Re: Garden Design

At 03:48 PM 12/3/00 +0000, Jan Smithen wrote:

>Deborah Lindsay wrote:
> > Other peoples at other times have used different systems. For example,
> > much Japanese architecture is based on the module of the tatami, a
> > multi-functional woven mat, a rectangle approximately 3ft x 6ft, and people
> > there will refer to a space as some number of tatamis in size. Who is 
> to say that a rectangle
> > 3units x 5units (a "Golden" rectangle) is more right or more 
> proportionally perfect than a rectangle 3units x 6units?
>
>The "tatami mat" proportion is most interesting, and I am glad to learn of 
>it. I
>will lay both the Golden Rectangle and the Tatami Mat proportions out side 
>by side
>to see if I am attracted to one over the other.

Tatami proportions were designed for both architectural and human 
relationships.  A single tatami is large enough for a standard asian adult 
to sleep on (though with the introduction of western foods, many are now 
too tall for a tatami mat).  The floors of home would be made up of these 
mats, laid in various patterns depending upon the size of the room - hence 
the width being exactly half of the length, so that 2 ends could fit onto 
one length, as the need arose.  A golden proportion would not fit in the 
same manner.

> > Do I use it? Rarely. I believe that form should follow function, not 
> vice versa.
> > I do find the Fibonacci series and geometrical forms using it interesting
> > and pleasing, and I am intrigued (as a spectator) by the mysticism that 
> some
> > people have historically drawn from it.
>
>I guess my question is, should form +always+ follow function, (be dictated 
>by it?)  Or can some design have value simply because it is pleasing or 
>beautiful. Yes, these ideas are old; not only the G.R., but also the 
>perfect square as a symbol of heaven brought to earth, the quadripartite 
>garden as symbol of paradise, the square half-turned within a square. But 
>does this make them outdated, no longer beautiful to modern designers?
>     I always love your answers, they are informative and 
> well-reasoned.  Hope you don't mind that I quote you often.
>     And thanks to all who responded to my little foray into design in 
> order to please Steve French who wishes for less plants and more design!   Jan

I consulted on a landscape for a friend who is a mathematician.  He was 
very interested in representing a fibonacci sequence in the paving on his 
rear garden.  At first I tried to talk him out of it, but I soon realized 
this was very important to him.  I helped him come up with a design that he 
installed himself.  He discarded much of my idea and the result was rather 
obscure (hard to tell what was going on - it seemed more-or-less like a 
partially random, partially ordered brick paving pattern.  Intrigued by 
this (there are latent mathematical tendencies in me I fear!), I have 
thought of various pathways and other paving that would even more 
effectively represent a fibonacci sequence, but, of course, I have yet to 
find a client who would be interested!!!

Gardens are often about peoples perceptions of reality - this is what makes 
them unique and interesting.  I never expect a client to agree with all of 
my ideas, nor desire them.  It is more interesting to help them find a way 
to express their own vision in a functional and attractive 
manner.  Representing abstract philosophy or science in a garden setting is 
innovative.

Being originally trained as an artist, I find that most of the 'techniques' 
I was taught for color, proportion, etc., do not necessarily translate 
easily into the garden.  They can, at times, be useful tools, but you can 
become somewhat a slave to them and not produce worthwhile results.  I have 
had to come up with new concepts on my own.  For example, how can use talk 
about true complimentary colors (opposites on the 6-color wheel) in a 
garden setting (yellow & purple, blue & orange) when you will always have a 
large dose of foliage color (i.e. some sort of green)!  This is one reason 
why the classic green foliage with only pure red flowers is so classic - it 
is a true complimentary, but the only one possible!

A garden is a 4-dimensional object: height, width, depth, and then 
time.  The golden proportion being discussed hear is more related to 2 
dimensional surfaces (building faces, paintings, etc.).  A garden is more 
like sculpture in the round, but with MUCH less control as plants often do 
what they please regardless of our plans!!


h o r t u l u s   a p t u s     -    'a garden suited to its purpose'
Sean A. O'Hara        fax (707) 667-1173     sean.ohara@groupmail.com
710 Jean Street, Oakland, CA 94610-1459, U.S.A.
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index