20.10.2014 Views

building the american landscape - Univerza v Novi Gorici

building the american landscape - Univerza v Novi Gorici

building the american landscape - Univerza v Novi Gorici

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Vaux complemented Olmsted, he had a good knowledge of <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ories of <strong>the</strong><br />

picturesque garden, and in addition, he was a skilled designer with varied<br />

experiences and projects behind him. After <strong>the</strong> death of Downing, Vaux had been<br />

able to personally revise <strong>the</strong> ideas of his old partner and friend. Without betraying<br />

<strong>the</strong> spirit underlying <strong>the</strong> first American experience, he had also dedicated himself to<br />

<strong>the</strong> publication of a book entitled Villas and Cottages (1857), which appeared to be<br />

an amalgamation of <strong>the</strong> ideas of Emerson and Ruskin.<br />

In <strong>the</strong> Central Park project, toge<strong>the</strong>r with Olmsted for whom this was his very first<br />

project, Vaux attempted to reintegrate nature into <strong>the</strong> city on <strong>the</strong> basis of<br />

principles, which <strong>the</strong> work of men, such as Henry David Thoreau or George Perkins<br />

Marsh, had disseminated. Olmsted and Vaux conceived an urban park, which was<br />

not just an unbuilt area intended as a green space to meet <strong>the</strong> recreational needs of<br />

<strong>the</strong> citizens of a large city like New York, but which was a project capable of<br />

endorsing <strong>the</strong> recognition of some of nature’s rights and <strong>the</strong> public aims of<br />

<strong>landscape</strong> design [Figures 121‐122]. The “regressive utopias”, designed at <strong>the</strong><br />

beginning of <strong>the</strong> century in both town planning and literature could be seen to have<br />

clearly evolved in <strong>the</strong> daily debate to become a political and city management<br />

problem. There was no longer space for <strong>the</strong> picturesque dreams of Downing’s Mall<br />

project [Figure 117]. Although <strong>the</strong>re were analogies between <strong>the</strong> two projects,<br />

what became clear immediately was <strong>the</strong> different conception of <strong>the</strong> relationship<br />

between city and park. Downing’s separatist project aimed to build a parallel world<br />

as an alternative to that of <strong>the</strong> city, in an attempt to soften <strong>the</strong> contradictions. The<br />

Central Park project followed <strong>the</strong> logic of an innovative style, which featured<br />

winding paths. The programmatic separation between pedestrians and carriages or<br />

for horse riding [Figure 127] implied an awareness that <strong>the</strong> city could flow into<br />

fragments of a specially created, natural and pastoral world. Having won <strong>the</strong><br />

competition, Olmsted was nominated “Architect in Chief of <strong>the</strong> Central Park”, <strong>the</strong><br />

preceding offices of head engineer and superintendant were abolished, and<br />

between 1859 and 1861 <strong>the</strong> main <strong>landscape</strong> work began.<br />

As his first job in his new office, Olmsted gave permission for Vaux and o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

assistants to be called in. The two project designers won with a project <strong>the</strong>y called<br />

158

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!