102年第1學期-7002 亞洲城鄉規劃與研究 課程資訊

課程分享

選課分析

本課程名額為 20人,已有9人選讀,尚餘名額11人。

評分方式

評分項目 配分比例 說明
Attendance and Participation 30 Individual grading is based on learning attitudes, performance and demonstrated ability for self-improvements. Extra 5 % will be rewarded for criticality and innovation.
Design Studios 50 Only Graduate 1A students required to do two studios.
Individual Assignment 20 Report must be written in English (10%) and Power Point (PPT) presentation within 20 minutes (10%).

授課教師

邱國維

教育目標

This module aims to provide an inclusive design framework to the understanding of urban form that is useful not only for the explanation of historical roots, but also for meaningful spatial interventions in the future. Module objectives include: 1. Students will learn to deepen thoughts involving Asian city origin and analytical epistemology; 2. Students will learn to articulate Urbanism Inversion and stay connected to an Asia-focused pedagogy that applies in the context of a selected international design city; and 3. Students will learn to formulate their own morphological framework for own research.

課程概述

關於現代建築的討論,長久以來,一直都是圍繞著以歐美為中心的言說與論述;在這樣的觀點之下,其他國家相對地就成為接受現代建築洗禮的地區,而自然地,也就被視為現代建築發展過程中的邊緣地帶。以科學革命為發端,藉由技術與資本的力量,形塑當前生活形態的現代文明,雖然是起源於西歐,然而,近年來,當現代文明的弊病逐漸呈現而開始受到批判的時候,對於現代建築的反思,也開始讓我們從一元的觀點轉為多元的視野,同時看到各種不同文化下的現代建築發展過程,亞洲的建築與都市就是在這多元文化的觀點之下漸漸受到世界的注目,其中近年來,隨著亞洲經濟力的提高,日本與中國現代建築的崛起,更說明了這個現象。 面對亞洲現代建築與都市的發展過程,本課程將涵蓋亞洲的空間領域分為不同的單元,藉由這些區域的建築與都市的研究與討論,希望能對亞洲建築與都市有更為細緻的認識,從而理解台灣現代建築在亞洲文化中的特性,並勾勒出台灣對於亞洲現代建築與都市的自我觀點。

課程資訊

參考書目

Suggested Readings (non-mandatory): Detail lists will be provided in Wk2

AlSayyad, N. (ed.) (2001) Hybrid Urbanism: On the Identity Discourse and the Built
Environment. USA: Praeger Publishers.
Barrie, T. (2010) The Sacred In-Between – The Mediating Roles of Architecture. New York: Routledge.
Bhabha, H. K. [1994] (2004) The Location of Culture. (New edition) London & New York: Routledge.
Cohen, A.P. and Fukui, K. (eds.) (1993) Humanising the City: Social Contexts of Urban Life at the Turn of the
Millennium. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Conzen, M.R.G. (1998) ‘Apropos a sounder philosophical basis for urban morphology’.
Urban Morphology, Vol. 2, pp.113-114.
Forsyth, A. (2007) ‘Innovation in Urban Design: Does Research Help?’ Journal of Urban Design, 12(3), 461-73.
Hiebert P. (1982) ‘The Flaw of the Excluded Middle’, Missiology: An International Review,
Vol. X, No.1, January, 1982. pp.35-47.
Kropf, K. S. (2001) ‘Conceptions of change in the built environment’. Urban Morphology, Vol.5, (1), pp.29-42.
Larkham, P. J. (1999) ‘Organicism, evolution and urban form: on the problem of borrowing from
other disciplines’. Urban Morphology, Vol.3, pp.49-51.
Lawrence, D. L. and Low, S. M. (1990) ‘The Built Environment and Spatial Form’.
Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol.19, pp.453-505.
Levy, A. (1999) ‘Urban morphology and the problem of the modern urban fabric: some questions for research’.
Urban Morphology, Vol.3, (2), pp.79-8.
Malfroy, S. (1998) ‘Urban Tissue and the idea of Urban Morphogenesis’. In Typological Process and
Design Theory, Attilio Petruccioli (ed). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture
at Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
_________ (1998) ‘On the question of organicist metaphors’. Urban Morphology, Vol. 2, pp.47-50.
Marcus, J., et. al. (eds.) (2008) The Ancient City – New Perspectives on Urbanism in
the Old and New World.