Re[2]: Garden Design
- To: "m*@ucdavis.edu"
- Subject: Re[2]: Garden Design
- From: D* L*
- Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 16:30 -0600
Hi Jan,
You wrote:
"Hi Deborah:
Thanks for your response. Of course, you are correct in pointing out my confusio
n
with the spread-eagle human by da Vinci. What I really should have refered to wa
s
the drawing of the walking human by Doryphorus, Roman copy of Greek original by
Polyclitus. This has the golden section relationships drawn over several parts o
f
the body as well as the whole."
Oh *that* one...
(snip)
"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 si
de
to see if I am attracted to one over the other.
I think Laura Cooper pointed out recently that we are all heavily influenced by
our
past associations and aculturations in our likes and dislikes. And others have
observed that the G.R. is built into much that we commonly use in our western
culture, from paper to the TV screen."
Exactly. Are some people so accustomed to it that it feels "right" the way the
color of the sky, the light of home, the smells of one's childhood, etc, do?
> The "Golden Rectangle" is certainly still discussed in design courses but
> in my experience as *a* way to define spatial proportions, not as *the*
> way.Certainly one can't really grasp Renaissance architecture without an
> understanding of its mathematics and the people who found these mathematics
> pleasing.
>
> Do I use it? Rarely. I believe that form should follow function, not vice vers
a.
> 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."
Oh dear...that is one of the central questions of the study of Aesthetics isn't
it...and I can only tell you that I definitely don't have an answer :) .
Once upon a time I thought I did, but I was young, brash and dogmatic then...
That said I'll tell you that I definitely have a bias towards the beautiful
*and* practical
in garden design and architecture in general.And I enjoy artworks
which evoke or echo emotions in some way. I am left rather cold by what I
perceive as design for design's sake (Diebenkorn comes to mind),though I may
find it interesting for purely intellectual reasons.
By functions in garden design I am referring to the client's need for their
garden space to fulfill
identifiable purposes. The creation of a beautiful design can certainly be a
function in this sense. What I am driving at is that I (and I am speaking only
of myself here)do not go into a meeting with a client with the notion that I
want to impose a particular design that I happen to like on *their* space.If a
client was enamored of some particular geometrical form and wanted to have it
used because they found it inherently pleasing I would surely try to work with
them on it. Most of the gardens I have designed have been very small urban
spaces, the clients being people with very limited budgets who needed the little
space they had to fill many purposes.
Going in with preconceived ideas of how a space should be designed would be
counterproductive. I think that there is a fundemental difference between
creating a garden (or any work of art)for oneself and creating a garden that
works for someone else.
"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 squ
are
half-turned within a square. But does this make them outdated, no longer beautif
ul
to modern designers?"
Not at all. I just think that these forms are not neccessarily made *more*
beautiful than some other form simply because of the associations they have with
spiritual beliefs. A perfect square is to me just a perfect square since I do
not share a belief system in which heaven exists. If I had a client in whom a
perfect square evoked heaven,and who wanted her garden
to be a place of spiritual celebration then I would use it in that context.
If a square was simply the best answer to an arrangement of a space then I would
use it. But I wouldn't impose it on a space just because I liked squares.
Deborah
