RE: philosophical question

Steve develops some interesting points regarding the
various reasons why people create gardens.  I
personally feel that there should be room for everyone
in their desire to create a personal garden.  As
another landscape architect practicing in California,
as well as in Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Indonesia, my
background is probably more similar than disimilar to
Steve's, and I can definitely relate to the feeling of
being the odd one out, when discussing gardens or
plants with both gardeners and landscape designers. 

With some people the focus will be on the plants, with
others,(including many, many landscape architects),
the planting design and selection is considered the
last item of a design or the least important.  I have
always felt that de-emphasizing the role of plants in
a garden misses the point, as a garden without
plantings might as well be considered architecture of
the outdoors, rather than landscape architecture. 
Many times I feel that the idea of beauty, or gardens
as an art form which should allow creative
individuality is frowned upon in our current times.

We may be particularly blessed,(or cursed), depending
on your outlook, with an incredible variety of styles,
melange of plant species and lack of traditions here
in California with regard to garden design.  So it
would follow that there would be many varying
approaches to designing a garden.  The local botanical
gardens here in the Bay Area offer an incredible
abundance of foreign species as geographic
collections, and play a large role in introducing new
plants which may prove valuable in local garden
making.  We benefit from this, in that we can see what
does well locally, and also have an opportunity to try
rare species which are not as readily available at
commercial nurseries.  We are fortunate that we have
both great collections of California native species as
well as from other mediterranean and subtropical
climates.  With the ever increasing destruction of
habitat around the world, I think a valid case could
be made for collector's gardens as preservers of
species which may have become extinct in the wild.

In my own garden's design, I know that the sense of
spatial enclosure as a retreat from the outside world
is primary.  Beauty and diversity are the next most
important qualities, and the choices of plant material
have been influenced by what I can grow here, and
attempting to learn what I can't grow.  My interest is
therefore drawn to experimenting with new
introductions, cloudforest climate species,
subtropicals and yes, other mediterranean climate
species.  This approach is not necessarily one I would
take for a typical client, unless they also had some
of these interests.  Part of what makes landscape
design so interesting for me, is the chance to design
for different conditions, climates and preferences,
and the opportunities this provides to research and
explore different plant communities.  The choice of
which plants to use can be very significant.  The
structure and hardscape of two gardens could be
identical, yet the gardens appear totally different,
just by changing the plants used.  This is one of the
aspects of designing gardens that makes it such an
individual experience.

Some of the recognized master of contemporary
landscape design have vastly different approaches. 
Roberto Burle Marx's gardens might be considered more
painterly in approach, and works of abstract art using
plants as paint.  A closer examination of many of his
designs might also show that creating garden spaces to
be physically used was not as important a design
component as it is in contemporary California
landscape design.  Thomas Church's approach to design
was much more functional in nature, and less dependent
on plantings, or more traditional and frugal in their
use, than Burle Marx.  Church was more likely to use
plants as manipulated architectural elements, through
the use of hedges and topiary, rather than sculptural
elements in their natural from.  Oehme and Van Sweden
might be an example of landscape designers
intermediate in approach between Burle Marx and
Church, as they combine strong architectural forms
with diverse and abundant plantings, while allowing
plants to assume their natural forms.  

A current trend in California Bay Area landscape
design places vastly more emphasis on the plants
themselves, with a strong bent to explore combinations
of plants which could only be grown together outdoors
here.  This is possibly a return to the Victorian
era's desire to try the unique and exotic, while also
developing an original sense of place.  Perhaps only
time will tell how this is viewed by others.  Some of
the local landscape designers who best represent this
style are Roger Raiche, Marcia Donahue, Bob Clark, and
Sharon Osmund, to name just a few.  Other prominent
local landscape designers such as Cevan Forrest and
Topher Delaney take a decidedly more
architectural/less horticultural approach to designing
gardens, but also completely modern in approach.  This
trend is not as apparent in the larger scale, more
commercial landscapes by landscape architects, but has
been well represented in articles published in Pacific
Horticulture Magazine over the last decade. 

And my own answer to Steve's question about the
necessity for collector's gardens?  The Japanese
borrowed from the Chinese, with introduced Camellias
and Peonies being just two examples.  Islamic gardens
such as Alhambra also made liberal use of plants from
throughout the known world, and did not confine
themselves to just those species native to the local
area.  Plants which we have come to associate with
Mediterranean Gardens, such as Bougainvillea and
Jacaranda, are foreign introductions from Brazil.  If
garden designers were to avoid creating gardens with
collections, there would certainly be less variety in
garden design.  Knowing that the plants are already
here, the obligation becomes one of knowing when to
stop.  Diversity and variety are not necessarily bad
for design if the designer can artfully arrange them
into a garden which is pleasing.  For some this
artfull arrangement may be more weighted to grouping
plants together which require similar growing
conditions.  Great gardens have also been created
which break all the rules, and juxtaposing disimilar
plants can also create gardens of great beauty.    

I think that collecting is not necessarily a cultural
characteristic, but a deeply rooted human desire.  The
intensity of this desire, and how it manifests itself,
has definitely varied between cultures.  In Islamic,
Chinese and Japanese Gardens, maintaining tradition
and continuity is a more valued characteristic than
innovation or being unique.  In English and
Californian landscape design, the ease of importing
new species, connections through broader travel,
historical colonization, immigration and a preference
for individuality have encouraged the trend of
collecting.  Should this be considered a good or bad
thing?  I feel that it is part of the gardening
continuum, neither good or bad.  It is just as
difficult to judge whether gardening as a hobby, for
food production, as art, for moderating climatic
conditions, or to provide a private retreat is the
most valid reason for creating a garden.      

  






__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf!  It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index