This study was provoked by the recent detection of 541 unmarked burials signifying the recovery of the African American Burial Ground (AABG) on the grounds of Woodland Cemetery (WC) at Clemson University, South Carolina. A case study analysis of this coexistent sacred burial ground, initially for enslaved individuals of African descent interred during the pre-emancipation plantation era, seeks answers to fundamental questions: Was Clemson University aware of the AABG’s existence, and why did it take so long to act on preserving this sacred ground, historically known to the local descendant community? This study reveals that Clemson University’s negligence and cultural erasure during the 20th century has in the present day given way to an institutional commitment to truth-telling brought on by student activism and concerns about long-standing social inequities. The recovery of the AABG aligns with and contributes to work on “Black Geographies” and “Black Landscapes” (Woods, 2000; McKittrick & Woods, 2007; Boone, 2020; Hood 2020). The study examines the national reckoning among universities as they consider the legacy of slavery at their institutions and navigate justice (Wilder, 2014; Harris, et al., 2019). This research draws upon the author’s larger study on South Carolina’s landscape legacy and the synthesis of novel typologies beyond the normative classification of cultural landscapes (Padua, 2020). The commemoration of the AABG on campus is explored as a potential “reconciliatory landscape” conceptualized through the lens of “retrospective justice” drawn from the human rights literature (Russell, 2003; Roth, 2004). Status-quo attitudes are questioned as disruption to the norm instigates change and asserts social justice.
{"title":"Illuminating a Hidden Site","authors":"M. Padua","doi":"10.3368/lj.42.1.53","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.42.1.53","url":null,"abstract":"This study was provoked by the recent detection of 541 unmarked burials signifying the recovery of the African American Burial Ground (AABG) on the grounds of Woodland Cemetery (WC) at Clemson University, South Carolina. A case study analysis of this coexistent sacred burial ground, initially for enslaved individuals of African descent interred during the pre-emancipation plantation era, seeks answers to fundamental questions: Was Clemson University aware of the AABG’s existence, and why did it take so long to act on preserving this sacred ground, historically known to the local descendant community? This study reveals that Clemson University’s negligence and cultural erasure during the 20th century has in the present day given way to an institutional commitment to truth-telling brought on by student activism and concerns about long-standing social inequities. The recovery of the AABG aligns with and contributes to work on “Black Geographies” and “Black Landscapes” (Woods, 2000; McKittrick & Woods, 2007; Boone, 2020; Hood 2020). The study examines the national reckoning among universities as they consider the legacy of slavery at their institutions and navigate justice (Wilder, 2014; Harris, et al., 2019). This research draws upon the author’s larger study on South Carolina’s landscape legacy and the synthesis of novel typologies beyond the normative classification of cultural landscapes (Padua, 2020). The commemoration of the AABG on campus is explored as a potential “reconciliatory landscape” conceptualized through the lens of “retrospective justice” drawn from the human rights literature (Russell, 2003; Roth, 2004). Status-quo attitudes are questioned as disruption to the norm instigates change and asserts social justice.","PeriodicalId":54062,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"53 - 75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45382914","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
To substantively advance sustainability and equity, landscape architecture scholars must reform our own scholarly norms. To increase the influence of our discipline and offer practitioners and communities more relevant knowledge and tools, we can build on our strong tradition of transdisciplinary work to: 1) more credibly affect and be informed by knowledge in other socio-environmental disciplines that study landscapes and communities, and 2) confront our own “two cultures” problem in which science may be misunderstood as limiting creative excellence. To achieve these aims, I suggest we employ the landscape as a transdisciplinary boundary object—recognizing that all landscapes function within dynamic multiscalar socio-environmental systems, and viewing both commonplace and unique landscapes as essential objects of our scholarship. Doing this presents opportunities for individual scholars to serially specialize in different areas of landscape inquiry, teaching and learning from colleagues and communities throughout our careers, and to be credible leaders of transdisciplinary science. It also offers a conceptual frame for activating boundary work between the two cultures within our own discipline. Importantly, it also helps us to be more fully prepared to teach future practitioners to use landscape science in design and planning, empowering the profession to support communities in advancing sustainability and equity.
{"title":"Transdisciplinarity and Boundary Work for Landscape Architecture Scholars","authors":"J. Nassauer","doi":"10.3368/lj.42.1.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.42.1.1","url":null,"abstract":"To substantively advance sustainability and equity, landscape architecture scholars must reform our own scholarly norms. To increase the influence of our discipline and offer practitioners and communities more relevant knowledge and tools, we can build on our strong tradition of transdisciplinary work to: 1) more credibly affect and be informed by knowledge in other socio-environmental disciplines that study landscapes and communities, and 2) confront our own “two cultures” problem in which science may be misunderstood as limiting creative excellence. To achieve these aims, I suggest we employ the landscape as a transdisciplinary boundary object—recognizing that all landscapes function within dynamic multiscalar socio-environmental systems, and viewing both commonplace and unique landscapes as essential objects of our scholarship. Doing this presents opportunities for individual scholars to serially specialize in different areas of landscape inquiry, teaching and learning from colleagues and communities throughout our careers, and to be credible leaders of transdisciplinary science. It also offers a conceptual frame for activating boundary work between the two cultures within our own discipline. Importantly, it also helps us to be more fully prepared to teach future practitioners to use landscape science in design and planning, empowering the profession to support communities in advancing sustainability and equity.","PeriodicalId":54062,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"1 - 11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47202494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ad hoc urbanism—activities performed in public space that fall outside of the officially sanctioned uses of that space—is usually met with regulations that attempt to control or criminalize the offending actions, which de Certeau (1984) has called “‘waste products’ of a functionalist administration” (p. 94). But unsanctioned improvisatory use patterns can convey information about what people require of their public places. Instead of dismissing these uses as undesirable and erasing them from public view, landscape architects can instead reframe them as justifications for expanding or altering programs to create public spaces that provide commons to a diverse citizenry for the purposes of living, regenerating community, and asserting civic rights and responsibilities. Using news stories, case studies, and field observations, this article investigates examples of ad hoc urbanism to explore how landscape architects might accommodate their embedded meanings and expand the functionality and fairness of urban design.
{"title":"Guerrillas in Our Midst","authors":"Sue Abbey","doi":"10.3368/lj.42.1.77","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.42.1.77","url":null,"abstract":"Ad hoc urbanism—activities performed in public space that fall outside of the officially sanctioned uses of that space—is usually met with regulations that attempt to control or criminalize the offending actions, which de Certeau (1984) has called “‘waste products’ of a functionalist administration” (p. 94). But unsanctioned improvisatory use patterns can convey information about what people require of their public places. Instead of dismissing these uses as undesirable and erasing them from public view, landscape architects can instead reframe them as justifications for expanding or altering programs to create public spaces that provide commons to a diverse citizenry for the purposes of living, regenerating community, and asserting civic rights and responsibilities. Using news stories, case studies, and field observations, this article investigates examples of ad hoc urbanism to explore how landscape architects might accommodate their embedded meanings and expand the functionality and fairness of urban design.","PeriodicalId":54062,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"77 - 90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48594209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
L. Manzo, Daniel R. Williams, Andrés Di Masso, C. M. Raymond, N. Gulsrud
Uncertainty and change are the hallmarks of contemporary life. Global climate change, ecological regime shifts, and urban transformations catalyze new levels of socio-spatial precarity. Exacerbated by political and economic conditions, accelerating change and uncertainty have disrupted people-place relationships and created anxiety around real and perceived place loss and threat. In this article, we outline the potential of senses of place—both pluralized and politicized—to generate new possibilities for thinking, acting, and designing in response to disruption. Three different case studies demonstrate how senses of place can guide us through disruption. For each case, we examine the nature of the disruption/place change, describe how senses of place are involved in the disruption, and consider the role of landscape architecture in helping communities respond. Together, these cases demonstrate that a deeper understanding of senses of place offers a way to respond to disruptions that enables new beginnings to unfold, facilitates the coproduction of knowledge, and supports socio-spatial justice.
{"title":"Using Senses of Place to Help Communities Navigate Place Disruption and Uncertainty","authors":"L. Manzo, Daniel R. Williams, Andrés Di Masso, C. M. Raymond, N. Gulsrud","doi":"10.3368/lj.42.1.37","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.42.1.37","url":null,"abstract":"Uncertainty and change are the hallmarks of contemporary life. Global climate change, ecological regime shifts, and urban transformations catalyze new levels of socio-spatial precarity. Exacerbated by political and economic conditions, accelerating change and uncertainty have disrupted people-place relationships and created anxiety around real and perceived place loss and threat. In this article, we outline the potential of senses of place—both pluralized and politicized—to generate new possibilities for thinking, acting, and designing in response to disruption. Three different case studies demonstrate how senses of place can guide us through disruption. For each case, we examine the nature of the disruption/place change, describe how senses of place are involved in the disruption, and consider the role of landscape architecture in helping communities respond. Together, these cases demonstrate that a deeper understanding of senses of place offers a way to respond to disruptions that enables new beginnings to unfold, facilitates the coproduction of knowledge, and supports socio-spatial justice.","PeriodicalId":54062,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"37 - 52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48788490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
that advances design pedagogy and practice amid the messy, inarticulate amusement park ride that is creativity and design education today. Designers and instructors alike can feel lost in the rapidly degrading environment and digitizing world in which we are focused on quickly arriving at “the correct answer.” Here Professor Robertson asks us to slow down and take the time to find out for ourselves what the most important questions and problems are and what answers and options are available for solving them. Emeritus Professor Robertson gave tirelessly to develop and test practices in creative thought and expression throughout his tenure in the Department of Landscape Architecture at the University of Washington. He has used his masterful skills in collage and wordsmithing to wrap up his knowledge and experience in this reflective and expressive text, including the beautifully crafted collages and notes that adds authenticity and a unique textural quality to our relationship with the author. Art, iteration, and play are too easily overlooked or even lost in our rapid simplification of design methods and processes, but ironically, they are critical to success. Professor Robertson’s book begs for a revolution. Throughout these pages, Professor Robertson encourages us to break the rules, color outside the lines, and ultimately enhance our life and our learning through an authentic and creative design process. After surviving colliding and multifaceted crises over the past few years, the idea of working to develop more “fluid” or “sovereign” minds may seem elusive to many educators. In these challenging times, Cultivating Creativity comes as a rare and timely gift from an expert in both mindfulness and whimsy. Design leaders and educators would do well to keep this book on hand for discovering endless ideas and opportunities for enriching group and classroom experiences, student learning outcomes, discussions, and personal creative and design identity.
{"title":"Against the Anthropocene","authors":"T. Eisenman","doi":"10.3368/lj.42.1.140","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.42.1.140","url":null,"abstract":"that advances design pedagogy and practice amid the messy, inarticulate amusement park ride that is creativity and design education today. Designers and instructors alike can feel lost in the rapidly degrading environment and digitizing world in which we are focused on quickly arriving at “the correct answer.” Here Professor Robertson asks us to slow down and take the time to find out for ourselves what the most important questions and problems are and what answers and options are available for solving them. Emeritus Professor Robertson gave tirelessly to develop and test practices in creative thought and expression throughout his tenure in the Department of Landscape Architecture at the University of Washington. He has used his masterful skills in collage and wordsmithing to wrap up his knowledge and experience in this reflective and expressive text, including the beautifully crafted collages and notes that adds authenticity and a unique textural quality to our relationship with the author. Art, iteration, and play are too easily overlooked or even lost in our rapid simplification of design methods and processes, but ironically, they are critical to success. Professor Robertson’s book begs for a revolution. Throughout these pages, Professor Robertson encourages us to break the rules, color outside the lines, and ultimately enhance our life and our learning through an authentic and creative design process. After surviving colliding and multifaceted crises over the past few years, the idea of working to develop more “fluid” or “sovereign” minds may seem elusive to many educators. In these challenging times, Cultivating Creativity comes as a rare and timely gift from an expert in both mindfulness and whimsy. Design leaders and educators would do well to keep this book on hand for discovering endless ideas and opportunities for enriching group and classroom experiences, student learning outcomes, discussions, and personal creative and design identity.","PeriodicalId":54062,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"140 - 142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46807373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article posits that resiliency and adaptation in landscape architecture studio projects must plan for changes and feedback loops. With this premise in mind, the article evaluates a landscape architecture design studio focused on designing and planning adaptive landscapes that are part of the Los Angeles River and its surrounding neighborhoods. Students were charged with planning for change over time and designing multiple scenarios that assume various forms and vagaries in management, care, environmental conditions, and policies, while also connecting to community needs. Their designs were guides that envisioned a range of possibilities—feedback loops creating environmental and social resiliencies that provide value over time. The studio and this article build on Joan Woodward’s (2008) work suggesting several shifts in landscape design practice for progressing toward resilient landscapes that accommodate surprise and disruption. The case study methods evaluating the studio approach included external and internal reviews of students’ work, student written reflections regarding the course, and instructors’ reflections on the work. Some reviewers felt the paucity of final state perspective renderings in some students’ work equated to diminished design rigor. Some students pushed back on the studio’s interdisciplinary scope, but others looked beyond fixed design solutions, giving entire systems deep consideration by considering how to provide economic resiliency toolkits and adopt best practices that could unfold and adapt over time based on a particular neighborhood’s needs and desires. Overall, the studio serves as a model for teaching that advances Woodward’s concepts and promotes her goal of seeing design as an infinite rather than finite game (Carse, 1986; Woodward, 2008).
{"title":"Teaching Design as an Infinite Game","authors":"Noah Billig, T. Kjer","doi":"10.3368/lj.42.1.91","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.42.1.91","url":null,"abstract":"This article posits that resiliency and adaptation in landscape architecture studio projects must plan for changes and feedback loops. With this premise in mind, the article evaluates a landscape architecture design studio focused on designing and planning adaptive landscapes that are part of the Los Angeles River and its surrounding neighborhoods. Students were charged with planning for change over time and designing multiple scenarios that assume various forms and vagaries in management, care, environmental conditions, and policies, while also connecting to community needs. Their designs were guides that envisioned a range of possibilities—feedback loops creating environmental and social resiliencies that provide value over time. The studio and this article build on Joan Woodward’s (2008) work suggesting several shifts in landscape design practice for progressing toward resilient landscapes that accommodate surprise and disruption. The case study methods evaluating the studio approach included external and internal reviews of students’ work, student written reflections regarding the course, and instructors’ reflections on the work. Some reviewers felt the paucity of final state perspective renderings in some students’ work equated to diminished design rigor. Some students pushed back on the studio’s interdisciplinary scope, but others looked beyond fixed design solutions, giving entire systems deep consideration by considering how to provide economic resiliency toolkits and adopt best practices that could unfold and adapt over time based on a particular neighborhood’s needs and desires. Overall, the studio serves as a model for teaching that advances Woodward’s concepts and promotes her goal of seeing design as an infinite rather than finite game (Carse, 1986; Woodward, 2008).","PeriodicalId":54062,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"91 - 107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44070073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：