Garden Design and Architects' Gardens: Two reviews, illustrated, to show, by actual examples from British gardens, that clipping and aligning trees to make them 'harmonise' with architecture is barbarous, needless, and inartistic — John Shaqi
Garden Design and Architects' Gardens: Two reviews, illustrated, to show, by actual examples from British gardens, that clipping and aligning trees to make them 'harmonise' with architecture is barbarous, needless, and inartisticRobinson, W. (William)
General
Garden Design and Architects' Gardens: Two reviews, illustrated, to show, by actual examples from British gardens, that clipping and aligning trees to make them 'harmonise' with architecture is barbarous, needless, and inartistic
Robinson, W. (William)
Blomfield, Reginald Theodore, Sir, 1856-1942. Formal garden in England; Landscape gardening; Sedding, John D. (John Dando), 1838-1891. Garden-craft old and new
Equally stupid is the assumption, throughout the book, that the people
the authors are pleased to term "landscapists" flop their houses down in
the Grass, and never use low walls for dividing lines, nor terraces
where necessary, never use walls for shelter or privacy, have no "order"
or "balance," and presumably allow the Nettles to look in at the
windows, and the cattle to have a fine time with the Carnations!
[Illustration: Tailpiece]
NO GRASS IN LANDSCAPE GARDENING!
The following glaring piece of injustice is due to want of the most
elementary consideration of garden design:--
Grass-work as an artistic quantity can hardly be said to exist in
landscape gardening. It is there considered simply as so much
background to be broken up with shrubs and Pampas Grass and irregular
beds (p. 135).
The opposite of this is the fact. Grass-work as an "artistic
quantity" did not exist in anything like the same degree before
landscape gardening. One of the faults of the formal style of gardening
still seen in France and Austria is that there is little or no Grass.
Compare the Jardin des Plantes in Paris with the Parc Monceau, or the
many other gardens about Paris in which Grass is an "artistic quantity."
One of the most effective reasons indeed for adopting the English
landscape garden was that it gave people some fresh and open Grass,
often with picturesque surroundings, and, nowadays, one can hardly
travel on the continent and not see some pleasant results of this. In
England, the landscape gardeners and writers have almost destroyed every
trace of the stiff old formal gardens, and we cannot judge the ill
effects of the builder's garden so easily as in France. As a rule, the
want of rest and freshness in tropical and sub-tropical gardens is due
to the absence of those broad and airy breadths of greensward which, in
gardens at least, are largely due to landscape gardening. Think of
Warwick without its turf and glorious untrimmed Cedars!
[Illustration: _Goodwood. Example of large English places in which the
grass sweeps up to the house_]
Consider the difference between a picturesque landscape like the
Emperor of Austria's stately garden at Laxenberg, near Vienna, and the
gardens in the same city formed of miserable clipped trees in lines!
Grass as an "artistic quantity" is finely visible at Laxenberg; in the
old clipped gardens gravel and distorted trees are the only things seen
in quantity--we cannot call it "artistic."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account