally, to utilize the

7、 beauty of the monumental center as a means of social control and civic amelioration. The means to these ends was the 1901 plan. The group began their research for the comprehensive city plan by visiting the “great cities” of Europe. Vienna, Paris, and the town planning of Germany were their destina

8、tions in an attempt to recover the spirit of LEnfant. “Their pilgrimage in general, and their specific itinerary, reflected the reverence of the City Beautiful mentality for the culture of the Old World” (Hines, 87) The commissioners were particularly impressed with Paris, seeing it as a “well-artic

9、ulated citya work of civic art.” (Hines, 87) The broad Parisian avenues and gardens of Versailles were a great influence on the men, and with their predilection for the Beaux-Arts style, an understandable influence on the final plan. The plan itself was a reworking of LEnfants plan, creating a monum

10、ental core, a great public Mall, and a series of public gardens. The focus of the plan, however, was on the Mall itself. Briefly, the Commission proposed to surround the Capitol square with a series of monumental buildings for Congressional use and for the Supreme Court. These, together with the exi

11、sting Library of Congress, would form a frame for the Capitol and its towering dome. Extending westwards on a rectified axis, a broad Mall with four carriage drives would lead to the Washington Monument. Lining the Mall on both sides would be major cultural and educational buildings. (Reps, 109) The

12、 buildings surrounding the Capitol eventually included Burnhams immense Union Station and Columbus Plaza. The placement of this railroad station is important in the 1901 plan. Not only does it demonstrate the Commissions mania for symmetry, harmony, and building groups rather than individual buildin

13、gs, it also demonstrates its power. For the preceding decades the Pennsylvania railroad had its station at the base of Capitol Hill, its tracks cutting across the Mall. Daniel Burnham, used his influence with the railroads president, Alexander Cassatt, and convinced him to move his station, as a mat

14、ter of civic beauty and national loyalty.At the opposite end of the monumental core stood the Washington Monument, anchoring the two axes of powerthe Capitol and the White House. However, the Monument had been built a few hundred yards off the White Houses sight lines. “Elaborate sunken gardens prop

15、osed for the western side of the monument attempted to correct the off-center north-south axis from the White House. South of the monument were projected sites both for a principal memorial honoring the founding fathers now the Jefferson Memorial and for facilities for indoor and outdoor sports.” (G

16、utheim, 90) In addition, a monument to Lincoln was planned for the reclaimed swampland west of the Washington Monument, as well as Memorial Bridge leading to Arlington Cemetery. The placement of the Lincoln Monument (a hotly debated site, which the Speaker of the House, a representative from Illinoi

17、s, called a “damn swamp”) served to enclose the Mall, creating a monumental core, a national civic center. LEnfants vision of a processional avenue similar to Paris Champs Elysees became, in the hands of the Senate Park Commission, “a tapis vert that was similar to elements at Versailles and to the

18、Schoenbrunn Palace gardens in Vienna.” (Hines, 94) The Mall was “unified and stripped of theundulating walks as well as the intrusive railroad station and tracks, long a civic disfigurement. Elms were to be planted along the Malls longitudinal edges, defining this space and its central panel of swar

19、d.” (Gutheim, 34) This visual reference to great European cities was not an accident. Not only were the designers influenced by the French Beaux-Arts style, they took Europe as an explicit model for their plan. America had been struggling with defining its identity since its inception, and on the ce

20、ntennial of the national capital, was still not quite sure of itself. To visually equate the American capital with European capitals was to create instant social and cultural cache for the nation. It was not only the nation for which the Senate Park Commission was attempting to attain social and cul

21、tural cache. As members of a growing professional class, which included professors, writers (such as Henry Adams, William and Henry James), architects, and civil servants, they were attempting to define their roles in this new category in a modern society. As social roles changed, government grew, a

22、nd America underwent the last death pangs of an agricultural society, this new class of professionals sought recognition and power. The Senate Park Commission, whether consciously or not, identified themselves with the power of planning the national capital, using the Beaux-Arts style to indicate th

23、at they (and America) had as much class as the Europeans, and just as much right to be a part of the upper echelons of American society. However, it was not only European forms that the Commission used in its 1901 plan. The Beaux-Arts style gave the impression of being vaguely classical, connoting n

24、ot only the democracy of ancient Greece and the Roman Republic, but also the early American Republic of LEnfants plan. “Classic architecture symbolized the historical heritage of the United States in a way that the Gothic, Romanesque, or commercial styles never could.” (Wilson, 89) The classical ref

25、erence in architecture was well-known in America, flowering through the late 1840s before the advent of Victorian eclecticism and the more austere and functional forms of the Chicago school. (Wilson, 89, Craig, 214) The very fact that the initial intent of the plan was to revisit LEnfant demonstrate

26、s the Commissions attempt to link the growing power of their class and of the government itself with the ideals and forms of the early Republic. “It was the first large effort to retrieve and restore the historic capital of the Founders, one of the earliest major attempts in the history of the repub

27、lic to reestablish for any city a sense of continuity with its origins and with the national heritage, as expressed in architectural forms.” (Hines, 95) This explicit reference to the Founders allowed the government at the turn of the century, and subsequent governments, to align themselves with the

28、 powerful symbolism the Founders invoked. Drawing on this well of myth, the Mall was to present “the public a symbol of the power of the national government.” (Gutheim, 43) In the past, the Mall was simply an open space for residents of Washington D.C.； with the new plan it “was reconceived as a new

29、 kind of governmental complex, a combined civic and cultural center that is at once a national front lawn and an imperial forum. This long, wide swath of open spacesomething between a park and a boulevardand the buildings along its edges have long served, in effect, as a sacred enclosure, a tenemos

30、for a democracy.” (Stern, 263) The growing power of the government and its bureaucracy needed the kind of legitimacy that classic forms and Republican allusions provided. Yet the monumental core was not the only part of the city the 1901 Plan addressed. The 1901 Plan was the first real expression of

31、 the City Beautiful movement in America, believing in the power of beauty in the urban center to not only increase business and property prices, but to induce civic pride and its attendant moral and economic reforms. The Plan did not explicitly address the problems of the overcrowded and impoverishe

32、d tenements and alleys surrounding the monumental core； instead government buildings were to replace “notorious slum communities” with names like Swamppoodle and Murder Bay. (Gutheim, 43) The intent of the plan on its social level was not to address economic issues head-on； instead Burnham suggested

33、 the way to deal with the impoverished neighborhoods would be to cut “broad thoroughfares through the unwholesome district.” (qtd. in Boyer, 271-72) These City Beautiful proponents believed in the power of fountains, statues, and tree-lined boulevards as an “antidote to moral decay and social disord

34、er.” (Boyer, 265-66) but did not include the displaced poor in their city plans. Earlier planners, including Frederick Olmsted, Sr., believed in the restorative effects of beauty, as expressed in natural and park settings. His famous plan for New Yorks Central Park was conceived as a place where all

35、 economic classes could relax and mingle, “the locale of class reconciliation.” (Wilson, 31) rather than a place where city dwellers (who were mostly working class or poor) would be imbued with the spirit of civic/national idealism, and be inspired to pick themselves up out of moral decay and into e

36、conomic success. Olmsted, Sr. was never reconciled to the civic idealism or neoclassicism of the City Beautiful movement, although his son Olmsted, Jr., was a force for beautys restorative effect within the Commission. The plan “might have emphasized primarily ceremonial aspects had the experience a

37、nd sympathies of the younger Olmsted not been present.” (Gutheim, 35) Olmsteds legacy in the plan is felt in the open green spaces of the Mall, and the park systems he included in the D.C. area. Yet in the end, the Commission “believed less in the Olmstedian view of beautys restorative power and mor

38、e in the shaping influences of beauty.” (Wilson, 80) The potential for monumentality, beauty, and community building was immense in the redesign of Washington D.C. But as Norma Evenson observes in her article “Monumental Spaces,” : “As a planned city, Washington provided opportunities for the creati

39、on of large scale urban unity: the axial government complex could be harmoniously embodied within, and related to, a comprehensively ordered street fabric.” (21) Yet this was not the case with the 1901 plan； in fact many, even at the time, saw the focus on the Mall as exclusive rather than inclusive

40、, a lost opportunity to address not only city beautification as well as social and economic reforms, but also thoughts for the future as the growing national government expanded the borders of Washington D.C. The 1901 Plan for Washington D.C. was not at its core a plan for the growing metropolitan c

41、ity, but for a monumental center which would invoke European and classical forms in order to legitimize the power of the planners, the growing government, and America in the international arena. It would also provide a focus for civic and national pride, which would in turn somehow magically amelior

42、ate the citys and nations economic and social problems. When the Commission presented the Plan to President Roosevelt and the public in an exhibition at the Corcoran Gallery, the estimated $200-600 million required to put the plan into place was only one of many concerns voiced. The legacy of the Ci

43、ty Beautiful movement in Washington D.C., and throughout the country, is being felt even today in debates over city beautification versus economic redevelopment. 2、外文资料翻译译文 华盛顿的 1901 年规划 第一次明确企图利用从 1893 年哥伦比亚世界博览会涌现出来的，有明确的美化城市和社会改良意图的古典主义艺术建筑风格的是参议院公园委员会重新设计的不朽的华盛顿核心，以纪念该城的百年历史。这个 1901 至 1902 年的麦克米

44、兰计划被命名为参议员詹姆斯麦克米兰，他在国会是该委员会的联络和政府的主要支持者， 这是美国在城市规划中的第一次尝试。 皮埃尔 埃尔芬最初的规划 思想在该城市的发展中并没有被广泛的实现，随着美国在国际舞台上的地位日益突出，美国国会决定执行宏大的 埃尔芬 规划。由国会召集的 参议院公园委员会 的成员包括原 哥伦比亚世界博览会 建筑学主任 丹尼尔伯纳姆 ；建筑师 查尔斯麦克金姆 ， 麦克金姆 ，米德和纽约市的伯特；雕塑家和世界公平委员会的校友 奥古斯都圣 赛恩德 -格德斯；佛瑞德 欧姆斯德 ；和国会的联络员 查尔斯穆尔 。他们通过古典艺术风格的宏大形式共同探求首都的振兴。用他们在世界公平委员会的经验

45、作为起跳点，委员们希望能够达到一系 列的目标：获取与欧洲对等的文化意识；在迅速增长的专业阶层确立自己在文化和社会上的领导地位；在一个不断变化，混乱和不断发展时代，振兴华盛顿的“不朽的核心”，以表达“开国元勋”的连续性和政府的合法性；最后，要利用“不朽的核心”的优点作为控制社会及改善公民一种途径。 为达到这些目的而实施的手段就是 1901 年的规划。该委员会通过参观欧洲的“伟大城市”开始其做全面城市规划的研究。尝试重新获得 埃尔芬 的规划精华，维也纳，巴黎，和德国的城市规划是他们的目的地。“他们的朝圣旅程，他们的详尽的旅行计划，反映了他们对城市美化的崇 敬，对旧世界文化的心态， ”（ 汉斯， 8

46、7）。委员们尤其对巴黎留下了深刻的印象，把它看做一个“ 良好的明确表达的城市 城市公民的艺术 ”（ 汉斯 , 87）。巴黎宽阔的林荫道及凡尔赛宫深深的影响了他们，结合对古典艺术风格的 偏好，形成了最后规划定案，这是可以理解的。 规划本身是对 埃尔芬 规划的改造，创造了“不朽的核心”，一个巨大的公共广场，以及一系列的公共花园。但是，规划的焦点是广场本身。 简单来说，该委员会建议用一系列纪念国会和最高法院的建筑物包围国会大厦广场。这些，再加上现有的美国国会图书馆，将为国会 和其高耸的穹顶形成一个框架。向西延续纠正后的轴线， 4 辆马车能够并行的宽阔的广场直通华盛顿纪念碑。衬托广场两侧的都将是重大的

47、文化和教育大厦。（ 瑞普斯 , 109） 环绕国会的建筑物，最终包括伯纳姆的巨大联合车站和哥伦布广场。在 1901 年的规划中，如何安置火车站非常重要。它不仅表明了委员会对对称，和谐以及建筑群（而不是个别建筑物）的热衷，而且也显示了其权力。国会山基地的几十年前的宾夕法尼亚州铁路车站的踪迹贯穿广场中心。 丹尼尔伯纳姆 ，用他对铁路会长 亚历山大 卡萨特的影响，使其相信对城市美化的支持和对国家忠诚，迁走车站 。在“不朽的核心”对面的尽端伫立着华盛顿纪念碑，稳固两轴象征权利的是国会和白宫。然而，这座纪念碑建成后偏离了白宫视线几百码。“ 艾尔伯特 建议，在西部建立另一座纪念碑，以纠正从白宫偏离中心的南北轴线。南方的这座纪念碑规划用地不仅主要用于纪念这位开国元勋 现在称杰弗逊纪念碑 而且是户内和户外运动的场地”（ 古特海姆 , 90）。此