「設1刊在戰後台灣的建築學院中，早已建立起幾近神聖的歷史地位。這種現象與台灣戰後特有的依賴見代性情境脫不了關係:在國府地緣政治依賴脈絡下，西方各種「改良j約見代主義陸續輸入了台灣的建築學院，從而開展了一段第三世界建築學院藉由設計論述展露主體意慾的歷史過程。其中，由金長銘等於四、五0年代在省立工學院所開展的「況代」中國建築設計論述，乃是台灣建築學院設計論述開始美學化、並形成忽略空間性神話的最初關鍵。本文旨在對此設計論述淪為魔咒的初始過程作一論述形構的系譜考核，除希望闡明爾等三支計論述戶才是主舍的文化邏輯與歷史社會意涵外，亦希望能因此開放「設計j的象徵性意義，以為下階段「學院」設計教育提供另類可能的視野。

As a newly established discipline，‘Design' has acquired its historical posi. tion， which is nearly holy and mystical， in the architectural academies of post· war Taiwan.' Teachers and Students of the architectural departments not only engaged in ‘designing'by manipulating the representations of space， but also‘talk about' design. As if not doing so， they would become disabled of designing， and couldn't take pride in their studies. The causes that resulted in the phenomena mentioned above had their complicatedly social· historical origins， which were closely related to the con· dition of the dependent modernity of postwar Taiwan. Under the structural Context of geo·political dependency， so many different editions of the im· proved modernisms of the ‘western'world had been imported into the aca· demic world of Taiwan. Ithad had so great advantage to develop different discursive practices in Taiwan's academies. Among so many discursive prac· tices， the propagation of the Chinese ‘modern'architecture by Ch'ang·ming Chin and his colleagues and students at the T. C. E./Cheng Kung University in the 1950s was the first and most fundamental one. By using aesthetic practices to distinct the field ‘Architecture'from the field 'Civil Engineering'， they articulated and distorted the foreign discourses due to their personally differ· ent epistemological premises. This resulted in the inconsistent and fragment· ed diffusions of modernisms in Taiwan. Besides， they also manifested their enthusiastic desires to modernize the nation state， and alluded the creation of their utopian society. The writing of this paper aims to display the concretely historical process of the formation of design discourses in architectural academies in Taiwan from the middle 1940s to the early 1960s. Therefore， we can attempt to demystify the ideological clouds obscuring ‘design'，to release the magically symbolic power of‘design'， and to suggest openly an alternative horizon for the design teachings in Taiwan's architectural academies.