她的百年诞辰，城市病依旧还是我们的痛
昨天是美国记者-《美国大城市的死与生》作者简·雅各布斯（JaneJacobs）的诞辰100周年。她以对城市的研究而闻名，被认为过去半个世纪对美国乃至世界城市规划发展影响最大的人士之一。...
今年春节小编回到家乡，听说一处城中村要改造，一时好奇去围观了规划：只见偌大的沙盘上，沿湖楼盘林立，住宅区、商业区、休闲区一应俱全；单看规划还以为是某一线城市呢。然而，规划目标中所描述的“恢复其历史胜景”，却很难看出端倪。
“馒头蒸的比饼大，饺子煮的比包子大”，这就是我家乡发展的节奏，大操大办，大开大合。这应该也是如今多数中国城市常见的套路，发展就是拆了旧楼建高楼，人们的生活需要被迫去适应新的建筑，新的街道，新的规划。
对于这类发展模式，早在50多年前，简·雅各布斯（Jane Jacobs）就在她的著作《美国大城市的死与生》（The Death and Life of Great American Cities）当中提出了批评。时至今日，这本于1961年出版的经典之作仍有大批读者。
今天，借着纪念Jane诞辰100周年的特殊时机，让小编带你速速回顾她的思想光辉：
不过，想当年，媒体对Jane使用最多的形容词就是angry，因为她总是对城市规划有太多不满。
Jane只是一个编辑，一个自由撰稿人，一个喜欢步行喜欢观察的人。虽然她既不是职业的城市规划师或城市学者，也没有相关的文凭，但是世界上几乎任何一个城市谈起规划，人们都会想起Jane。
在Jane的书中，她认为一个城市的街道应该是这样的：
― Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American CitiesFirst, there must be a clear demarcation between what is public space and what is private space. Public and private spaces cannot ooze into each other as they do typically in suburban settings or in projects.
Second, there must be eyes upon the street, eyes belonging to those we might call the natural proprietors of the street. The buildings on a street equipped to handle strangers and to insure the safety of both residents and strangers, must be oriented to the street. They cannot turn their backs or blank sides on it and leave it blind.
And third, the sidewalk must have users on it fairly continuously, both to add to the number of effective eyes on the street and to induce the people in buildings along the street to watch the sidewalks in sufficient numbers. Nobody enjoys sitting on a stoop or looking out a window at an empty street. Almost nobody does such a thing. Large numbers of people entertain themselves, off and on, by watching street activity.
如果一个城市的街道总是人头攒动、生机勃勃的话，那你对这个城市的印象一般也不会太差。
Jane的书中对于城市应该是什么样子所做的描述是“organic, spontaneous, and untidy”，前两个比较容易理解，但是为啥是untidy呢？难道城市不应该整齐一点？
试想一下，一条笔直整齐但行人寥寥无几的大道和一条蜿蜒的但充满活力的小街相比，哪个更吸引人呢？
理想的、适于人居住的环境应该是带着一点无序的，按照刚才那段引文的描述，这样的城市也更加安全。
The architects, planners—and businessmen–are seized with dreams of order, and they have become fascinated with scale models and bird’s-eye views. This is a vicarious way to deal with reality, and it is, unhappily, symptomatic of a design philosophy now dominant: buildings come first, for the goal is to remake the city to fit an abstract concept of what, logically, it should be.
...
Intricate minglings of different uses in cities are not a form of chaos. On the contrary, they represent a complex and highly developed form of order.
...
Designing a dream city is easy; rebuilding a living one takes imagination.
—— Jane Jacobs
在街巷之中穿梭有可能会迷路，但却不觉得乏味，也不用担心自己的人身安全，出远门了可以放心的把钥匙交给楼下小卖部的老板，不在家的时候也有街坊帮你留意家中的安全。
这大概是Jane构想的，也是所有人心目中的理想城市。
自从工作以后，小编每次回到家乡都有耳目一新之感，尤其每次从崭新的火车站坐车回家，沿途不是在建的工地就是一栋栋拔地而起的新建筑，感觉自己渐渐成了这座城市里的陌生人。
不过，不希望看到你的城市变成你不喜欢的样子，你真的有设想过它应该是什么样吗？
― Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American CitiesCities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.
联系我们：
三思译坊（Thanks Translation Workshop）欢迎垂询
电话：86-18353359635（崔先生）
86-13070670238
电邮：thanks_translation@126.com
关注 三思译坊
微信扫一扫关注公众号
