40年ほど前、自分が関わっていた建築誌*1で同潤会アパートメントの特集を組んだ。横浜国立大学の松本恭治さんによる生活史調査を中心に資料などを構成したが、このとき初めて東京・横浜の各地区を見てまわり、同潤会の「実力」に圧倒されたのだった。完成からすでに4、50年の歳月を経ているうえに、戦後は住戸が私有化され、しかも地区によって管理体制が違う。集合住宅が多様な条件下でいかに多彩な顔を持つことになるのか。それを知ったのである。
建築そのものの質、あるいは都市における景観の魅力と、それ以上に内側の生活に重点をおいた松本さんの調査からは、同潤会に限らずすべての集合住宅が自ずと内包している社会性が見えてくる。たとえば戦後の公共住宅における、最大目標戸数の早急な供給の優先にたいして、大震災後の復興住宅は強く永く続く暮らしのヴィジョン。それぞれに集合住宅の思想が生じている。どちらの優劣ではなく、時代、人、地区、都市、ばあいによっては国の様相までもが集合住宅を通して実証されてくる。
その同潤会特集から40年後の2014年に、今度は元・日本住宅公団(現・UR都市機構)の団地を、建築家の木下庸子さんと一冊にまとめた。*2多いとはいえ全体のごく一部でしかないが70団地あまりを関東、関西中部、九州に訪ね、うち55団地の設計計画概念と現在の風景を記録した。いいかえれば数だけの供給ではなく、それぞれに関わった建築家の思想が反映した集合住宅という場所である。こちらは賃貸・分譲のどちらも管理体制がより整えられている。標準設計の枠がきびしかった1977年までの団地にこそ均一化を超えようとする意志を感じたのだが、設計とは本来そういうものだろう。このふたつの出版のあいだに、同潤会アパートメントのいくつかを再訪し、また都市集住の領域を拡げるためにそれ以外の、首都圏に残る店舗付き連続住宅、長屋、下宿、寮あるいは戦後の都営住宅やマンションに住む人々を取材したり*3、さらには欧米にその規範を探るかたちで、20世紀を中心に出現した名作といわれる集合住宅をやはり住人へのインタヴューと併せて編集したりした。*4
研究者でもないのに集合住宅の本が多い。このジャンルの建築はどれほど優れた事例でも一歩手前。完成がない。規格化と多様化の相反する方向がある。設計計画の力と生活の表れが等しい。集まって住むとは地上もっとも貧しくもっとも崇高な建築形式である。そこに魅かれてしまうのだろう。いまも進化あるいは退化？の只中にある建築。都市に住まうことの意味はまず集合住宅のなかに、それも理論よりドキュメントに読みとりたい。生きたモデルがそこにある。
*1 特集：生活史・同潤会アパート「都市住宅」1972年7月号 鹿島出版会
*2 「いえ 団地 まち―公団住宅設計計画史」住まいの学大系103 住まいの図書館出版局2014
*3 「集合住宅物語」みすず書房2004
*4 「世界の集合住宅：20世紀の200」(共著)株式会社大京1990
のちに普及版「アパートメント―世界の夢の集合住宅」平凡社2003
About 40 years ago or so, we wrote a cover story on Dojunkai Apartment in an architectural magazine *1 that I was involved in. We put together a story mainly based on the research on life history done by Professor Kyoji Matsumoto of Yokohama National University. I did, however, visit various districts in Tokyo and Yokohama and was overwhelmed by the “real capacity” of Dojunkai. 40 to 50 years had already passed since the completion of those apartments, and the dwelling units became privatized after the war. On top of that, each district had a different management setup. How versatile a housing complex can be under a variety of different conditions? Through my visits to the aforementioned apartments, I learned it.
The intrinsic social nature of all the housing complexes, not just limited to those by Dojunkai, started to manifest itself through the research conducted by Prof. Matsumoto where the emphasis was placed on the quality of architecture itself, the attraction of landscape in a city, and more than anything else, life in and of itself in it. Take post war public housing as an example. The priority was to supply the maximum target number of houses as quickly as possible while the vision for restoration housing after the big earthquake was to make it stronger and long-lasting. Different housing complexes had a different philosophy. Neither is better than the other: Time, people, district, city or sometimes a facet of a country can be demonstrated through a housing complex.
In 2014, 40 years since I wrote a feature story on Dojunkai, I put together a book on danchi housing complex by the Japan Housing Corporation (the current Urban Renaissance Agency) together with the architect, Ms. Yoko Kinoshita. We visited a little over 70 danchi complexes in Kanto, Kansai, central Japan and Kyushu. It sounds like a lot but it is only a fraction of all the complexes. Of them, we recorded the design plan concepts and landscapes of 55 danchi complexes. A housing complex was not just there to supply the number of houses needed: It was a reflection of the philosophy of an architect who was involved in it. The management system was well organized both for rental and condominium properties. I sensed purposefulness in the danchi complexes built before 1977 during the time when the standard design code was strict. I sensed their will to go beyond the homogenization. I think that is what designing was meant to be. In between the two publications I mentioned above, I revisited several Dojunkai Apartments. To expand the coverage of urban housing complex, I also interviewed residents of continuous houses in mixed-use development, tenements, boarding houses, dormitories, post-war Tokyo public housing complex*3or condominiums. Furthermore, to search for a base case in Europe and the United States, I also interviewed residents of those housing complexes that appeared mainly in the 20th century that were called a masterpiece*4 and compiled those interviews. I am not even a researcher on housing complexes, but I did write many books on them. Every architecture in this genre is always one step short of being complete no matter how good it is. There is no such thing as perfection. There are two opposing directions of normalization and diversification: the power of design plan and manifestation of life are equivalent. Housing complex is the most deprived yet the most sublime building type on earth.
I guess that’s what is so appealing to me. Architecture is still in the middle of evolution or maybe devolution. The meaning of living in an urban area should be sensed from a housing complex, and that should be done through documents, not a theory. A real life model exists there.
*1 Cover Story: Life History/Dojunkai Apartment, “Urban Housing”, July Issue, 1972, Kajima Institute Publishing Co. Ltd.
*2 “House Danchi Town - Design/Planning history of Public Housing,” Sumai-no-gaku Taikei 103, SUMAI Library Publishing Company 2014
*3 “Housing Complex Story,” Misuzu Shobo 2004
*4 “Housing Complex in the World: 200 from the 20th Century,” Jointly authored by Daikyo Incorporated, 1990, “Apartment – World Dream Housing,” Heibonsha, 2003