Challenging the Pictorial: Recent Landscape Practice
In the article, Challenging the Pictorial: Recent Landscape Practice, Julia Czerniak questions the traditional practice of the pictorial portrayal of landscape and examines alternative methods for representation and communication of ideas within the landscape. The representation of nature with “pretty pictures” contributes to the objectification of nature and the misunderstanding of nature’s many roles and functions. Techniques established in the field of landscape painting constrain and confuse the development of built landscape and impart cultural ideas and attitudes which manipulate our perception of nature.
In Taking Measures Across the American Landscape, Alex MacLean’s pictorial aerial photographs are juxtaposed beside James Corner’s map-drawings, which portray invisible aspects of the landscape to represent nature as a process. George Hargreaves’s Process: Architecture discusses the representation of landscape through abstract depictions rather than naturalistic illustrations. Adriaan Geuze challenges the convention of representing the landscape as a park or garden by depicting green area as a necessary and active system within the city. In reading this article I have come to better understand the notion of representing invisible aspects of the landscape to make visible the essence of the landscape. The article has illuminated the importance within the field of Landscape Architecture of abandoning traditional strategies of landscape representation to render the landscape’s function. The landscape should be presented as a dynamic process not a static picture to be admired for its aesthetic quality.
The Machine in the Garden
Leo Marx, in The Machine in the Garden, effectively explores the impact of the Industrial Revolution and the mechanization of society on American writers. Marx considers the inability to associate a literary work’s underlying theme with its physical and temporal setting and the difficulty of proving an author’s intent but also suggests a connection established in response to imagery employed. While it is extremely difficult to prove Hawthorne’s intentions, Marx addresses the evidence of symbolism in “Ethan Brand” which suggests an association between the short stories traditional theme and the changes taking place in Hawthorne’s time. The Industrial Revolution further provoked the conflict between civilization and nature.
While “Ethan Brand” contains no mention of industrialism or the massive factories which began polluting the landscape, I agree with Marx’s interpretation of the story as a response to the situation. Characters of the story are represented as victims of change with the responsible “separator” being technology. The representation of the kiln as a source of evil juxtaposed against the golden sun further supports Marx’s claim. We recognize the identical theme in Melville’s Moby Dick, published three years later. In my interpretation, Hawthorne and Melville view man and technology as serious threats to nature and the pastoral, and perhaps in fear of breaking convention, use symbolism to communicate their concerns regarding the conflict between technology and nature.
Transparency: Literal and Phenomenal
In this article, authors Colin Rowe and Robert Slutzky explore the idea of transparency in respect to two very distinct meanings of the word. The first, literal transparency, refers to the idea of being able to see through something that is translucent, such as glass or plastic. Phenomenal transparency, on the other hand, is a concept which, to me, is quite a bit more difficult to explain. I understand phenomenal transparency to be either the same or very similar to the idea of “slippage.” I believe it to refer to the space or area or form created through an actual absence of form altogether, or a void. Though the idea is explained through the use of various examples of Cubist paintings and modern architecture, I was not able to fully wrap my head around the idea.
The final paragraph I found most helpful in clarifying the difference between literal and phenomenal transparency. Here I was presented with the metaphor of space within the two buildings represented by water. Rowe and Slutzky describe Le Corbusier’s League of Nations as a dam tunneling, containing, embanking, and then depositing water, while the Bauhaus is presented as a reef, washed over by a quiet tide. Also useful was the comparison between Moholy-Nagy’s La Sarraz and Leger’s The Three Faces. Rowe and Slutzky explain Moholy’s focus on materials and light (literal transparency) in contrast to Leger’s emphasis on structure and form (phenomenal transparency).
Enjoy Vaping With Amazing Vape Juice Flavors
4 years ago
5 comments:
In Jessie's statement, "I have come to better understand the notion of representing invisible aspects of the landscape to make visible the essence of the landscape," she clearly summarizes the most important point of the article by Czerniak.
She emphasizes the notion of Czerniak that a landscape that is both multi-functional and works as an ecological system, rather than a work to be solely viewed. In other words, a landscape must first "work," and though it may not be visible to the viewer, the little well thought pieces make for a landscape that can be experienced on many more levels than just visually.
In Jessie's review of the Czerniak article, I think she hits the nail on the head. Particularly with respect to the challenge of depicting aspects of the landscape that are invisible like natural processes, smell, sound, etc. It is a necessary to think outside the pictorial "box" in order to begin to capture other dimensions of the landscape. I guess after reading Jessie's and Czerniak's review of current work, I'm still left wondering how do we communicate these things effectively and creatively?
I also think Jessie's response to "The Machine in the Garden" excellently sums up the main struggle that Marx is examining in this literary period. However, while Jessie surmises that perhaps the authors, Melville and Hawthorne, used symbolism and metaphor to communicate their conflicting feelings about the Industrial Revolution in order to avoid breaking the convention of that time, I disagree. The point that Marx is making in this essay is that people during this period, as evidenced by the literature, didn't have a full awareness of what was happening around them and so were unable to fully communicate their feelings about it. They did not yet have the words or concepts to express their fears so it came out in symbolism that tried its best to capture those emotions and experiences. In hindsight, we realize that these authors actually captured the time period and the emotional turmoil quite accurately and eloquently despite it all.
I completely agree with what you have said, Emily, but while the authors during this period were not completely aware of how to address the changes taking place during this time, I do believe the representation of these ideas as symbols and metaphors was intentional. I suppose I could have been more clear when I mentioned the breaking of convention for what I meant by that phrase was going against conventional ideas of the time and questioning the "progress" taking place during this period.
Jessie,
I think an example of phenomenal transparency that we are encountering is the section elevations. For example in our first section elevation of the quad, maybe the library was in the background and then a tree might be placed right in front of it, when in actuality it was forty feet away. But on our piece of paper they are placed directly on top of one another. I'm not positive the section elevations are considered phenomenal transparency, but it seems like they would be.
Post a Comment