LA

Landscape arch student

[operativelandscapes]

VODA

After seeing the exhibition, I was both surprised and shocked. It was well prepared and organized, the sequence of displayed material played a big role, certainly had a great impact on me. Pictures and presented data in the beginning of exhibition set you in the right frame of mind, make you think and create a kind of scare, anger and respect in you. While progressing further through the exhibition you have that constantly on your mind and watch everything with a kind of distance. Of course we know the facts, we know how much water we have and that we are in a way the lucky ones, living in this part of the world. It made me think that someday we could actually get involved in a war because of our luck and carelessness. As I said, we know the situation but we don't respect it, neither do we feel the need to appreciate our well being, which is really scary. As it is with manny everyday things, also water had a great impact on technology and science. Seeing the numerous devices and projects that happened because of our need to use, know and especially regulate water was really interesting. I certainly enjoyed the exhibition and would probably want to see it again if it was still displayed.

[operativelandscapes]

Vulnerable landscape

Using middle landscape as a source for getting our commodities while at the same time leaving dross behind, even destroying nature as is the case with most of the used middle landscape, is coming to an end. Sadly, not everywhere - yet. It is funny to think that with securing wilderness with National Parks and such or even with random birocratical directions such as Natura 2000, we feel better while at the same time carelessly using landscape that has no ''medal of ecological beauty''. Reusing drosscape and making new habitats is legit if the community understands what is happening. We shall not make it a common practice and thinking that if one habitat is reused and even better, restored, that we can then destroy one at the same time. That way, landscape is even more vulnerable because it is clearly being manipulated. If we strive to leave nature and only reuse what has been destroyed in the past while at the same time doing restorations and developing new technologies that will help new uses of reused landscape to not produce dross after a few 10 years, than we are doing it the right way in my opinion. In this case, nature is not vulnerable.

[operativelandscapes]

Socially seductive landscape

As a consequence of our past living, our needs and indifference on many aspects, we are trying to cure and save nature that has been lost. New landscapes and similar that are being produced to heal our past errors, must not only be environmentally productive but also socially seductive to be successful and to initiate a long term change. Author of Big Nature, Jane Amidon, thoroughly describes this problematic and its historical evolution. We have to incorporate our actions, as is the case here with remedial landscapes, into our lives, meaning that we understand the situation and therefore change our habits and eventually our lifestyle. It is not enough to build something that treats our careless past, but doesn't incorporate us there. To be socially seductive means to be publicly appealing in a way that integrates cultural and social function and development, while simultaneously raising awareness and educating the community. Our environment must raise a desire in us to participate and influence its evolution. We must be connected to our surroundings, start to give back what we destroyed and understand that everything is part of a bigger global system. This would influence our future decisions and lead into new kinds of societies and landscapes such as ecomodernism.

[operativelandscapes]

The City in Nature

Every existing settlement was essentialy build in space that was nature of some kind in its origin. Because of the city as a living and spreading organism, also it's surounding nature was transformed on short notice into second or third nature. To think of the city in nature as the concrete tissue nestled in first nature is not possible anymore. However, if you take into account all the surounding parts of second nature that were abandoned and are therefore being slowly converted into, let us say, a more natural variation of the second nature, because of succesion and such that takes place there, we can somehow presume that cities actualy exist in nature that is not a public park or garden. Some examples are clearer and visualy stronger because of the rich contrast.

[operativelandscapes]

Nature in the City

When one thinks of nature in the city, images of tree alleys, designed riverbanks, urban gardens and similar are the most common interpretations. Most of them are planned arrangements containing vegetation that are embedded within masses of concrete. These are mostly well kept after and mimic the public ideal and image of nature, but actualy don't have very much in common with it. True nature is untammed and free. Thats where neglected instances of originaly planned nature come into play. Because they are not kept after anymore, they probably represent the idea of truer nature in the city better.

[operativelandscapes]

The City as Nature

There are many different variations or interpretations of the city as nature. The most complex explanation would be to think of the city as an organism that breathes, grows, adapts and simply lives to accomodate everything that takes place in it. Or maybe to take the city as an enormous space – nature where different actors (people, traffic, architecture, infrastructure, industry etc.) exist and function, because of the city as a huge media that makes it possible. On the other hand, there are also very simple interpretations of the idea, for instance, where the city only visualy mimics nature, as is the case in this photograph. Forms for architecture came from objects or elements from wilderness. The tall buildings imitate high mountain peeks that can be actualy seen here in the distant background when the sky is clear and the design for the building on the left side derives from organic lines and structures that are found in living organisms.

[operativelandscapes]

Nature can have many different meanings. It can be someone’s backyard, it can be a group of trees in the middle of a street that is otherwise crowded with concrete, masses of building and such or it can be a wild landscape of rivers, ridges, mountains etc. saturated with untouched wildlife and vegetation. For me, nature certainly means a variation of somekind of the latter, but the understanding of nature probably has something to do with the environment one comes from. I was born in a small town with roughly around 10 000 inhabitants, nestled in a tight valley. The surounding hills are either  agricultural or not occupied at all because of the unstable terrain that is a consequence of local coal mine industry. There are more forrests, grass, cliffs and similar than there  are areas covered with housing, roads, industry and such. A five minute walk from my house brings me to the nearest meadow where I can watch a wild deer eating his breakfast in silence. A one hour walk takes me from an urban center through dense forrests on steep terrain to our local highest hill that is around 900m above sea level. There I am surounded with true nature, enyoing the smell of freshly felt trees and apart from hearing the birds sing, there is maybe a tractor or something similar that makes a sound every now and then and if it is a clear sunny day, you can see Kamnik and Julian Alps in the background, covered with snow. The only humans you meet are other peace and nature seekers that pass by, but if you know  the right spots, even they can be avoided.. This is for me the definiton of nature and in its strictest form it would mean the untouched areas of Patagonia, Alaska, Sahara and such. I seek nature to feel alive, to enjoy life in its most basic form, to free my mind and to find myself.