For centuries, gardens have been
used to relax the body, and the mind, and allow people to connect back to
nature whether that be in a suburban neighborhood or in an urban area. With the expansion of cities and urban
centers, people have sought this connection back to nature with the creation of
urban gardens and roof top gardens in urban centers. However, when
does the design of these gardens start to hinder their purpose and
functionality? At what point does
the garden become more of a design experiment and less of a functional space.
A good example of this is the
rooftop gardens on the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) in New York. The MOMA contracted famous landscape
architect Ken Smith to design a rooftop garden to spice up the roof. The new garden was scheduled to open at
the same time as the Groundswell exhibit.
Many were expecting great things from Smith and many were disappointed
by what the final product was. The
product was a 17,000 sq. ft. artificial garden consisting of 85 plastic rocks. 560 artificial boxwoods. 300 pounds of
clear crushed glass. 4 tons of recycled rubber mulch. The garden is not open to public use or circulation of any
sort and may only be seen from the adjacent buildings. While this garden requires little to no
maintenance or upkeep, at what expense is this achieved? The essence of the
garden here, in my opinion, is completely lost. The intimacy, the exploration, the tranquility, and the
connection to nature are lost because the garden is not occupiable. That is why
I believe this piece became a test of how far someone could push the meaning of
a garden. In this case, it was
pushed too far. I believe that, if
anything, this has become more of a piece of contemporary art, something just
to look at, than a garden. Are
garden is meant to be enjoyed and experienced, not looked at from far away.
This begs
the question of the viability of an artificial garden to be used as a
garden. Is it possible to
have such a garden that can create the same feeling as a true rooftop garden? In this case, I believe that there was
a disconnect between this installation and the true purpose of a garden. A much more successful green urban
installation, in my opinion, was the Lincoln Center’s green roof in the Hypar
Pavilion. This piece of green work can be explored and used by the public every
day during the warmer months of the year.
It allows the public to sit and enjoy a lawn much like the one they
might find in a less urbanized area.
In this sense It is much more successful than the artificial garden on
the roof of the MOMA. This is a
green installation that you can feel, touch, and enjoy. Architecturally this piece of work is
still very interesting as it is a twisted parabolic plane that is suspended by
what only seems like glass. While
this green installation does not boast the impressive size of the MOMA garden,
it can be used and enjoyed by the public.
It is not held up on a podium for the public to look at but not touch.http://agreenliving.org/tag/lincoln-center/
http://laud8.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/the-museum-of-modern-art-roof-garden-new-york/
http://serenityinthegarden.blogspot.it/2010/07/ken-smith-landscape-architect.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2005/mar/23/entertainment/et-moma23
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/11/garden/11NATU.html
http://www.greenroofs.com/projects/pview.php?id=423
No comments:
Post a Comment