I believe that ‘landscape’ is a term that can mean something very different to each of us, and our clients. These meanings or definitions greatly influence the design process and the overall outcome and expectations. For example, what one person sees as a ‘natural landscape’ could very well be perceived as ‘weeds’ to another.
I recently led a discussion on the topic: “Landscape + Architecture = ???” during which I examined the larger picture of how landscape integrates with architecture during the design process and as a finished project. I presented several projects that integrate landscape with architecture in very different ways–highlighting the merits and downfalls of the examples. Through this discussion, I hoped to develop a greater awareness of landscape architecture and the positive impact it has on architectural projects. I asked that we question our own process as we work together as architects and landscape architects.
Our discussion focused on a few of the following questions:
– Is landscape an extension of the building? Or is the building an extension of the landscape?
– Is it important that a landscape acknowledge the site? Is the acknowledgement metaphor, or ecology?
– Is landscape a work of art? Or is landscape artful inhabitation?
– Does sustainable mean natural? When is natural not sustainable?
To dig deeper, view my presentation here.
What do you think? What are some landscapes you love? Are there any that you hate? Why?