MSN did an article with the aid of professional landscape designers on what they consider landscaping sins. What struck me to be very strange about this article is the many times, "nature," was used. One of the no-no's was the marching flowers (flowers in a row) because they don't look "natural" because that's not "in" right now.
"Now we plant in mass groupings, more like nature does," says Donovan. "Bunched together, in a bouquet effect, that attracts the eye."
However, Sin # 4 is about having too much.
The upshot? "They'll get this hodgepodge effect," says Donovan, who sees it often. But using lots of colors all over the place "produces chaos," she says. "That's too busy for the eye. It's like wearing too much jewelry." And often all of the color don't complement the home -- one of landscaping's chief goals.
It seems strange to glean elements of nature for some parts, but not for others. It's okay to feign the idea of nature, as long as it is trimmed regularly.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I dont think designer hates a daisy for being daisy but for that particualr color field they are working in, a pallatte. What if picassos blue peoriod were painted in red? they would be totally diff er ent
landscaping is just part of the blending process [ into nature"]
to do that requires artistic sense,
a single flower is nothing more than a drop of paint. to criticize is to undermine the right of expression
There's a really interesting article on Skyfarming in New York Magazine. Verticle farms that create energy, are solar powered, and could possibly help fight global warming.
It's along the same lines as the "not too natural" idea though. Here's a quote:
Growing crops in a controlled environment has benefits: no animals to transfer disease through untreated waste; no massive crop failures as a result of weather-related disasters; less likelihood of genetically modified “rogue” strains entering the “natural” plant world. All food could be grown organically, without herbicides, pesticides, or fertilizers, eliminating agricultural runoff. And 80 percent of the world’s population will be living in urban areas by 2050. Cities already have the density and infrastructure needed to support vertical farms, and super-green skyscrapers could supply not just food but energy, creating a truly self-sustaining environment.
I can't decide if it's terrifying, a good solution to a problem that's not going to get any smaller or a little bit of both.
Post a Comment