A discussion and posting space for Rutgers University, Intermediate Landscape Architecture 2 Studio on urban landscapes
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Forth Reading
Our forth reading is James Corner, "Eidetic Operations and New Landscapes", in Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture, ed. James Corner (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1999), pp. 152-169.
Especially for me it was interesting what is actually understood under the term Landschaft because i would have understood the opposite of it: landscape as a nostalgic picture- the beauty of nature, a hillside...But maybe the sence of the term changed within the years.
an interesting point is the thought, that there are not enough techniques for representation! I agree!
I liked when he was comparing landscapes to landschaft and how landschaft deals with much more than just the physical landscape but activity, space, and patterns. I can relate this reading to what we are trying to do with our new site because we are trying to engage, not just design. Its like our devices.
I can see how Corner wants to create a dynamic landscape and not a "picture" or "postcard" which is meant to be enjoyed the same way as a painting, he wants an interactive landscape which is evident as he explores the roots of the words in many different languages. He wants to shift the focus from the "appearance" to the "dynamics of occupancy" , what he calls a "more productive, engaging strategy. The use of "layers" as well as the recombination of these "layers" promotes a working knowledge and the use of logic in the landscape rather than just designing for asthetic values alone.
I really appreciated the way Corner let his definition of landskip and landschap evolve through the paper. When he first describes the terms he gives a short phrase to sum them up but after defining them again two or three more times he lastly defines them as:
landskip: the making of a picture participates in and makes what is to be pictured
landschaft: the formation of synaestetic, cognitive imiages forges a collective sense of place and relationship evolved through work
I also enjoyed the sequence of terms that describe how the mind process a memory from sensible forms to fantasmata.
I must agree with Jenna. Corner has shown an evolution of landscape and the way we, the people, view it. The term eidetic, meaning marked by extraordinarily detailed and vivid recall of visual images, enables vision as a powerful set of instruments that not only describes the landscape but the way it may be controlled or conditioned. Landscape should no longer be viewed as aesthetically pleasing scene, but rather a landscape should be viewed as a functioning product for society as well as the environment and several habitats. Corner uses the example of the garden and states “that gardens are defined less by formal appearances than through the activities of gardening” emphasizing that the programs are more important to society than the appearance. The time now is moving away from scenographic designs and engaging more closely with the programmatic function of the site. The designer may reveal new possibilities buried in a specified field by framing the issues in different ways.
The landscape as a wonderful dance that can be appreciated for its beauty and form. The twists the turns the interaction. But the viewer may or may not also see the deeper thought and power hidden in the dance. The concept of each move and their relationship to the whole in general. The subtle message given off, expressing emotion, depicting a story and revealing its desire for understanding. There is more than meets the eye, sometimes it right there all along, silent in form, but loud in expression.
Corner definitely made me realize as our designs evolve we must change out definition of words. Landscape if often thought of as just an aesthetic experience, and I was one of them. However after reading this I understand that the definition of landscape "shifts from object appearances to processes of formation, dynamics of occupancy, and poetics of becoming." We cannot just look at the landscape as a simple two dimensional image, instead look at it as a strategy. I also liked the discussion of diagrams (because I know they will definitely be a huge part of this semester). That “diagrams do not themselves produce form, but rather they emit formative and organizational influence, shape-giving pressures that cannot help but be embodied in all subsequent states of the given region of concrete reality in which they act.” I think it’s important to think of the diagrams as a way to show the systems and depths of the landscape that cannot be shown in just a plan or section.
This one really coincides well with this week's "device". It is refreshing to read and think about diagramming and how the before/after of a project are not the only phases. Many times we see projects transform through traditional plan, section, and perspective. All showing the final picture of that project. But what about the functions of that project that are not easily visible. Functions are what should make our projects, not some pretty flowers.
Landscape is not only something to be looked at but something to be interacted with. Corner writes, " Just as there is no innocent eye, there is no neutral or passive imaging, meaning that landscape too, as image, is neither inactive or benign." We need to think of Jamaica Bay as an active landscape, one that has life before and after us.
Landscapes are definitely seen and experienced differently by different people. people who visit a landscape for the first time will have a totally different reaction than those accustomed to the landscape because they experience it everyday. Thanks to the internet, anyone can choose any landscape they can imagine at the click of a button and view it. however, no matter how many times one sees it on the computer screen, its something totally new and exciting to experience it in person.
"...not to mention the pathetic failing of most of what passes as landscaping today..."
In agreement with what he stated after that, i would like to see us merge landscapes and the people who use the landscapes into a more functional and productive program. how to do this, especially without sliding back towards agriculture and that sort of thing, im not sure, it was just a thought...
While I appreciated Corners argument for a landscape that is "productive and participatory" I felt that he was arguing against a landscape that is enjoyed passively. It is possible that I misinterpreted what his argument was, however he seemed to strongly disapprove of such things as scenic overlooks because "the scene itself displaces viewers, keeps them at a safe and uninvolved distance". He was also critical of the ability of similar landscapes to "detach the subject from the complex realities of the world".
Perhaps a scenic overlook physically detaches the viewer from the landscape at which they view, but for him to claim that an the people who visit such places aren't connecting with the landscape is assumptive at bet, and moreover seems to reveal an elitist sort of mindset wherein there is a "right" and "correct" way to experience the landscape and if one is not actively involved in the shaping or working of it, one is not involved at all. A curious thought to have, especially since he is actively involved as a designer, so his definition of connection to the landscape conveniently includes him.
I think as designers we need to understand that people experience the world differently. For a designers there is this deeply embedded desire in us to get our hands dirty by actively shaping and engaging the earth. But we need to be aware that not everyone is like that, and we cannot discredit someone else's relationship to the landscape just because we cannot understand it or don't relate.
I greatly appreciated Corner's analysis of the words "landskip" and "landshaft". His words give a bit more meaning to our studies and explain how landscape design has gone from the creation of picturesque landscapes to the incorporation of personal experience and overall relationship.
I really think it is interesting how corner talks about the ideas of communication in design adn the difference between imaging and picturing. I think he makes a valid point that the landscape architecture industy must branch out and look for new definitions of media to communicate designs. I also really understood the relationship he was making with landshaft and landskip
Especially for me it was interesting what is actually understood under the term Landschaft because i would have understood the opposite of it: landscape as a nostalgic picture- the beauty of nature, a hillside...But maybe the sence of the term changed within the years.
ReplyDeletean interesting point is the thought, that there are not enough techniques for representation! I agree!
I liked when he was comparing landscapes to landschaft and how landschaft deals with much more than just the physical landscape but activity, space, and patterns. I can relate this reading to what we are trying to do with our new site because we are trying to engage, not just design. Its like our devices.
ReplyDeleteI can see how Corner wants to create a dynamic landscape and not a "picture" or "postcard" which is meant to be enjoyed the same way as a painting, he wants an interactive landscape which is evident as he explores the roots of the words in many different languages. He wants to shift the focus from the "appearance" to the "dynamics of occupancy" , what he calls a "more productive, engaging strategy. The use of "layers" as well as the recombination of these "layers" promotes a working knowledge and the use of logic in the landscape rather than just designing for asthetic values alone.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciated the way Corner let his definition of landskip and landschap evolve through the paper. When he first describes the terms he gives a short phrase to sum them up but after defining them again two or three more times he lastly defines them as:
ReplyDeletelandskip: the making of a picture participates in and makes what is to be pictured
landschaft: the formation of synaestetic, cognitive imiages forges a collective sense of place and relationship evolved through work
I also enjoyed the sequence of terms that describe how the mind process a memory from sensible forms to fantasmata.
I must agree with Jenna. Corner has shown an evolution of landscape and the way we, the people, view it. The term eidetic, meaning marked by extraordinarily detailed and vivid recall of visual images, enables vision as a powerful set of instruments that not only describes the landscape but the way it may be controlled or conditioned. Landscape should no longer be viewed as aesthetically pleasing scene, but rather a landscape should be viewed as a functioning product for society as well as the environment and several habitats. Corner uses the example of the garden and states “that gardens are defined less by formal appearances than through the activities of gardening” emphasizing that the programs are more important to society than the appearance. The time now is moving away from scenographic designs and engaging more closely with the programmatic function of the site. The designer may reveal new possibilities buried in a specified field by framing the issues in different ways.
ReplyDeleteThe landscape as a wonderful dance that can be appreciated for its beauty and form. The twists the turns the interaction. But the viewer may or may not also see the deeper thought and power hidden in the dance. The concept of each move and their relationship to the whole in general. The subtle message given off, expressing emotion, depicting a story and revealing its desire for understanding. There is more than meets the eye, sometimes it right there all along, silent in form, but loud in expression.
ReplyDeleteCorner definitely made me realize as our designs evolve we must change out definition of words. Landscape if often thought of as just an aesthetic experience, and I was one of them. However after reading this I understand that the definition of landscape "shifts from object appearances to processes of formation, dynamics of occupancy, and poetics of becoming." We cannot just look at the landscape as a simple two dimensional image, instead look at it as a strategy.
ReplyDeleteI also liked the discussion of diagrams (because I know they will definitely be a huge part of this semester). That “diagrams do not themselves produce form, but rather they emit formative and organizational influence, shape-giving pressures that cannot help but be embodied in all subsequent states of the given region of concrete reality in which they act.” I think it’s important to think of the diagrams as a way to show the systems and depths of the landscape that cannot be shown in just a plan or section.
This one really coincides well with this week's "device". It is refreshing to read and think about diagramming and how the before/after of a project are not the only phases. Many times we see projects transform through traditional plan, section, and perspective. All showing the final picture of that project. But what about the functions of that project that are not easily visible. Functions are what should make our projects, not some pretty flowers.
ReplyDeleteLandscape is not only something to be looked at but something to be interacted with. Corner writes, " Just as there is no innocent eye, there is no neutral or passive imaging, meaning that landscape too, as image, is neither inactive or benign." We need to think of Jamaica Bay as an active landscape, one that has life before and after us.
ReplyDeleteLandscapes are definitely seen and experienced differently by different people. people who visit a landscape for the first time will have a totally different reaction than those accustomed to the landscape because they experience it everyday. Thanks to the internet, anyone can choose any landscape they can imagine at the click of a button and view it. however, no matter how many times one sees it on the computer screen, its something totally new and exciting to experience it in person.
ReplyDelete"...not to mention the pathetic failing of most of what passes as landscaping today..."
In agreement with what he stated after that, i would like to see us merge landscapes and the people who use the landscapes into a more functional and productive program. how to do this, especially without sliding back towards agriculture and that sort of thing, im not sure, it was just a thought...
While I appreciated Corners argument for a landscape that is "productive and participatory" I felt that he was arguing against a landscape that is enjoyed passively. It is possible that I misinterpreted what his argument was, however he seemed to strongly disapprove of such things as scenic overlooks because "the scene itself displaces viewers, keeps them at a safe and uninvolved distance". He was also critical of the ability of similar landscapes to "detach the subject from the complex realities of the world".
ReplyDeletePerhaps a scenic overlook physically detaches the viewer from the landscape at which they view, but for him to claim that an the people who visit such places aren't connecting with the landscape is assumptive at bet, and moreover seems to reveal an elitist sort of mindset wherein there is a "right" and "correct" way to experience the landscape and if one is not actively involved in the shaping or working of it, one is not involved at all. A curious thought to have, especially since he is actively involved as a designer, so his definition of connection to the landscape conveniently includes him.
I think as designers we need to understand that people experience the world differently. For a designers there is this deeply embedded desire in us to get our hands dirty by actively shaping and engaging the earth. But we need to be aware that not everyone is like that, and we cannot discredit someone else's relationship to the landscape just because we cannot understand it or don't relate.
I greatly appreciated Corner's analysis of the words "landskip" and "landshaft". His words give a bit more meaning to our studies and explain how landscape design has gone from the creation of picturesque landscapes to the incorporation of personal experience and overall relationship.
ReplyDeleteI really think it is interesting how corner talks about the ideas of communication in design adn the difference between imaging and picturing. I think he makes a valid point that the landscape architecture industy must branch out and look for new definitions of media to communicate designs. I also really understood the relationship he was making with landshaft and landskip
ReplyDelete