Modern Landscape Architecture: A Critical Review

Rating:
Summary: Lagging behind architecture, but finally catching up.
Review: The editor, Marc Treib, said in the introduction that ideas in the field of landscape architecture is 15 years behind architecture(and architure is behind art for another 15 years). But for the history of modernism, landscape architecture seemed to be behind architecture for several decades. Finally, landscape architecture has its own history.This book can be read along with "Invisible Gardens" (MIT Press, 1994)written by art critics Melaine Simo and landscape architect Peter Walker.That would makes a general picture of what modernism in landscape architecture is like.

But what happened after modernism? For those who really interested in the subject of modernism/postmodernism in landscape architecture, i suggest them to read essays in Landscape Journal, e.g "Cubist space, Volumetric space, and Landscape Architecture" by Patrick M. Condon(spring, 1988),who called for a transition of design paradigms of landscape architecture in the late 20th century ; or "Form, Meaning, and Expression in Landscape Architecture" by Laurie Olin, who had criticized some important classical, modern and contemporary landscape architectural works. That would makes a more comprehensive and in-depth exploration in the changing ideas of landscape architecture. It's kind of pity that "a critical review" is just an anthology of pappers in one single symposium(and some historical documents) that some important concepts like Condon's were elimated. So a more coherent and critical history of modern(even 20th century) landscape architecture is still expectative.