何处寄乡愁?——由厦门、新疆高中生景观偏好比较研究引发的思考
|
摘要
城镇化引发的大规模人员流动导致了大范围的文化融合与趋同,这是"乡愁"问题成为社会热点的现实背景。以厦门市本地高中生与驻厦新疆高中生为对比研究对象,通过实施景观宜居及审美偏好测试,探讨2组人群景观偏好差异特征及其同化趋势。结果显示:1)2组人群文化特征的差异性和趋同性并存;2)2组人群对新、旧景观的宜居偏好差异显著,现代城市文化的冲击对新疆交流生的影响更大;3)2组人群对于新、旧景观的审美偏好趋于一致,人员流动性减弱了新疆交流生景观审美价值的地域性。针对流动人群的景观偏好研究,凸显了城市建设中延续地域景观特色的紧迫性。研究结论对"乡愁"经济建设和城市规划发展方向的探讨具有积极探索价值。
The large-scale flow of people caused by urbanization has led to a wide range of cultural integration and convergence. This is the realistic background why "homesickness" becoming a social hot spot. This study takes two different groups of high school students as research object. These two groups coming from one Xiamen senior school, have different district backgrounds, which of one is native, the other is Xinjiang. Through questionnaire surveys of the preference of landscape habitability and aesthetics, their landscape preference characteristics and assimilation trend are discussed. The results shows that: 1) The difference and convergence of cultural characteristics are co-exist; 2) The difference of habitability demand between the two groups in the old and new landscapes is significant, which shows a greater impact of modern urban culture on Xinjiang students than Xiamen students; 3) The aesthetics preference of the two groups have the same trend, indicating that the population mobility has weaken the Xinjiang students' regional characteristic of aesthetic value. The research on the landscape preference of the floating population highlights the urgency of maintaining traditional region landscape features in urbanization. Also, the conclusions have positive exploration value for the "homesickness" economy and the developing trend of urban planning.
The large-scale flow of people caused by urbanization has led to a wide range of cultural integration and convergence. This is the realistic background why "homesickness" becoming a social hot spot. This study takes two different groups of high school students as research object. These two groups coming from one Xiamen senior school, have different district backgrounds, which of one is native, the other is Xinjiang. Through questionnaire surveys of the preference of landscape habitability and aesthetics, their landscape preference characteristics and assimilation trend are discussed. The results shows that: 1) The difference and convergence of cultural characteristics are co-exist; 2) The difference of habitability demand between the two groups in the old and new landscapes is significant, which shows a greater impact of modern urban culture on Xinjiang students than Xiamen students; 3) The aesthetics preference of the two groups have the same trend, indicating that the population mobility has weaken the Xinjiang students' regional characteristic of aesthetic value. The research on the landscape preference of the floating population highlights the urgency of maintaining traditional region landscape features in urbanization. Also, the conclusions have positive exploration value for the "homesickness" economy and the developing trend of urban planning.
引文
[1]国家统计局.2016年农民工监测调查报告[N].中国信息报,2017-05-02(001).
[2]陈云文,胡江,王辉.景观偏好及栽植空间景观偏好研究回顾[J].山东林业科技,2004,34(4):54-56.
[3]艾伦·卡尔松.自然与景观[M].陈李波,译.长沙:湖南科学技术出版社,2006:88-116.
[4]刘媛媛,卓金梅,张朝枝.游客文化差异性特征对其景观偏好的影响[J].中南林业科技大学学报:社会科学版,2012,6(2):12-6.
[5]齐童,王亚娟,王卫华.国际视觉景观研究评述[J].地理科学进展,2013,32(6):975-983.
[6]Shuttle W S.The Use of Photographs as an Environment Presentation Medium in Landscape Studies[J].Journal of Environmental Management,1980,11(1):61-76.
[7]宋立民,鲁苗.景观偏好的差异性探究[J].设计,2016(21):27-29.
[8]Kaplan R,Herbert E J.Cultural and sub-cultural comparisons in preferences for natural settings[J].Landscape&Urban Planning,1987,14(4):281-293.
[9]陈友军,张捷.九寨沟旅游客流景观偏好特征研究[J].河南科学,2009,27(2):249-252.
[10]叶晓敏,倪琪.基于文化背景的景观偏好研究:以杭州西湖风景区为例[J].华中建筑,2011,29(9):145-149.
[11]王曦.文化差异在语言中的体现[J].中国集体经济,2008(1):195-196.
[12]Buijs A E,Elands B H M,Langers F.No Wilderness for Immigrants:Cultural Differences in Images of Nature and Landscape Preferences[J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2009,91(3):113-123.
[13]刘炎.东西方游客对中国文化景观的符号认知差异[D].大连:东北财经大学,2007.
[14]斯塔夫里阿诺斯.全球通史[M].吴象婴,等,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[15]傅蝶.积极的融合,无形的阻隔:上海市民工子女文化融合问题研究[D].上海:华东师范大学,2012.
[16]蔡熊彬,谢宗添,林萍.游人对城市公园场景安全性心理反应的评价研究[J].中国园林,2012,28(12):109-113.
[17]林振福.厦门城市景观风貌塑造的规划管控方法研究[J].城市规划学刊,2016(6):83-91.
[18]蒋宇.中国城市化进程中城市景观美学问题研究[D].重庆:西南大学,2012.
[19]Ji L J,Zhang Z Y,Nisbett R E.Is It Culture or Is It Language?Examination of Language Effects in Cross-Cultural Research on Categorization[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2004,87(1):57-65.
[20]Hidalgo M C,Hernandez B.Place Attachment:Conceptual and Empirical Questions[J].Journal of Environmental Psychology,2001,21(3):273-281.
[21]Costanza R,Arge R,Groot R,et al.The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital[J].Nature,1997,87(6630):253-260.
[22]Soini K,Vaarala H,Pouta E.Residents'sense of place and landscape perceptions at the ruralurban interface[J].Landscape&Urban Planning,2012,104(1):124-134.
[23]汪芳,吕舟,张兵,等.迁移中的记忆与乡愁:城乡记忆的演变机制和空间逻辑[J].地理研究,2017,36(1):3-25.
[24]张红玲.跨文化外语教学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2007.
[2]陈云文,胡江,王辉.景观偏好及栽植空间景观偏好研究回顾[J].山东林业科技,2004,34(4):54-56.
[3]艾伦·卡尔松.自然与景观[M].陈李波,译.长沙:湖南科学技术出版社,2006:88-116.
[4]刘媛媛,卓金梅,张朝枝.游客文化差异性特征对其景观偏好的影响[J].中南林业科技大学学报:社会科学版,2012,6(2):12-6.
[5]齐童,王亚娟,王卫华.国际视觉景观研究评述[J].地理科学进展,2013,32(6):975-983.
[6]Shuttle W S.The Use of Photographs as an Environment Presentation Medium in Landscape Studies[J].Journal of Environmental Management,1980,11(1):61-76.
[7]宋立民,鲁苗.景观偏好的差异性探究[J].设计,2016(21):27-29.
[8]Kaplan R,Herbert E J.Cultural and sub-cultural comparisons in preferences for natural settings[J].Landscape&Urban Planning,1987,14(4):281-293.
[9]陈友军,张捷.九寨沟旅游客流景观偏好特征研究[J].河南科学,2009,27(2):249-252.
[10]叶晓敏,倪琪.基于文化背景的景观偏好研究:以杭州西湖风景区为例[J].华中建筑,2011,29(9):145-149.
[11]王曦.文化差异在语言中的体现[J].中国集体经济,2008(1):195-196.
[12]Buijs A E,Elands B H M,Langers F.No Wilderness for Immigrants:Cultural Differences in Images of Nature and Landscape Preferences[J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2009,91(3):113-123.
[13]刘炎.东西方游客对中国文化景观的符号认知差异[D].大连:东北财经大学,2007.
[14]斯塔夫里阿诺斯.全球通史[M].吴象婴,等,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[15]傅蝶.积极的融合,无形的阻隔:上海市民工子女文化融合问题研究[D].上海:华东师范大学,2012.
[16]蔡熊彬,谢宗添,林萍.游人对城市公园场景安全性心理反应的评价研究[J].中国园林,2012,28(12):109-113.
[17]林振福.厦门城市景观风貌塑造的规划管控方法研究[J].城市规划学刊,2016(6):83-91.
[18]蒋宇.中国城市化进程中城市景观美学问题研究[D].重庆:西南大学,2012.
[19]Ji L J,Zhang Z Y,Nisbett R E.Is It Culture or Is It Language?Examination of Language Effects in Cross-Cultural Research on Categorization[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2004,87(1):57-65.
[20]Hidalgo M C,Hernandez B.Place Attachment:Conceptual and Empirical Questions[J].Journal of Environmental Psychology,2001,21(3):273-281.
[21]Costanza R,Arge R,Groot R,et al.The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital[J].Nature,1997,87(6630):253-260.
[22]Soini K,Vaarala H,Pouta E.Residents'sense of place and landscape perceptions at the ruralurban interface[J].Landscape&Urban Planning,2012,104(1):124-134.
[23]汪芳,吕舟,张兵,等.迁移中的记忆与乡愁:城乡记忆的演变机制和空间逻辑[J].地理研究,2017,36(1):3-25.
[24]张红玲.跨文化外语教学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2007.