著：（加拿大）蘇珊·赫林頓 譯：呂回 校：魏方

材料，包括對(duì)其使用、操作和裝配，是景觀設(shè)計(jì)的重要維度，因?yàn)槿藗冎苯雍途坝^材料發(fā)生聯(lián)系。材料可以傳達(dá)信息。景觀理論家烏多·維拉赫（Udo Weilacher）表示“材料是一種媒介，可以影響作品中比喻和象征的信息”[1]。正因?yàn)椴牧蠘?gòu)成了景觀自身的物理屬性，所以材料的制造方式—萃取、收割、鑄造或是培育—都可能造成嚴(yán)重的生態(tài)破壞和社會(huì)影響。第二次世界大戰(zhàn)后，風(fēng)景園林師渴望使用百姓能夠獲得的新材料。對(duì)風(fēng)景園林師和建筑師來(lái)說(shuō)，之前那些和戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)相關(guān)而被限制使用的材料和制造方式逐漸成為一種可選用的資源。設(shè)計(jì)師都開(kāi)始改造戰(zhàn)后的材料、商品和體系，并形成一種現(xiàn)代設(shè)計(jì)的語(yǔ)匯。一些批量生產(chǎn)并遍布全球的材料開(kāi)始成為現(xiàn)代景觀設(shè)計(jì)的象征。1956年美國(guó)鋁公司（ALCOA）贊助蓋瑞特·埃克博（Garrett Eckbo）設(shè)計(jì)了ALCOA花園（Forecast Garden）。鋁材作為一種極佳的戶外材料，在該花園的設(shè)計(jì)中得到了推廣。鋁不僅質(zhì)量輕、不生銹，而且易穿孔的特性使其適合用作格柵棚架[2]。直至20世紀(jì)80年代后期，《布倫特蘭報(bào)告》（Brurdtland Report）指出人們認(rèn)識(shí)到氣候急劇變化和人類活動(dòng)有密切關(guān)系，這才促使風(fēng)景園林師在選擇材料時(shí)開(kāi)始考慮可能造成的生態(tài)影響。

1 物質(zhì)性的理論基礎(chǔ)

“物質(zhì)產(chǎn)生于過(guò)去到現(xiàn)在的時(shí)間流動(dòng)中，是偶發(fā)的因果關(guān)系所定義的結(jié)果。而物質(zhì)性產(chǎn)生于未來(lái)向現(xiàn)在的時(shí)間回溯中，在很多具有能動(dòng)性的現(xiàn)實(shí)情境中被定義?，F(xiàn)實(shí)的困境在于，讓普通民眾理解這些問(wèn)題比科學(xué)家難得多。”[3]

——布努諾·拉圖爾，《人類世時(shí)代的能動(dòng)性》，2014年

物質(zhì)性為設(shè)計(jì)提供了一個(gè)理論視角，不僅將物質(zhì)簡(jiǎn)單地作為實(shí)體、形態(tài)、體量和表皮，而是將物質(zhì)作為一種連接當(dāng)下與未來(lái)的媒介。在引言中，科學(xué)家布努諾·拉圖爾辨析了物質(zhì)和物質(zhì)性。他解釋了物質(zhì)從“過(guò)去流向現(xiàn)在”，而物質(zhì)性指向了未來(lái)?！拔镔|(zhì)在未來(lái)會(huì)發(fā)生什么變化” “物質(zhì)如何隨著時(shí)間推移相互作用”，以及“物質(zhì)如何被轉(zhuǎn)譯”構(gòu)成了關(guān)于物質(zhì)性的關(guān)鍵問(wèn)題[4]。拉圖爾對(duì)于物質(zhì)性的認(rèn)識(shí)是行動(dòng)者網(wǎng)絡(luò)理論（the Actor-Network Theory）的一部分，可在“系統(tǒng)”（請(qǐng)參見(jiàn)原書）一章讀到。關(guān)于物質(zhì)性的問(wèn)題，本文筆者聚焦在物質(zhì)性和物質(zhì)符號(hào)學(xué)的關(guān)系。它將語(yǔ)義研究進(jìn)行了拓展，從傳統(tǒng)的對(duì)語(yǔ)言學(xué)的研究，拓展到對(duì)那些可以產(chǎn)生語(yǔ)義的物質(zhì)過(guò)程和技術(shù)工具的研究。正如地理學(xué)家史蒂夫·辛科利夫（Steve Hinchliffe）所說(shuō)“物質(zhì)符號(hào)學(xué)最重要的功能是識(shí)別人類和非人類的時(shí)間和空間，以及他們?cè)诠餐瑯?gòu)成世界的過(guò)程中所扮演的角色”[5]。此外，拉圖爾還重點(diǎn)強(qiáng)調(diào)了“能動(dòng)性”（agency）：“很多具有能動(dòng)性的情境”。能動(dòng)性在這里指的是人類或物體的行動(dòng)能力，在結(jié)論章節(jié)（請(qǐng)參見(jiàn)原書）這一觀點(diǎn)將得到具體闡述。

唯物主義者（materialist）的思想的起源可以追溯到蘇格拉底之前的希臘哲學(xué)家們。古代唯物主義認(rèn)為，從人的感覺(jué)到天體系統(tǒng)這一切宇宙現(xiàn)象的根本來(lái)源都是自然。這一概念還認(rèn)為，“自然獨(dú)立于心靈（mind）而存在，但沒(méi)有任何心靈可以脫離物質(zhì)而存在。物質(zhì)世界早在人類或其他生物出現(xiàn)之前就存在了”[6]。18世紀(jì)，保羅·亨利·蒂爾（Paul Henri Thiry）、保爾·霍爾巴赫（Baron d’ Holbach，1723—1789）出版了《自然系統(tǒng)、精神世界和物質(zhì)世界的法則》，在哲學(xué)唯物主義的框架下描繪了宇宙。他認(rèn)為，每一件事或行為，甚至思想和情感，都是受自然規(guī)律支配的物質(zhì)相互作用的結(jié)果。這一版本的哲學(xué)唯物主義認(rèn)為，一切事物，包括意識(shí)和思想（精神），都與物質(zhì)有偶發(fā)的因果關(guān)系。當(dāng)然，隨著物理學(xué)不斷更新有關(guān)物質(zhì)的概念，唯心主義者和科學(xué)家也一直在爭(zhēng)論唯物主義中關(guān)于物質(zhì)的概念。由于唯物主義者否認(rèn)精神（spirit）的存在，唯物主義與大多數(shù)宗教的宇宙觀是不一致的。哲學(xué)唯物主義是本文中的一個(gè)重要方面，即材料作為特定類型的物質(zhì)，在塑造它的設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程中，人們得以思考和表達(dá)精神和物質(zhì)之間的因果關(guān)系。

除了哲學(xué)唯物主義，物質(zhì)性的定義也受到了考古學(xué)、人類學(xué)和社會(huì)學(xué)研究的影響，它們共同構(gòu)成物質(zhì)文化的研究。物質(zhì)文化（material culture）研究試圖通過(guò)研究風(fēng)物—它們的對(duì)象、資源和空間——去認(rèn)識(shí)一個(gè)特定群體或社會(huì)，這些風(fēng)物包括從花園到建筑、從杯子到針線包在內(nèi)的各種物體。正如物質(zhì)文化教授喬伊斯·希爾·斯通納（Joyce Hill Stoner）所定義的那樣，“物質(zhì)文化是對(duì)歷史和日常物品的拆封或挖掘，以發(fā)現(xiàn)內(nèi)在的思想和概念，這些思想和概念往往定義了其所在的社會(huì)的狀態(tài)”[7]。因此，研究一個(gè)特定的景觀，研究它的物質(zhì)狀態(tài)和潛在稟賦，將會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)是什么人或動(dòng)物塑造了這個(gè)景觀，以及他們的信仰和習(xí)俗是什么。拉圖爾對(duì)物質(zhì)性的當(dāng)代定義加深了這一認(rèn)識(shí)，即物質(zhì)在物質(zhì)文化中的價(jià)值不僅在于它的物理性質(zhì)，還在于它可被解釋的潛力。

1.1 物質(zhì)性的重要性

物質(zhì)性之于風(fēng)景園林師，猶如文字之于作家。就像一名作家，風(fēng)景園林師不僅要了解物質(zhì)的潛力和稟性，還要了解其“信息傳達(dá)”的維度。物質(zhì)性之所以重要，是因?yàn)樗鼧?gòu)成了人們與之交互的物理物質(zhì)形態(tài)，這種形態(tài)在設(shè)計(jì)項(xiàng)目完成后便長(zhǎng)時(shí)間存在。舉幾個(gè)關(guān)于材料互動(dòng)性的例子，人們通過(guò)觸摸、行走、落座等方式和材料發(fā)生互動(dòng)，設(shè)計(jì)師經(jīng)常試圖利用這些互動(dòng)來(lái)激發(fā)某些特定的體驗(yàn)。風(fēng)景園林師安德里亞·科克倫（Andrea Cochran）反思了人行道上礫石的使用及其聽(tīng)覺(jué)體驗(yàn)，她指出：“當(dāng)人們走在某樣?xùn)|西上并聽(tīng)到聲音時(shí)，會(huì)形成一種感官上的質(zhì)感。用材料來(lái)塑造空間體驗(yàn)是我的工作核心”[8]。

正如拉圖爾所指出的，物質(zhì)性本身也與信息傳達(dá)有關(guān)。在景觀設(shè)計(jì)中，受大地藝術(shù)家的啟發(fā)，許多設(shè)計(jì)師通過(guò)物質(zhì)的選擇和塑造來(lái)傳達(dá)他們?cè)O(shè)計(jì)中對(duì)于場(chǎng)地歷史、特定文化或自然系統(tǒng)的關(guān)照。大地藝術(shù)家與風(fēng)景園林師共享相似的物質(zhì)調(diào)色盤：地形、水、太陽(yáng)、陰影、植物、巖石、混凝土、人造物品等。邁耶（Meyer）認(rèn)為，如羅伯特·史密森（Robert Smithson）的《螺旋防波堤》（Spiral Jetty），邁克爾·黑澤爾（Michael Heizer）的《雙重否定》（Double Negative），瓦爾特·德·瑪利亞（Walter De Maria）的《閃電的原野》（Lightning Field）和羅伯特·歐文（Robert Irwin）的《九個(gè)空間，九棵樹(shù)木》（Nine Spaces, Nine Trees）這樣的大地藝術(shù)作品使風(fēng)景園林師產(chǎn)生了共鳴，因?yàn)椤斑@些作品的創(chuàng)造者采取了規(guī)整而形式化的形態(tài)，來(lái)關(guān)注一個(gè)地方和其特質(zhì)—包括古老的自然歷史、時(shí)間的深度、循環(huán)往復(fù)的自然周期和自然過(guò)程—在分散和脫離的文化背景下，這些物質(zhì)幾乎是不可見(jiàn)的 ”[9]。

物質(zhì)性也與學(xué)習(xí)有關(guān)，尤其和還未形成讀寫能力的人群有關(guān)，比如兒童。發(fā)展心理學(xué)家讓·皮亞杰（Jean Piaget）的建構(gòu)主義學(xué)習(xí)觀認(rèn)為，“知識(shí)并不是現(xiàn)實(shí)的復(fù)制品。要認(rèn)識(shí)理解一個(gè)物體或事件，并不僅是簡(jiǎn)單地觀察然后在腦海中復(fù)制或想象，而是采取一定的行動(dòng)，對(duì)它進(jìn)行修改和轉(zhuǎn)化，并要理解這個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)化的過(guò)程，從而最終理解這個(gè)物體的建構(gòu)方式”[10]。對(duì)于兒童來(lái)說(shuō)，景觀的物質(zhì)性更是至關(guān)重要的，因?yàn)樗麄兺ㄟ^(guò)探索物體和材料來(lái)學(xué)習(xí)和感知這個(gè)世界。孩子們會(huì)自發(fā)地對(duì)物質(zhì)世界進(jìn)行感官性的探索，他們會(huì)把東西放進(jìn)嘴里，并根據(jù)他們看到、聽(tīng)到、聞到、嘗到和觸摸的材料創(chuàng)造各種各樣的故事。這就是他們的學(xué)習(xí)方式，所以在景觀設(shè)計(jì)時(shí)考慮孩子們的需求尤為重要。

1.2 關(guān)于物質(zhì)性的實(shí)踐

1.2.1 辯證唯物主義

正如引言中所討論的，辯證過(guò)程起源于西方哲學(xué)傳統(tǒng)，是一種涉及矛盾思想或?qū)α⒘α康霓q論方法。哲學(xué)家喬治·威廉·弗里德里?！ず诟駹枺℅eorg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel，177—1831）提出了一種辯證的方法來(lái)替代知識(shí)發(fā)展中的線性過(guò)程。黑格爾的辯證過(guò)程包括正題、反題以及它們的不斷統(tǒng)一達(dá)到綜合（合題）。大地藝術(shù)家羅伯特·史密斯森在他的文章《弗雷德里克·勞·奧姆斯特德與辯證景觀》（Frederick Law Olmsted and the Dialectical Landscape）中，將辯證法解釋為物理過(guò)程，并認(rèn)為奧姆斯特德設(shè)計(jì)的公園是辯證唯物主義的一種形式[11]。結(jié)合辯證法和唯物主義哲學(xué)傳統(tǒng)，卡爾·馬克思（1818—1883）和弗里德里?！ざ鞲袼梗?820—1895）的辯證唯物主義認(rèn)為，決定人們是誰(shuí)的不僅是他的意識(shí)，而是他本人的社會(huì)身份和他所在社會(huì)所生產(chǎn)的物品。換句話說(shuō)，“物質(zhì)自身存在的狀態(tài)決定了我們理解它們的方式和理解我們自己的方式”[12]。每天所走的街道、主干道和高速公路都將決定一個(gè)人的意識(shí)。這是辯證的，因?yàn)榈缆凡皇枪铝⒌目腕w，而是被人類主觀改變的物質(zhì)材料，例如街巷在每周二上午都會(huì)被擺上垃圾桶，高度可見(jiàn)的十字路口會(huì)被貼上促銷廣告，高速公路兩側(cè)的隔音墻上會(huì)被噴上涂鴉。馬克思的唯物主義是辯證的，因?yàn)樗且环N自我認(rèn)知所構(gòu)建的主體（人的主體性）和勞動(dòng)、物質(zhì)生產(chǎn)所創(chuàng)造的物質(zhì)世界的相互作用[12]。

參見(jiàn)喬恩·皮亞塞基（Jon Piasecki）在紐約州設(shè)計(jì)的斯通河（Stone River，圖1）。皮亞塞基在樹(shù)林中手工建造了這條約244 m（800英尺）長(zhǎng)的小徑。他用獨(dú)輪車?yán)瓉?lái)將近400 t的石塊并精心擺放，這些石頭擺放的位置不僅考慮了相互之間的關(guān)系，也考慮了它們和其他植物、枯木、石墻之間的關(guān)系。皮亞塞基在回顧自己的勞動(dòng)時(shí)說(shuō)到，“今天，設(shè)計(jì)和建造通常是相互獨(dú)立的過(guò)程。勞動(dòng)力的地位正在降低，那些卑微的人辛苦地生產(chǎn)著我們的需求品，而瘋狂運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)的機(jī)器進(jìn)一步摧毀了生產(chǎn)階級(jí)的人性，也掠奪了土地。當(dāng)然，機(jī)器是必不可少的，設(shè)計(jì)和建造之間的一些脫節(jié)是不可避免的，但這個(gè)項(xiàng)目公開(kāi)提出疑問(wèn)：我們對(duì)虛擬事物的迷戀是不是已經(jīng)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)了實(shí)際能力可以達(dá)到的范圍，或者對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)的追求是不是已遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)了建造能力能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)的程度？”[13]

你同意風(fēng)景園林和廣義的社會(huì)降低了勞動(dòng)力的地位嗎?

他為什么要獨(dú)自建造，為什么沒(méi)有使用建設(shè)團(tuán)隊(duì)?

1.2.2 媒介即信息

“媒介”一詞與“物質(zhì)性”密切相關(guān)，指的是做事的途徑，或信息傳達(dá)或表達(dá)的方法。傳播理論哲學(xué)家馬歇爾·麥克盧漢（Marshall McLuhan，1911—1980）創(chuàng)造了“信息即媒介”這一術(shù)語(yǔ)，用來(lái)描述媒介如何深刻地改變我們的思維和行為方式。對(duì)麥克盧漢來(lái)說(shuō)，以上這些改變，曾經(jīng)來(lái)自“信息”本身，但現(xiàn)在來(lái)自媒介，因?yàn)槊浇椤巴卣沽宋覀兊纳眢w”[14]?！胞溈吮R漢經(jīng)常會(huì)設(shè)想一種具有‘培育’功能的介質(zhì)，就像盆栽中肥沃的土壤，或培養(yǎng)皿中的瓊脂。換句話說(shuō)，媒介作為我們身體、感官或心靈的延伸，可以催生某種變革的發(fā)生?！盵15]他還認(rèn)為，人們過(guò)分關(guān)注了革新的內(nèi)容，而忽視了這些內(nèi)容是如何被傳達(dá)的。因此，社交網(wǎng)站有價(jià)值的信息并不是這個(gè)網(wǎng)站呈現(xiàn)的內(nèi)容，而是社交媒體帶來(lái)各種變革，包括人們合作模式的變革、對(duì)特殊項(xiàng)目或技術(shù)創(chuàng)新投資方式的變革，以及廣義社交方式的變革。

1 喬恩·皮亞塞基設(shè)計(jì)的斯通河Stone River by Jon Piasecki

參見(jiàn)藝術(shù)家貝內(nèi)迪克特·格魯斯（Benedikt Gross）設(shè)計(jì)的燕麥試驗(yàn)田（Avena + Test Bed Planting，圖2）。項(xiàng)目位于德國(guó)昂特瓦爾德豪森，占地約11.5 hm2（28英畝），85%的區(qū)域種植了燕麥（Avena sativa），15%的區(qū)域種植了11種不同野花和草本植物。但格魯斯在這片土地上的種植方式與標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的農(nóng)耕種植方式有很大的不同。他利用算法和衛(wèi)星定位，數(shù)字化地繪制出燕麥、野花和草本植物的種植位置，并駕駛一輛專門的拖拉機(jī)，以3 m×3 m的像素分辨率精確地播種[16]。格魯斯表示：“可以說(shuō)在過(guò)去50年里，為了擴(kuò)大規(guī)模和提高效率，一切農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)都是機(jī)械化的，但農(nóng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域的下一階段應(yīng)該是數(shù)字化、精確化耕作，在這種方式下，小到植物個(gè)體、大到場(chǎng)地的一切信息都將被記錄下來(lái)”[17]。過(guò)去的單一栽培農(nóng)業(yè)是指在大面積土地上成列種植相同或相似的植物，這種模式制約了生境價(jià)值，而且常需使用農(nóng)藥來(lái)防止因極端氣候變化、病蟲(chóng)害泛濫引起的大規(guī)模作物歉收。格魯斯這種新的種植方式，增加了田間植物的種類和數(shù)量，可以替代過(guò)去單一栽培的耕作方式。

這個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)將如何改變我們利用種植手段塑造景觀的方式?

你如何評(píng)價(jià)設(shè)計(jì)師創(chuàng)造的圖形?

他是如何收割燕麥的?

1.2.3 物質(zhì)實(shí)踐

由建筑師斯坦·艾倫（Stan Allen）倡導(dǎo)的物質(zhì)實(shí)踐，包括了物質(zhì)轉(zhuǎn)化的活動(dòng)，這些活動(dòng)試圖通過(guò)轉(zhuǎn)化物質(zhì)來(lái)“產(chǎn)生新的對(duì)象和新的物質(zhì)組織”[18]。艾倫認(rèn)為，“盡管它們的作用是轉(zhuǎn)化物質(zhì)，但物質(zhì)實(shí)踐必須通過(guò)投影、符號(hào)或計(jì)算等抽象代碼的媒介才能起作用。不斷地以這種方式融合媒介，物質(zhì)實(shí)踐才能從物質(zhì)本身和融合過(guò)程中產(chǎn)生新的概念”[19]。艾倫有意識(shí)地將物質(zhì)實(shí)踐區(qū)別于物質(zhì)性本身。他認(rèn)為物質(zhì)實(shí)踐只是暫時(shí)借用了材料的特性。

參見(jiàn)費(fèi)迪南德·路德維希（Ferdinand Ludwig）、奧利弗·斯托茲（Oliver Storz）在德國(guó)康斯坦斯湖邊建造的人行天橋[20]（圖3）。在施工過(guò)程中，一個(gè)2.5 m高的金屬構(gòu)架被先建立起來(lái)，然后柳樹(shù)苗纏繞其上。隨著柳樹(shù)的生長(zhǎng)，它們承擔(dān)了越來(lái)越多的荷載。幾年之后，結(jié)構(gòu)工程師給予了這些柳樹(shù)“植物健康認(rèn)證”，這表明是時(shí)候拆除結(jié)構(gòu)柱了，這樣柳樹(shù)就可以獨(dú)立支撐人行天橋。斯托茲說(shuō)：“每一種結(jié)構(gòu)都是虛構(gòu)和現(xiàn)實(shí)的混合體……我們必須遵從這棵樹(shù)自身的結(jié)構(gòu)規(guī)則”[21]。樹(shù)木代替了結(jié)構(gòu)柱，樹(shù)根代替了基礎(chǔ)，形成了一種新型的人行天橋。

設(shè)計(jì)師們需要做什么樣的計(jì)算來(lái)確定柳樹(shù)的數(shù)量?

人行天橋是否暫時(shí)借用了材料的某些特性，還是可以使用其他材料?

他們?yōu)槭裁催x擇柳樹(shù)?

除了樹(shù)的結(jié)構(gòu)邏輯之外，設(shè)計(jì)師還需要考慮什么?

設(shè)計(jì)師明白這是一項(xiàng)復(fù)雜的工作。項(xiàng)目里使用了金屬構(gòu)件確實(shí)引發(fā)了一些問(wèn)題，比如阻斷了植物體內(nèi)養(yǎng)分的運(yùn)送。因此建筑師們?cè)鲈O(shè)了“養(yǎng)分輸送”系統(tǒng)來(lái)確保樹(shù)木存活。

1.2.4 編碼

編碼，即設(shè)計(jì)中材料的塑造或操作方式?！霸谔幚聿牧系倪^(guò)程中，我們可以將有關(guān)這個(gè)過(guò)程的信息進(jìn)行分層標(biāo)記。在物體形態(tài)被制作、調(diào)整、成型的過(guò)程中，這種模殼式的標(biāo)記過(guò)程可以成為其造型的主導(dǎo)邏輯?！盵22]例如混凝土，它的成型過(guò)程是一個(gè)編碼的過(guò)程。參見(jiàn)由保羅·亨西（Paul Hensey）和雷默·佩德萊斯基（Remo Pedreschi）為英國(guó)皇家園藝學(xué)會(huì)切爾西花展（RHS Chelsea Flower Show）設(shè)計(jì)的芬丘奇花園（Fenchurch Garden，圖4）。設(shè)計(jì)師澆筑鋼筋混凝土?xí)r使用了構(gòu)造纖維膜來(lái)代替?zhèn)鹘y(tǒng)模板，這種方式比起如木框架之類的成型系統(tǒng)可以節(jié)省更多材料。

這個(gè)編碼過(guò)程所說(shuō)明的混凝土的施工過(guò)程和基本特性是什么?

1.3 物質(zhì)性之辯

物質(zhì)性相關(guān)理論和實(shí)踐在設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域的發(fā)展，可以作為20世紀(jì)后期批評(píng)實(shí)踐（critical practices）發(fā)展的替代性方向。正如建筑師羅伯特·麥克納爾蒂（Robert McAnulty）所指出的，“關(guān)注分析、解釋和表現(xiàn)的傳統(tǒng)批評(píng)實(shí)踐被摒棄了。設(shè)計(jì)師尋求規(guī)范性的理論，而非散漫性的理論；尋求有助于創(chuàng)造健全的生態(tài)環(huán)境的理論，而不是那些揭示設(shè)計(jì)中意識(shí)形態(tài)的理論。對(duì)于新唯物主義來(lái)說(shuō)，即使是最有魅力的形態(tài)也必須達(dá)到更高的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)—它們是否符合一些不言而喻的‘性能’標(biāo)準(zhǔn)？”[23]89麥克納爾蒂還認(rèn)為，唯物主義者思想對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)的關(guān)注常被認(rèn)為與形式主義者相反。但是他也指出，反形式主義“強(qiáng)調(diào)材料的性能而忽略材料的應(yīng)有形態(tài)”的論點(diǎn)從一開(kāi)始就是站不住腳的。把物質(zhì)從形態(tài)中分離出來(lái)是不可能的。物質(zhì)從來(lái)都是有形狀的；這個(gè)媒介一直都在形成?！盵23]90

對(duì)于風(fēng)景園林師來(lái)說(shuō)，大部分的物質(zhì)也都已經(jīng)存在。不僅天氣現(xiàn)象有物質(zhì)性，現(xiàn)狀場(chǎng)地也具有物質(zhì)性。物質(zhì)性的其中一個(gè)維度—特定媒介理論（medium-specificity），在景觀設(shè)計(jì)中一直備受爭(zhēng)論。由藝術(shù)評(píng)論家克萊門特·格林伯格（Clement Greenburg）發(fā)展的特定媒介論，闡釋了藝術(shù)品的材料是作品的決定性要素。格林伯格的理論深受目的論（teleology）的影響，“在目的論中，藝術(shù)史把自己定義為一個(gè)純化的過(guò)程，每一種藝術(shù)都與它自身的本質(zhì)以及媒介的特性所一一對(duì)應(yīng)”[24]。對(duì)于傳統(tǒng)的藝術(shù)門類，例如繪畫，只有畫在畫布上的色彩才能定義為一幅畫。但是在景觀設(shè)計(jì)中，常規(guī)意義上的特定媒介又是什么呢？

簡(jiǎn)·吉列（Jane Gillette）在她的文章《花園的意義》（Can Gardens Mean?）中提出了這個(gè)問(wèn)題。吉列提供了一份花園元素清單，他們共同組成了花園的媒介：“湖泊、河流和噴泉等水系，各式鋪地，墻壁，長(zhǎng)椅，雕像，場(chǎng)地豎向；從石窟到寺廟等特色構(gòu)筑物（folly）；花、樹(shù)、石頭和灌木”[25]。我認(rèn)為在《花園的意義》中，藝術(shù)家們不斷地挑戰(zhàn)著那些特定媒介的

藝術(shù)范疇。運(yùn)動(dòng)和人物層出不窮，例如包豪斯、瓦爾特·本杰明、安迪·沃霍爾的工廠，還有大地藝術(shù)家已經(jīng)嘗試滲透各種傳統(tǒng)藝術(shù)類別，而不局限于某一種材質(zhì)。許多藝術(shù)類別都受到了挑戰(zhàn)，因?yàn)樗鼈儫o(wú)法完全解釋我們當(dāng)前這個(gè)大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)、數(shù)字媒體和文化差異的世界。風(fēng)景園林師和設(shè)計(jì)師也對(duì)傳統(tǒng)景觀材料清單中的特定媒介提出了質(zhì)疑。在瑪莎·施瓦茨、肯·史密斯和克勞德·科米爾創(chuàng)作的眾多花園和景觀中，材料在當(dāng)今時(shí)代得到了積極探索。

1.4 關(guān)于物質(zhì)性的主要閱讀材料

布努諾·拉圖爾 《 人類世的能動(dòng)施為》

羅伯特·史密森《羅伯特·史密森：文集》

2 材料真實(shí)性的理論基礎(chǔ)

“材料……的重要性在于它們被處理和對(duì)待的方式。石頭和玻璃都不具備任何本質(zhì)或‘真實(shí)性’，而且其中任何一種也并沒(méi)有特別契合我們的時(shí)代。整個(gè)問(wèn)題取決于材料如何被塑造和轉(zhuǎn)化、它們?nèi)绾纬蔀橐郧皼](méi)有成為的東西、它們?nèi)绾纬阶约??！盵26]

——戴維·萊瑟巴羅（David Leatherbarrow），《材料的重要性》，2009年

在這里，建筑理論家戴維·萊瑟巴羅提到了材料的“真實(shí)性”。自19世紀(jì)藝術(shù)評(píng)論家約翰·拉斯金（John Ruskin，1819—1900）將材料的“誠(chéng)實(shí)使用”問(wèn)題提上設(shè)計(jì)思維的前沿以來(lái)，這個(gè)問(wèn)題一直困擾著設(shè)計(jì)師們。在《建筑的七盞明燈》（The Seven Lamps of Architecture，1849）中，羅斯金設(shè)想每盞燈都可以作為設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程中材料選擇的指南和參考。很大程度上，他的建議是對(duì)鑄鐵等工業(yè)材料的回應(yīng)，因?yàn)樗慷昧诉@些材料在建筑和工程結(jié)構(gòu)中被越來(lái)越多地使用。羅斯金提出的7盞燈包括：獻(xiàn)祭之燈—服務(wù)上帝的人類技藝；真實(shí)之燈—對(duì)材料和結(jié)構(gòu)的誠(chéng)實(shí)使用；力量之燈—用體量、光線、影子來(lái)影響人們的思想；美感之燈—受自然啟發(fā)的裝飾物；生命之燈—建筑應(yīng)該以人類雙手所能承受的工作強(qiáng)度來(lái)建造；記憶之燈—建筑應(yīng)該尊重當(dāng)?shù)匚幕?；遵從之燈—?jiǎng)?chuàng)意本身應(yīng)遵循規(guī)范和法律，避免過(guò)度創(chuàng)意。

2 迪克特·格魯斯的燕麥試驗(yàn)田—打印大地般的農(nóng)業(yè)改變了現(xiàn)有景觀（2013年）Avena + Test Bed—Agricultural Printing and Altered Landscapes (2013) by Benedikt Gross

3 費(fèi)迪南德·路德維希、奧利弗·斯托茲設(shè)計(jì)的人行天橋（2005年）Footbridge (2005) by Ferdinand Ludwig, Oliver Storz

拉斯金尤其反對(duì)把材料偽裝起來(lái)或者讓材料看起來(lái)像別的東西。他說(shuō)：“在磚上蓋水泥，然后在水泥上加縫，使水泥看起來(lái)像石頭，這就是欺騙[27]。材料的真實(shí)性也體現(xiàn)在威廉·羅賓遜（William Robinson）對(duì)法國(guó)公園的評(píng)價(jià)。他在訪問(wèn)巴黎肖蒙山公園期間，譴責(zé)了公園里人造巖石的使用。我們看到的“并不是真正的石頭，而是堆在石頭上的灰泥……雖然石洞里可以長(zhǎng)出一些植物，但巖石整體上光禿禿的狀態(tài)卻無(wú)法被掩蓋”[28]。參見(jiàn)專為肖蒙山公園設(shè)計(jì)的欄桿（圖5）。根據(jù)景觀歷史學(xué)家安·科馬拉（Ann Komara）的描述，工程師讓-查爾斯·阿道夫·阿爾法德（Jean-Charles Adolphe Alphand，1817—1891）“模仿原木或樹(shù)枝的樣子設(shè)計(jì)了貫穿公園的鋼筋混凝土樓梯立柱和扶手”[29]。

哪些是羅賓遜不贊成的呢?

在肖蒙山公園建成50多年后，鋼筋混凝土更多地被用于表達(dá)它的潛力，而不是它的模仿能力。1925年，在巴黎舉行的現(xiàn)代裝飾與工業(yè)藝術(shù)國(guó)際展覽會(huì)上，羅伯特·馬利特·斯蒂文斯（Robert Mallet Stevens）與雕塑家簡(jiǎn)·馬特爾（Jan Martel）和喬爾·馬特爾（Joel Martel）合作，在他們的“現(xiàn)代生活花園”（Jardin de l’habitation modern）中，用混凝土板制作了樹(shù)木，以充分探索鋼筋混凝土的廣泛用途[30]。參見(jiàn)羅伯特·馬利特·史蒂文的混凝土樹(shù)的圖片（圖6）。

這種混凝土的使用與肖蒙山公園的欄桿有何不同?

有哪一個(gè)更誠(chéng)實(shí)嗎?

在20世紀(jì)，現(xiàn)代建筑師和風(fēng)景園林師一直保持著對(duì)“材料真實(shí)性”的關(guān)注，因?yàn)樵O(shè)計(jì)師不信任幻象，尤其是歷史幻象。誠(chéng)實(shí)地使用材料成為現(xiàn)代建筑的一個(gè)原則，對(duì)現(xiàn)代風(fēng)景園林的早期思考也隨之而生。在《現(xiàn)代景觀中的花園》（Garden in the Modern Landscape）（1938，1948年）一書中，堂納德（Tunnard）主張：“只要不試圖掩蓋材料，就不會(huì)出現(xiàn)人工的痕跡。大多數(shù)鋪裝使用混凝土的目的是替代石材；當(dāng)瘋狂而隨意的施工進(jìn)程需要用混凝土建設(shè)道路或疊臺(tái)時(shí)，這種欺騙甚至?xí)还膭?lì)，因此帶來(lái)一種與周邊環(huán)境不相稱感”[31]。相較而言，堂納德更喜歡圣安山宅（St. Ann’s Hill House）里的鋪地，“這些鋪地材料不會(huì)偽裝成別的樣子。每塊混凝土板的質(zhì)感和形狀都像機(jī)器一樣精確而有條理—沒(méi)有人試圖使它們看起來(lái)更像‘自然’ ”[31]。

極簡(jiǎn)主義雕塑家在他們的作品中也避免了幻象和個(gè)人表達(dá)，他們通過(guò)對(duì)于建筑材料的布置，比如燒制的磚塊或工業(yè)產(chǎn)品，來(lái)抹去藝術(shù)家雙手的痕跡。藝術(shù)評(píng)論家羅莎琳德·克勞斯（Rosalind Krauss）在評(píng)論極簡(jiǎn)主義藝術(shù)家如卡爾·安德烈（Carl Andre）和唐納德·賈德（Donald Judd）的作品時(shí)解釋道，“這些藝術(shù)家反對(duì)雕塑幻象主義，這種幻象主義將一個(gè)物體轉(zhuǎn)換成另一個(gè)象征：例如把石頭雕刻成一塊肉—用一個(gè)比喻意義將雕塑抽離其所在的空間和場(chǎng)所?！盵32]除此以外，極簡(jiǎn)主義藝術(shù)家對(duì)非傳統(tǒng)藝術(shù)材料的選擇也體現(xiàn)了他們?cè)噲D轉(zhuǎn)變傳統(tǒng)的轉(zhuǎn)譯實(shí)踐—他們從創(chuàng)造意義的藝術(shù)家轉(zhuǎn)變成了觀眾。

“對(duì)于極簡(jiǎn)藝術(shù)來(lái)說(shuō)，‘意義’并不是藝術(shù)作品內(nèi)部的東西，而發(fā)源于藝術(shù)家的思想，體現(xiàn)在構(gòu)圖中；沒(méi)有那些甚至?xí)屛覀儜岩善湔鎸?shí)性的‘藝術(shù)’傳統(tǒng)、細(xì)節(jié)或事件。相反，如果任何意義要?dú)v久彌新，都需要我們對(duì)它的反思理解后進(jìn)行積極構(gòu)建?！盵33]

2.1 材料真實(shí)性的重要性

對(duì)材料誠(chéng)實(shí)的運(yùn)用需要考慮它們的建構(gòu)能力和表現(xiàn)能力。因此對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)人員來(lái)說(shuō)，充分理解這些能力是很有價(jià)值的。正如弗蘭普頓所言，材料建構(gòu)可以形成詩(shī)意（poetic）的設(shè)計(jì)維度。他指出：“我并不是僅剖析構(gòu)造技術(shù)，而是要指明它的表達(dá)潛力。構(gòu)造可以理解為一種建筑的詩(shī)學(xué)，所以構(gòu)造是一種藝術(shù)，但在這方面，藝術(shù)維度既不是具象的也不是抽象的?！盵34]從本質(zhì)上說(shuō)，通過(guò)材料建構(gòu)而成型的呈現(xiàn)方式是景觀空間呈現(xiàn)的最基本特征。

此外，通常風(fēng)景園林項(xiàng)目的場(chǎng)地已經(jīng)具備了物質(zhì)材料的特性，例如場(chǎng)地的土壤和巖層。通過(guò)使用、重塑或展示場(chǎng)地材料，設(shè)計(jì)師可以在設(shè)計(jì)之前就傳達(dá)出某些場(chǎng)地信息，這將在下一節(jié)中討論。這種做法還可以減少設(shè)計(jì)對(duì)環(huán)境系統(tǒng)的影響。

2.2 關(guān)于材料真實(shí)性的實(shí)踐

2.2.1 建構(gòu)表達(dá)

每種材料都有與其物質(zhì)特性相匹配的構(gòu)造邏輯和物理能力，這些都可以在設(shè)計(jì)中得到呈現(xiàn)。材料的強(qiáng)度、浮力、彈性，或它被切割或打磨后的外貌，都可以作為建構(gòu)表達(dá)。松散的材料堆在一起可以形成一個(gè)安息坡角，這在巖石公園（Pedra Tosca Park）得到體現(xiàn)。參見(jiàn)RCR （Rafael Aranda，Carme Pigem， Ramon Vilalta）建筑事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)的公園（圖7）。該公園位于奧洛特火山區(qū)域，該區(qū)域地質(zhì)上非常特殊，有40個(gè)火山錐和大量的熔巖流[35]。Pedra Tosca公園曾經(jīng)是農(nóng)田，場(chǎng)地內(nèi)厚厚的玄武巖巨石層（1.5～2 m厚）需要被清理掉才能使土地適于耕種。設(shè)計(jì)師們使用這種凝固的火山熔巖和考登鋼（或耐候鋼，因?yàn)樗鼤?huì)迅速氧化產(chǎn)生鐵銹，實(shí)際上會(huì)加強(qiáng)材料）來(lái)定義新公園的入口和出口方式，并表達(dá)該地區(qū)的文化和自然歷史。

風(fēng)景園林師朱利安·拉克斯沃西（Julian Raxworthy）指出，“墻壁的細(xì)節(jié)出奇的簡(jiǎn)單：大約500 mm寬的鋼板以大約2 m高的柵欄狀排列，每塊鋼板之間有75 mm的縫隙，從縫隙中可以看到后面堆積的巖石”[36]。

你能看到建構(gòu)表達(dá)嗎?

通過(guò)這種材料的安息角度，成堆的巖石表達(dá)了什么?

什么決定了鋼板間縫隙的大小?

2.2.2 地貌代理人策略

由VOGT的風(fēng)景園林師設(shè)計(jì)的諾華園區(qū)公園位于瑞士巴塞爾，圖中展現(xiàn)了公園內(nèi)的地形臺(tái)層（圖8）。設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程包括了廣泛的實(shí)地考察、地圖分析和模型制作，設(shè)計(jì)團(tuán)隊(duì)在萊茵河流域堤岸發(fā)現(xiàn)一種罕見(jiàn)冰川沉積物的“隱藏景觀”。VOGT風(fēng)景園林師試圖扮演代理人的角色來(lái)表達(dá)這種材質(zhì)，將設(shè)計(jì)構(gòu)思為“史前萊茵河上游山谷的模型”[37]135。這些地形臺(tái)層作為模擬山谷地貌的小尺度縮影，供公園使用者觀賞[37]175。地形的營(yíng)造結(jié)合了從公園下方的停車場(chǎng)挖掘出來(lái)的黏土和萊茵礫石，圍合出的通道形成公園的道路。當(dāng)?shù)匦闻_(tái)層里的土石固化穩(wěn)定后，設(shè)計(jì)師用蝕刻和鑿切方法，在臺(tái)層陡坎上塑造出豐富的礫石肌理[38]。

這些質(zhì)感和刻痕是如何產(chǎn)生冰川紋路效果的?

2.2.3 石材的面層

面層處理是對(duì)材料的一種轉(zhuǎn)化和改變，是工具使用和自然色澤共同作用的結(jié)果。設(shè)計(jì)師可以通過(guò)不同的表面處理來(lái)展現(xiàn)石材不同的紋路和肌理。以小提琴家兼作曲家?jiàn)W雷·布爾（Ole Bull）的名字命名的挪威卑爾根市的Ole Bulls Plass公共廣場(chǎng)，由風(fēng)景園林師阿爾內(nèi)·塞倫（Arne Saelen）設(shè)計(jì)（圖9）。設(shè)計(jì)師經(jīng)過(guò)仔細(xì)推敲，使用了兩種石材—本地帶有粉色紋理的灰色片麻巖和粉色花崗巖—并對(duì)這些石材進(jìn)行了7種不同的面層處理：“自然面、粗表面、細(xì)表面、火燒面、鋸面、打磨面、拋光面”，創(chuàng)造了一組微妙多樣的色澤和質(zhì)感[39]。

雨是如何使這個(gè)廣場(chǎng)上石材的面層變得更漂亮?

2.2.4 材料的暗示

材料可以暗示或關(guān)聯(lián)到一些不可見(jiàn)的場(chǎng)地情況。參見(jiàn)尼爾森·伯德·沃爾茲（Nelson Byrd Woltz）為北貝塞斯達(dá)馬里蘭市場(chǎng)設(shè)計(jì)的臺(tái)階（圖10）。據(jù)設(shè)計(jì)師托馬斯·瓦爾茲（Thomas L. Woltz）說(shuō)，該地區(qū)位于沉積基巖層上，但鑒于該地區(qū)的城市環(huán)境，人們很少意識(shí)到這些巖層的存在。為了暗示這個(gè)深埋地下的三疊系時(shí)期的巖層，尼爾森·伯德·沃爾茲選擇了用當(dāng)?shù)夭删虻氖倪M(jìn)行鋪地。

可能有很多風(fēng)景園林師使用當(dāng)?shù)亻_(kāi)采的巖石，但樓梯的細(xì)部設(shè)計(jì)是如何突出這種材料暗示的?

2.2.5 人造，但不是偽造

風(fēng)景園林師克勞德·科米爾（Claude Cormier）經(jīng)常這樣說(shuō)，他認(rèn)為自己設(shè)計(jì)的景觀是人造的而不是偽造的。偽造對(duì)于科米爾來(lái)說(shuō)是故意使用材料來(lái)欺騙，讓一個(gè)物體看起來(lái)像另一個(gè)東西。例如人造草坪就是偽造的。對(duì)于科米爾來(lái)說(shuō)，“人造的仍然指真實(shí)的東西……比如森林里的樹(shù)冠，即使它是由玻璃纖維制成的天藍(lán)色的樹(shù)冠”[40]。

克勞德·科米爾在蒙特利爾會(huì)議中心入口處設(shè)計(jì)的口紅森林（Lipstick Forest，圖11），口紅森林并置了兩個(gè)看似遙遠(yuǎn)的意向—樹(shù)木的端莊之美和化妝品迷人的影調(diào)—這展示出景觀不僅是遙遠(yuǎn)的視覺(jué)樂(lè)趣?？诩t森林里利用巨大的樹(shù)脂樹(shù)干來(lái)模仿附近公園里樹(shù)木的形態(tài)。參考了蒙特利爾口紅之吻的標(biāo)志，樹(shù)干被刷成光滑的粉紅色來(lái)體現(xiàn)“剛剛涂上”的樣子。

你知道這些不是假樹(shù)而是人造樹(shù)嗎?

人造樹(shù)看起來(lái)會(huì)是什么樣子?

2.3 材料真實(shí)性之辯

在風(fēng)景園林領(lǐng)域，20世紀(jì)80年代開(kāi)始，設(shè)計(jì)師們逐漸摒棄諸如“材料的真實(shí)性”之類的現(xiàn)代原則。例如，1986年瑪莎·施瓦茨（Martha Schwartz）設(shè)計(jì)了馬薩諸塞州劍橋拼接花園（Splice Garden），設(shè)計(jì)中使用了整齊的塑料的灌木、塑料花朵，并用尼龍草皮包裹金屬形體來(lái)模仿修剪整齊的樹(shù)籬。事實(shí)上，使用偽造材料在某些情況下是可行的，這促使設(shè)計(jì)師在設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程中獲取意想不到的創(chuàng)作靈感。例如在紐約現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)博物館的屋頂設(shè)計(jì)中，活體的植物和沉重的材料被禁止使用，所以風(fēng)景園林師肯·史密斯（Ken Smith）使用了185塊塑料巖石、560塊人造黃楊木、玻璃和回收橡膠地膜創(chuàng)造了偽裝花園。這些材料組合的靈感竟來(lái)自他滑板褲的迷彩偽裝圖案！[41]

你認(rèn)為“材料真實(shí)性”的立場(chǎng)，會(huì)因?yàn)榈赖聝?yōu)越感而過(guò)于沉重嗎？

正如克勞德·科米爾在“關(guān)于材料真實(shí)性的實(shí)踐”中指出的，他熱衷于區(qū)分偽造材料和人造材料。對(duì)于科米爾來(lái)說(shuō)，如果塑料的形狀看起來(lái)像植物，或者混凝土鋪裝看起來(lái)像石頭，這就是偽造的。塑料制成的粉紅色球是人造的，因?yàn)樗钦鎸?shí)的合成材料，可以很容易地塑造成這種形狀。然而，有時(shí)項(xiàng)目的預(yù)算或材料的稀缺可能會(huì)阻礙某種材料的使用。也可能因?yàn)閭惱砩系脑颍ū热鐐卧斓钠げ荩?，?dǎo)致設(shè)計(jì)師選擇了一種給人相似錯(cuò)覺(jué)的材料。

毋庸置疑，在景觀和園林設(shè)計(jì)中，使用代表其他東西的材料有著十分悠久的傳統(tǒng)。傳統(tǒng)的日本花園里經(jīng)常有很多這樣的材料。例如，在日本的枯山水園林中，沙子或礫石指代了水。沙石地面被耙出波紋狀的形態(tài)，同樣會(huì)讓人想到水中的波浪。在西方的園林中也可以看到類似的做法。哲學(xué)家斯蒂芬妮·羅斯（Stephanie Ross）澄清說(shuō)，這些例子中的做法其實(shí)并不是幻象。在參觀枯山水園林時(shí)，人們不會(huì)誤以為可以在沙地上游泳。同樣，在參觀斯托海德花園（Stourhead Garden）時(shí)，人們不會(huì)真的認(rèn)為中心湖區(qū)是地中海。但在維吉爾的史詩(shī)《埃涅阿斯紀(jì)》（The Aeneid）中，這片湖就是暗指地中海，而《埃涅阿斯紀(jì)》也正是花園的中心主題之一。羅斯將這種體驗(yàn)描述為一種雙重的體驗(yàn)，“我們同時(shí)感知到實(shí)體的花園和虛構(gòu)的花園”[42]。正如在幻象空間中所討論的，有一些設(shè)計(jì)元素或技術(shù)被精確地用于制造幻覺(jué)。例如，“哈哈”（隱垣）制造了一種幻覺(jué)，從房子里看遠(yuǎn)處，誤以為吃草的動(dòng)物是花園的一部分。事實(shí)上，“哈哈”一詞被認(rèn)為來(lái)源于當(dāng)人們意識(shí)到自己要從擋土墻上掉下來(lái)時(shí)的驚訝。

用不同的方式來(lái)處理材料會(huì)讓設(shè)計(jì)師以不同的角度來(lái)思考材料。安博戴水道事務(wù)所（Ramboll Studio Dreiseitl）在波特蘭特納公園（Tanner Springs Park）的設(shè)計(jì)中使用回收鐵軌來(lái)建造墻壁，其布置方式讓這種堅(jiān)硬的材料看起來(lái)像柔軟的布料。參見(jiàn)特納公園的圖片（圖12）。

你有什么見(jiàn)解？

2.4 關(guān)于材料真實(shí)性的主要閱讀材料

威廉·羅賓遜 《巴黎的公園、步行街和花園，根據(jù)我們自己城市的需要來(lái)描述和考慮》

約翰·羅斯金《建筑的七盞明燈》

克里斯托弗·唐納德《現(xiàn)代景觀中的花園》

3 復(fù)寫的理論基礎(chǔ)

“英格蘭的地表就像復(fù)寫本，一遍又一遍地被書寫和抹去；破譯它是考古學(xué)領(lǐng)域的工作。需要考慮的特征當(dāng)然是道路和田野邊界、森林、農(nóng)場(chǎng)和其他聚居地以及人類勞動(dòng)的其他產(chǎn)品；這些就是刻在大地上的文字?！盵43]

——奧斯伯特·蓋伊·斯坦霍普·克勞福德（Osbert Guy Stanhope Crawford），《 田 野上的考古學(xué)家》，1953年

考古學(xué)家?jiàn)W斯伯特·蓋伊·斯坦霍普·克勞福德 （1886—1957）在這里用復(fù)寫這個(gè)術(shù)語(yǔ)來(lái)描述一種景觀狀態(tài)。

他為什么把風(fēng)景比作書寫的文本?

復(fù)寫一詞最早與景觀相關(guān)的用法之一是弗雷德里克·威廉·梅特蘭（Frederic William Maitland，1850—1906）在19世紀(jì)將一份英國(guó)景觀法令的地圖描述為“絕妙的復(fù)寫”[44]。通過(guò)把這張地圖當(dāng)作復(fù)寫來(lái)研究，他得以解釋歷史上的聚居模式，特別是日耳曼人與凱爾特人聚落的對(duì)抗。復(fù)寫是指古代在同一表面上書寫、擦除和再書寫的行為，如羊皮紙（parchment paper）或牛皮紙（vellum）。隨著時(shí)間的推移，文字表面逐漸堆積了先前文字微弱痕跡，被稱為“舊文本”（scriptio inferior）或“寫在下面的文字”（underwriting），后來(lái)學(xué)者們對(duì)這些文字進(jìn)行了解釋。考古學(xué)家加文·盧卡斯（Gavin Lucus）認(rèn)為，復(fù)寫一詞強(qiáng)調(diào)的是書寫的物質(zhì)形態(tài)和銘寫的物質(zhì)行為。無(wú)論是覆蓋的文本（overwritten或scriptosecunda）還是被覆蓋的文本（underwritten），都是場(chǎng)地的材料故事的一部分。景觀也是一樣，“復(fù)寫濃縮了銘寫和擦除的雙重過(guò)程”[45]。

正因?yàn)榫坝^是過(guò)去文化和自然事件的物質(zhì)證據(jù)，克勞福德的比喻被研究景觀的考古學(xué)家和地理學(xué)家采用，尤其是那些用英語(yǔ)工作的人[46]。這些研究梳理出一系列層次來(lái)表示景觀中的自然和文化變化。正如景觀考古學(xué)家?jiàn)W斯卡·奧爾德雷德（Oscar Aldred）所指出的，“復(fù)寫觀點(diǎn)以一種看待事件中物質(zhì)積累的特別視角，它以序列的方式看待這些事件，這種序列正如線性發(fā)展的時(shí)間線，一層又一層地疊加積累在它們自己以前的影子之上”[47]70。

復(fù)寫理論最初用于描述鄉(xiāng)村景觀，但也被用于分析20世紀(jì)城市景觀中的紀(jì)念碑和紀(jì)念物。研究德國(guó)和比較文學(xué)的安德里亞斯·胡塞恩（Andreas Huyssen）教授在他分析柏林、布宜諾斯艾利斯和紐約的紀(jì)念性實(shí)踐時(shí)認(rèn)為，公共記憶就像復(fù)寫本，是有選擇性的，大部分的選擇過(guò)程是服務(wù)于政治的，并有助于在全球背景下形成都市特質(zhì)。胡塞恩特別指出柏林就如同城市景觀的復(fù)寫?！耙苍S沒(méi)有哪個(gè)西方大城市能像柏林這樣強(qiáng)烈而自覺(jué)地承載著20世紀(jì)的歷史印記。在那個(gè)充滿暴力的世紀(jì)里，這座城市的文脈被書寫、抹去、重寫，它的可辨識(shí)性不僅來(lái)自被創(chuàng)傷性事件壓抑和撕裂的圖像和記憶，更來(lái)自建成空間中那些顯著的地標(biāo)?！盵48]

對(duì)材料進(jìn)行復(fù)寫作為一種分析方法和設(shè)計(jì)途徑已被設(shè)計(jì)師提出。在每一種用途中，景觀空間都充當(dāng)羊皮紙的角色，在其之上，自然和文化的變化留下跨越時(shí)間和空間的印記。自然變化包括冰川融化留下的巖石，而文化變化可能包括構(gòu)筑的增加或土壤的采掘。當(dāng)然，自然和文化這兩種類型的活動(dòng)，隨著時(shí)間的推移相互影響。例如人類砍伐森林，增加了水土流失和洪水的發(fā)生，進(jìn)一步促使了堤壩的建立。復(fù)寫的關(guān)鍵是同時(shí)考慮這些層狀變化及其相互作用。

3.1 復(fù)寫的重要性

復(fù)寫為景觀設(shè)計(jì)提供了一個(gè)概念，即景觀可以作為展示多種時(shí)空事件和人工產(chǎn)物的物質(zhì)載體。這一理論對(duì)于致力于在設(shè)計(jì)中傳達(dá)場(chǎng)地歷史信息的項(xiàng)目尤其有用。地理學(xué)家維達(dá)爾·白蘭士（Paul Vidal de La Blache）認(rèn)為復(fù)寫概念意味著“在整個(gè)地球尺度和場(chǎng)地區(qū)域背景下，理解事物之間的對(duì)應(yīng)關(guān)系和因果關(guān)聯(lián)”[49]。

復(fù)寫理論也是風(fēng)景園林師彼得·拉茨（Peter Latz）設(shè)計(jì)方法中的一個(gè)基礎(chǔ)理論。正如烏多·維拉赫所揭示的，“拉茨非常清楚地認(rèn)識(shí)到，景觀中不同層次完全不受干擾的情況是非常罕見(jiàn)的。景觀的每一個(gè)新增加的功能都在一定程度上擾亂了原有的景觀，并隨之帶來(lái)了自己特有的結(jié)構(gòu)。這些新的結(jié)構(gòu)以自己的方式顯現(xiàn)為一個(gè)信息層。歷史層和當(dāng)代層分別具有什么樣的特點(diǎn)？它們是完整的還是破碎的？它們是否可以完善或修復(fù)？或者用新的信息層完全取代它們是否更有意義？這些都是風(fēng)景園林師在設(shè)計(jì)時(shí)需要不斷提出的問(wèn)題”[50]26。

3.2 關(guān)于復(fù)寫的實(shí)踐

3.2.1 剩余物

剩余物（遺存保留和利用）是奧爾德雷德提出的一種關(guān)于景觀“層”積累和移除的方式?！斑z存保留和利用依賴于一種網(wǎng)絡(luò)化集群內(nèi)部的關(guān)系，以及遺存元素與其他個(gè)體聚集時(shí)的協(xié)同工作方式。”[47]66設(shè)計(jì)師保留和利用遺存時(shí)應(yīng)強(qiáng)調(diào)材料和元素應(yīng)對(duì)未來(lái)使用的可變性?！案鶕?jù)遺存屬性，保持材料形式可識(shí)別性的同時(shí)進(jìn)行改變的能力，也許是景觀中需要探索的一個(gè)關(guān)鍵問(wèn)題?！盵47]68參見(jiàn)位于德國(guó)安珀特紹森的拉茨事務(wù)所（Latz + Partner）的花園墻，設(shè)計(jì)師在那里仔細(xì)地保留了場(chǎng)地的物質(zhì)記憶（圖13）。

正如烏多·維拉赫所述，“顯而易見(jiàn)的，安珀特紹森的一系列圍合的擋土墻是由回收的碎石、舊屋頂瓦、用過(guò)的鋪路石、沒(méi)有形狀的混凝土塊、褪色的木板和類似材料建造的”[50]28-29。根據(jù)復(fù)寫的理論，這種材料在花園中向游客傳達(dá)著信息。維拉赫認(rèn)為，這些殘存的材料“講述了一個(gè)無(wú)法被忽視的故事—可能讓人回想起之前手工制作磚塊的日子，人們可能會(huì)抱怨精心建造的谷倉(cāng)被拆除，批評(píng)舊棚屋越來(lái)越?jīng)]用”[50]29。

4 愛(ài)丁堡大學(xué)愛(ài)丁堡藝術(shù)學(xué)院的保羅·亨西和雷默·佩德萊斯基設(shè)計(jì)的芬丘奇花園Fenchurch Garden by Paul Hensey/Elysium Design with Remo Pedreschi, Edinburgh College of Art The University of Edinburgh

5 巴黎肖蒙山公園的欄桿Parc Butte Chaumont railing, Paris, France

6 羅伯特·馬利特·斯蒂文斯、雕塑家簡(jiǎn)·馬特爾和喬爾·馬特爾的現(xiàn)代生活花園，法國(guó)巴黎 （1925年）Jardin de l’ habitation moderne (1925) by Robert Mallet-Stevens with Jan and Joel Martel, Paris, France

這些材料是如何傳達(dá)這個(gè)場(chǎng)地歷史的?

3.2.2 復(fù)寫的展示性

有時(shí)候一個(gè)場(chǎng)地復(fù)寫的特征可能隱藏在視野范圍和舊文本之中，而設(shè)計(jì)者的任務(wù)就是將這個(gè)隱藏的維度作為新文本展示出來(lái)。風(fēng)景園林師迪特爾·基納斯特（Dieter Kienast）設(shè)計(jì)的K花園（K Garden）就是將隱藏的復(fù)寫展示出來(lái)的美麗例子。參見(jiàn)迪特爾·基納斯特（Dieter Kienast）在蘇黎世自家花園里的土墻（圖14）。這片墻長(zhǎng)約10 m（33英尺），厚約6 cm（2.4英寸），高約2.5 m（8.2英尺），由一層層夯土建成?；{斯特說(shuō)：“土壤層次隱藏在各種深淺的棕色里。這面墻展現(xiàn)了一幅可愛(ài)的多變的圖畫，它的顏色和結(jié)構(gòu)會(huì)隨著時(shí)間而變化。因此，它已成為土壤形象的載體，平常不被注意的土壤得以擁有了形象”[51]。烏多·維拉赫還補(bǔ)充說(shuō)，“純土壤、純泥土不僅是一種建筑材料，更是一種媒介，它擁有自身固有的歷史、神話和意義，與所有其他元素在花園里互動(dòng)，敏感地對(duì)周圍小氣候的變化做出反應(yīng)，正如空氣濕度上升時(shí),墻面自然的顏色隨之變深”[52]。

你能看見(jiàn)土壤分層嗎?

土墻如何表達(dá)土壤的結(jié)構(gòu)?

3.2.3 未來(lái)的復(fù)寫

物質(zhì)的不僅參照過(guò)去，他們還可以投射到遙遠(yuǎn)的未來(lái)。參見(jiàn)泰勒·卡爾多·萊利恩（Taylor Cullity Lethlean）與格瑞爾（Tonkin Zulaikha Greer）設(shè)計(jì)的位于澳大利亞堪培拉的100片森林（100 Forests，圖15）。澳大利亞國(guó)家植物園占地250 hm2，其建立是為了紀(jì)念2003年堪培拉發(fā)生的一場(chǎng)大規(guī)模毀滅性火災(zāi)。每一片森林都由單一物種組成，這些物種包括來(lái)自世界各地的瀕危樹(shù)種和具有民族植物學(xué)意義的樹(shù)種。“每片森林占地2～3hm2，通過(guò)一個(gè)網(wǎng)格狀結(jié)構(gòu)排列在起伏的地形上?！盵53]

3.2.4 虛構(gòu)的復(fù)寫

復(fù)寫作為一種工作方法，使風(fēng)景園林師在設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程中能夠選擇展示哪些元素或隱藏哪些元素。風(fēng)景園林師麗貝卡·克林克（Rebecca Krinke）認(rèn)為，作為復(fù)寫的場(chǎng)地還邀請(qǐng)?jiān)O(shè)計(jì)師在其上添加虛構(gòu)的內(nèi)容。她認(rèn)為：“把場(chǎng)地當(dāng)作復(fù)寫，讓設(shè)計(jì)師有機(jī)會(huì)利用場(chǎng)地的歷史層次來(lái)揭示場(chǎng)地各種信息，甚至有機(jī)會(huì)給設(shè)計(jì)添加一層新的自明的虛構(gòu)內(nèi)容”[54]。換句話說(shuō)，虛構(gòu)的復(fù)寫的概念中，設(shè)計(jì)師可以在場(chǎng)地中加入可能完全不屬于這里的新構(gòu)筑物，但這些新物體的置入可以激發(fā)出富有想象力的闡釋。

參見(jiàn)由MVVA事務(wù)所（Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates）設(shè)計(jì)的淚滴公園（Teardrop Park）的冰水墻（圖16）?，F(xiàn)狀場(chǎng)地以前是哈德遜河沿岸的填海土地。設(shè)計(jì)中藍(lán)色石塊富有變化地層疊放置，組成了這片寬56 m高9 m的巨大拱形石墻，引發(fā)了人們對(duì)于它各種各樣的解釋。藝術(shù)家安·漢密爾頓（Ann Hamilton）、MVVA事務(wù)所和邁克爾·默塞爾（Michael Mercil）共同參與了這個(gè)項(xiàng)目。漢密爾頓認(rèn)為這面墻“可能讓人回想起哈德遜河谷的自然歷史，這些剖面可能還會(huì)讓人想起采石或砌筑的過(guò)程。但這個(gè)石作確實(shí)和這些過(guò)程和歷史都沒(méi)有直接的關(guān)系。而且因?yàn)樗皇窍惹耙呀?jīng)建成的物體，所以也不算是廢墟”[55]。淚滴公園是為兒童設(shè)計(jì)的，其目的是讓景觀的材料成為玩耍的對(duì)象和想象力的源泉。

設(shè)計(jì)中虛構(gòu)墻的意向，這會(huì)激發(fā)孩子們對(duì)它想象嗎，比如假裝它是一座山或一條龍?

3.3 復(fù)寫之辯

復(fù)寫反對(duì)將場(chǎng)地視為一塊白板（tabula rasa）的設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程。因此，許多風(fēng)景園林師對(duì)復(fù)寫一直保持著濃厚的興趣。GROSS.MAX的風(fēng)景園林師埃爾科·霍夫曼（Eelco Hooftman）爭(zhēng)辯說(shuō)：“我們從來(lái)沒(méi)有白板；設(shè)計(jì)項(xiàng)目幾乎永遠(yuǎn)位于一個(gè)已經(jīng)存在并亟待改變的場(chǎng)地。我認(rèn)為這種觀念不僅僅是重新設(shè)計(jì)場(chǎng)地那么簡(jiǎn)單，更多的是要把一些構(gòu)筑物回收并在新的項(xiàng)目中加以利用”[56]。確實(shí)，在設(shè)計(jì)中運(yùn)用復(fù)寫的概念，場(chǎng)地過(guò)去和未來(lái)的豐富質(zhì)感就可以通過(guò)材料的運(yùn)用而得到展現(xiàn)。然而，這一理論也要求設(shè)計(jì)者具備批判性決策的能力。

復(fù)寫既包括覆蓋的文本也包括被覆蓋的文本，設(shè)計(jì)師通常扮演策展人的角色，他們選擇將哪些材料展現(xiàn)給人們，將哪些材料保持隱藏。對(duì)于有政治爭(zhēng)議的景觀，設(shè)計(jì)師的這種做法可能給那些會(huì)被重寫和遮蓋的個(gè)人或社團(tuán)帶來(lái)問(wèn)題。這種情況可能會(huì)產(chǎn)生一種新的復(fù)寫，布倫達(dá)·本德（Brenda Bender）稱之為所有者復(fù)寫（proprietor palimpsest）。在這種情況下，只有當(dāng)權(quán)者才有對(duì)歷史和文化材料進(jìn)行最終解釋的權(quán)利[57]。當(dāng)本德提到巨石陣的“所有者復(fù)寫”觀點(diǎn)及遺產(chǎn)產(chǎn)業(yè)對(duì)其撥款時(shí)，一波后殖民主義研究學(xué)者對(duì)“所有者復(fù)寫”進(jìn)行了批判，尤其是對(duì)有關(guān)北美原住民的“所有者復(fù)寫”理念的批判。

例如18世紀(jì)由方濟(jì)會(huì)在加利福尼亞創(chuàng)建的教會(huì)花園。如今，這些翻修過(guò)的花園，連同教堂、廣闊的花園、牌匾、紀(jì)念碑和廢墟，都被保留下來(lái)，作為田園式教育休閑場(chǎng)所，供那些愿意為其支付少量參觀費(fèi)用的游客參觀游覽。運(yùn)用后殖民主義對(duì)教會(huì)花園和他們目前設(shè)計(jì)進(jìn)行批評(píng)，人類學(xué)家伊麗莎白·克萊德里德發(fā)現(xiàn)，這些翻修過(guò)的花園元素將教會(huì)花園放置在了加州更廣泛的歷史的起源里，在這樣的視野下能夠發(fā)現(xiàn)，紀(jì)念物和基督教遺存被保留和重寫—而教會(huì)作為強(qiáng)迫勞動(dòng)的場(chǎng)所的歷史遺產(chǎn)被篡改和抹去。歷史上這些教會(huì)確實(shí)助長(zhǎng)了西班牙人對(duì)加利福尼亞地區(qū)原住民的殖民。通過(guò)講述這部被重寫的壓迫史，克萊德里德“提供了另一種選擇，挑戰(zhàn)了當(dāng)代文化遺產(chǎn)實(shí)踐中的權(quán)力不平衡，并為沉默的聲音和觀點(diǎn)打開(kāi)了空間”[58]。

為什么教會(huì)花園是一個(gè)所有者復(fù)寫?

你會(huì)在這些花園中加入什么材料來(lái)使它們的信息更平衡?

如果設(shè)計(jì)中僅通過(guò)留下的物件來(lái)表達(dá)某個(gè)個(gè)體或群體，一旦這些物件難以被察覺(jué)，那么是否意味著這些個(gè)體或群體也可能不被表達(dá)？

3.4 關(guān)于復(fù)寫的主要閱讀材料

奧斯伯特·蓋伊·斯坦霍普·克勞福德《田野上的考古學(xué)家》

安德里亞斯·胡塞恩 《現(xiàn)在的過(guò)去：城市復(fù)寫和記憶政治》

致謝：

感謝原著出版商Routledge允許在《風(fēng)景園林》雜志上發(fā)表這段摘錄。

圖片來(lái)源：

圖1 ?美國(guó)紐約州的 Jon Piasecki；圖2 ?德國(guó)翁特爾瓦爾德豪森的Benedikt Gross；圖3 ?德國(guó)博登湖的Ferdinand Ludwig；圖4 ?愛(ài)丁堡藝術(shù)學(xué)院愛(ài)丁堡大學(xué)，2009年英國(guó)皇家園藝學(xué)會(huì)切爾西花展；圖5，12 ?本文作者；圖6?法國(guó)巴黎公共資源；圖7?西班牙La Garrotxa火山區(qū)自然公園；圖8?瑞士巴塞爾的Christian Vogt；圖9 ?挪威卑爾根的 Arne Saelen；圖10 ?羅克維爾，美國(guó)馬里蘭州Eric Piasecki/OTTO, Rockville；圖11 ? Jean-Fran?ois Vézina，加拿大蒙特利爾會(huì)議中心；圖13 ?德國(guó)Ampertshausen的Monika Nikolic；圖14 ?瑞士蘇世黎的Udo Weilacher；圖15 ?澳大利亞堪培拉的Taylor Cullity Lethlean和John Gollings, Canberra, Australia；圖 16 ? 美國(guó)紐約的MVVA事務(wù)所。（編輯/劉昱霏）

Materials-their use, handling, and assemblageare critical dimensions of the designed landscape.Their criticality is due to the fact that people often come into direct contact with the materials of a landscape. Materials can also communicate. The landscape theorist Udo Weilacher contends, the“Material becomes the medium which influences the figurative and symbolic message of the work”[1].Since materials constitute the physical attributes of the landscape, how the material is producedextracted harvested, moulded, or grown-has powerful ecological and social consequences. After the Second World War landscape architects were eager to use materials made newly available to civilians. Previously restricted war-related materials and modes of fabrication became fungible resources for landscape architects and architects.Both professions converted post-war materials,commodities, and systems to generate a modern design vocabulary. Mass-produced and globally distributed, many materials came to symbolize modern landscape architecture. Consider Garrett Eckbo’s ALCOA Forecast Garden from 1956.Sponsored by Aluminum Company of America(ALCOA), the garden promoted aluminium as the perfect exterior material that was light-weight, nonrusting, and easily perforated for uses like overhead trellises[2]. Yet by the late 1980s theBrundtland Report, coupled with the acknowledgment that the climate was rapidly changing due to human activities,prompted many landscape architects to consider the ecological consequences of their material selection.

1 Theoretical Groundings of Materiality

“Matter is produced by letting time flow from the past to the present via a strange definition of causality; materiality is produced by letting time flow from the future to the present, with a realistic definition of the many occasions through which agencies are being discovered. The paradox of the present situation is that this point is much more obvious to many scientists than it is for most other people”[3].

Bruno LaTour, “Agency at the time of the Anthropocene”, 2014

Materiality provides a theoretical lens for design as it goes beyond an understanding of material as only matter-its substance, shape,volume, and surface-to the way materials serve as an intermediary between the present and the future.In the opening quote this is how the philosopher of science, Bruno LaTour, distinguishes matter from materiality. If you read his definition carefully,matter flows from the “past to present”, while materiality is future directed. What you anticipate materials will do in the future, the way materials interact over time, with each other, and how they are interpreted shape key questions regarding materiality[4]. LaTour’s version of materiality is part of the Actor-Network Theory that you will read about in the Systems Chapter. What is important to materiality here, is its relationship to material semiotics, which expands the study of meaning from traditional concerns with language to material processes and technological devices, which bear meaning. As the geographer Steve Hinchliffe observes, “Material semiotics most significantly enables a recognition of human and nonhuman times and spaces and the roles in the coconstitution of worlds”[5]. Moreover, LaTour also emphasizes agency, “the many occasions through which agencies are being discovered”. Agency, here,means the ability of a human or object to act and this idea will be more specifically addressed in the section on consequentialism.

7 位于西班牙加泰羅尼亞La Garrotxa火山區(qū)自然公園的Pedra Tosca公園，由RCR建筑事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)（2004年）Pedra Tosca Park (2004) by RCR Architects, La Garrotxa Volcanic Zone Natural Park, Catalonia, Spain

The origins of materialist thinking can be traced back to pre-Socratic Greek philosophers.The ancient conception of materialism holds that nature is the fundamental source of all phenomena in the universe-from what you feel and think to the celestial system. This conception also maintains, “Nature exists independently of mind but that no mind can exist apart from matter.The material world existed long before mankind or any other being came into existence”[6]. In the eighteenth century Paul Henri Thiry, Baron d'Holbach (1723-1789) publishedThe System of Nature or, the Laws of the Moral and Physical World, which portrayed the universe within a philosophical materialist framework. He contended that every event or action, even thoughts and feelings, were the result of interactions of physical matter governed by natural laws. This version of philosophical materialism suggested that everything, including your consciousness and thought (mind), is causally contingent upon matter.Of course, Idealists and scientists have debated this conception of materialism as new conceptions of matter emerged in physics. Since materialists denied the existence of the spirit, materialism is at odds with most religious conceptions of the universe.The important aspect of philosophical materialism here is the fact that you shape material, a specific type of matter, in design, and in doing so you have the opportunity to consider and express those causal dependencies between mind and matter.

In addition to philosophical materialism,materiality is also shaped by its usage in material culture studies, which originally developed out of archaeology, anthropology, and sociology. The goal of material culture studies is to glean knowledge on a particular group or society through an analysis of their physical artefacts-their objects, resources,and spaces-from gardens to architecture to mugs to pin cushions. As Professor of Material Culture Joyce Hill Stoner defines it, “Material Culture is the unpacking or mining of both historic and everyday objects to find the embedded ideas and concepts that define the surrounding society”[7]. Hence,studying a specific landscape, its material qualities and properties will convey something to you about the people and animals that shaped that landscapetheir beliefs and conventions. Reinforced in Latour’s contemporary definition of materiality,material in material culture is valued for not only its physical properties, but also for its interpretative potential.

8 VOGT景觀事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)的諾華園區(qū)公園臺(tái)地（2006—2016年），位于瑞士巴塞爾Terraces at Novartis Campus Park (2006—2016) by Vogt Landscape Architects, Basel, Switzerland

1.1 Why Materiality Matters

Materiality is to landscape architects as words are to writers. Like a writer, a landscape designer must not only understand the properties of materials, but also their communicative dimensions.Materiality matters because it constitutes the physical matter that people interact with long after the design project is completed. Materials are touched, walked upon, or sat on-to name a few interactions-and anticipating the specific experiences arising out of these interactions are often key objectives for designers. The landscape architect Andrea Cochran reflects on the use of gravel for walkways and its auditory experience.She notes, “there is a sensual quality when you walk on something and you hear the sound. This idea of using materials to shape experience of a space is central to my work”[8].

9 阿爾內(nèi)·塞倫設(shè)計(jì)的奧雷·布爾公共廣場(chǎng)，位于挪威卑爾根市（1993年）Ole Bulls Plass (1993) by Arne Saelen, Bergen, Norway

As LaTour notes, materiality also concerns itself with communication. In landscape architecture, earthwork artists and land artists inspired many designers to select and shape materials in order to communicate something about their landscape design-its reference to a site’s history or a specific culture or natural system.Earthwork artists and land artists share a similar palette of materials with landscape architects:terrain, water, sun, shadow, plants, rocks, concrete,manufactured objects, etc. Meyer has suggested that earthworks, such as Robert Smithson’sSpiral Jetty,Michael Heizer’sDouble Negative, Walter De Maria’sLightning Field, and Robert Irwin’sNine Spaces, Nine Treesresonate with landscape architects because “Their creators employed formal presence to focus attention on a place and its particular qualities-it ancient natural histories,its deep time, its recurring natural cycles and processes-that were almost invisible to a culture of distraction and disengagement”[9].

Materiality is also connected to learning,particularly for those who can’t read or write,such as young children. The developmental psychologist Jean Piaget’s constructivist view of learning contends, “Knowledge is not a copy of reality. To know an object, to know an event, is not simply to look at it and make a mental copy or image of it. To know an object is to act on it. To know is to modify, to transform the object, and to understand the process of this transformation,and as a consequence to understand the way the object is constructed”[10]. For young children,the materiality of a landscape is vitally important because they develop and learn about the world through the exploration of objects and materials.Children engaged in spontaneous sensory exploration of the physical world will pull, tug,put things in their mouths, and invent stories about the materials they see, hear, smell, taste,and touch. This is how they learn, so the materials of landscapes designed for children are vitally important.

1.2 Materiality in Action

1.2.1 Dialectical Materialism

As discussed in the introduction, the dialectical process finds its roots in the Western philosophical tradition as a method of debate involving contradictory ideas or opposing forces.The philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770—1831) proposed a dialectical approach as an alternative to linear processes in the development of knowledge. Hegel’s dialectical process involved thesis, antithesis, and their continual unification to arrive at a synthesis. In his article, “Frederick Law Olmsted and the Dialectical Landscape,”the earthwork artist Robert Smithson interpreted dialectics as physical processes and he described the parks designed by Olmsted as a form of dialectical materialism[11]. Combining dialectics and materialist philosophical traditions, Karl Marx’s(1818-1883) and Friedrich Engels’s (1820-1895)dialectical materialism holds that it is not just your consciousness that determines who you are, but your social being and the artefacts of your society. In other words, “the conditions of material existence themselves are determinative of the very means by which we understand them and ourselves”[12]. The streets, arterial roads, and highways that you travel everyday help define your consciousness. It is a dialectic because these thoroughfares are not isolated objects but are materials altered by human subjectivity-the streets are obediently dotted with recycling bins every Tuesday morning, rummage sale signs are posted at highly visible intersections, and graffiti is spray painted on the sound barrier walls lining the highway. Marx’s materialism is dialectical because it is an interaction between who you think you are(human subjectivity) and the material world created by labour or material production[12].

Look at the image of Jon Piasecki’sStone Riverin New York State. Piasecki built the 244-meter-long path (800 feet) by hand through the woods (Fig. 1). He hauled almost 400 tons of stone by wheelbarrow and laid each stone in relation to each other and to the plants, trees, fallen logs,and the existing stone walls that he encountered.Reflecting on his own labour, Piasecki notes,“Today, design and fabrication are generally distinct entities. Labour is devalued. Unknown people toil to make our things. Machines spew out the stuff of our needs and desires and the making of them dehumanizes the production class and despoils the land. Of course the machines are essential, and some disconnect between design and fabrication is inevitable, but this project openly asks if perhaps our fascination with the virtual over the actual, or with design over build, has gone too far?”[13]

Do you agree that landscape architecture and society in general devalues physical labour?

Why do you think he created it all by himself,why didn’t he have a building party?

1.2.2 Medium is the Message

The term medium is closely related to materiality and refers to the means of doing something or how something is communicated or expressed. Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980), a philosopher of communication theory, coined the term “message is the medium” to describe how media can profoundly modify the way we think and behave. For McLuhan the message was this change and a medium is “any extension of ourselves”[14].“McLuhan always thought of a medium in the sense of a growing medium, like the fertile potting soil into which a seed is planted, or the agar in a Petri dish.In other words, a medium-this extension of our body or senses or mind-is anything from which a change emerges”[15]. He also thought that too much emphasis was placed on the content of inventions and not the way the inventions delivered its content.Thus, the message of a social networking site is not the content of the site, but the way it changes the way we collaborate or the way we fund special projects or technological inventions, and social in general.

Look at image of Avena + Test Bed Planting by the artist Benedikt Gross (Fig. 2). The 11.5-hectare-field (28 acres) in Unterwaldhausen,Germany was planted with 85% oats (Avena sativa)and with 15% of eleven different wildflowers and herbs. The way Gross planted this field, however,was very different from standard field planting methods. Using algorithms and GPS positioning enhanced with GLONASS, he digitally mapped out the planting location of the oats, wildflowers,and herbs. He then rode a specialized tractor that enabled him to sow the seeds with precision,a pixel resolution of three by three meters[16].According to Gross, “You could say in the last 50 years everything was about mechanisation to increase scale and efficiency, but the next thing in farming is digitalisation and precision farming,where everything is going to be mapped right down to the single plant”[17]. By increasing the diversity and placement of plants in the field, Gross envisions this new way of planting as an alternative to monoculture agriculture, a practice where genetically similar or identical plants are planted in rows over a large area. Monoculture planting has limited habitat value, and it often requires pesticides because of the likelihood of mass crop failure due to extreme climate changes and the inundation of diseases, pathogens, and pests.

How do you think this experiment could change the way we plant landscapes?

What do you think of the pattern he created?

How do you think he harvested the oats?

1.2.3 Material Practices

Championed by the architect Stan Allen,material practices involve activities that transform material “to produce new objects and new organizations of matter”[18]. Allen argues that,“Although they work to transform matter,material practices necessarily work through the intermediary of abstract codes such as projection,notation, or calculations. Constantly mixing media in this way, material practices produce new concepts out of the material and procedures of the work itself.”[19]Allen distinguishes material practices from materiality per se. He posits that material practices are only provisionally indebt to material.

Look at the image of Ferdinand Ludwig’s,Oliver Storz’s, and Hannes Schwertfeger’sFootbridge,along Lake Constance in Germany[20](Fig. 3). A raised 2.5 meter-high metal structure was first built and then young willows trees were entwined to the structure itself. As the willows grew, they supported more of the load. After a few years a structural engineer granted a “botanical certificate of fitness.” The certificate signalled that it was time to remove the structure’s support columns so that the willow trees held up the walkway on their own. “Each structure is a blend of fiction and reality…We have to subject ourselves to the tree’s own structural rules”[21], says Storz. Trees replace columns and their roots replace the typical foundation footing,making a new type of footbridge.

What types of calculations do think the designers had to make to determine the number of willow trees?

Do you think Footbridge is provisionally indebt to materials, or could other materials be used?

Why do you think they selected willow?

What else did the designers need to consider about the tree, aside from its structural logic?

The designers have underscored that this is a very complex undertaking. There have been problems with the metal hardware in the project.The fasteners, for example, have blocked sap flow. The architects have developed ‘sap bypasses’constructed from branches to keep the structure alive.

1.2.4 Encoding

Encoding expresses the way a material is shaped or manipulated in the design. “In the process of materials there is an opportunity to layer information about the process itself. Such formwork markings can become the dominant logic of a modulated form.”[22]Concrete, for example, and the way it is formed is often a source of encoding.Look at the image ofFenchurch Garden, designed by Paul Hensey and Remo Pedreschi for the RHS Chelsea Flower Show (Fig. 4). Fabric formworks for reinforced concrete enables designers to create concrete elements that express how the concrete was formed using fabric membranes that waste less material compared to other forming systems, such as wood framing.

What does this encoding say about the construction process and the nature of concrete?

1.3 Materiality Debated

Materiality developed in the design fields as an alternative to critical practices developed in the late twentieth century. As the architect Robert McAnulty notes, “Old-school critical practice, concerned with analysis, interpretation,and representation was dismissed”[23]89. Designers sought theories that were normative rather than discursive, and instrumental to creating an ecologically sound environment rather than concerned with revealing the ideological aspects of design. “For the new materialism, even the most seductive of forms must be held to a higher standard-do they meet some unspoken‘performance’ criteria?”[23]89McAnulty also argues that materialist ideas are often positioned as the antithesis to formalists concerns with design. Yet,he notes, “By emphasizing material’s performance over formal configuration, the antiformalist argument fails from the outset. It is impossible to separate matter from form. Matter is never without shape; the medium is always already formed”[23]90.

For landscape architects, much of the materiality is already there. Not only the weather,but also the existing conditions of the site have material qualities. One dimension of materiality that has been debated in landscape architecture is the theory of medium-specificity. Developed by the art critic Clement Greenburg, medium specificity asserts that the material of an artwork is the defining aspect of that work. Greenberg’s theory was dominated by a teleology, “in which art history identifies itself with a process of purification,each art paired down to its essence, to the specific qualities of its medium”[24]. For traditional categories of art, such as painting for example,paint on canvass defined a painting as a painting.But what are the medium-specificities conventional to landscape architecture?

This was a question posed by Jane Gillette in her article, “Can Gardens Mean?” Gillette provided a list of garden elements “water in the form of lakes, rivers, and fountains; paving of all sorts; walls, benches, statuary; grading; follies that range from grottos to temples; and flower, trees,stones, and shrubs” as the media of gardens”[25].In “Gardens Can Mean?” I explained that artists have continuously challenged the medium-specific categories of art. Movements and people as diverse as the Bauhaus, Walter Benjamin, Andy Warhol’s factory, and earthwork artists have sought to make conventional categories more porous, and not specific to a material. Many categories of art were challenged because they were unable to fully account for our current world of mass production, digital media, and cultural difference. Landscape architects and designers have also challenged the mediumspecificity of the conventional list of materials used in landscapes. In the numerous gardens and landscapes created by Martha Schwartz, Ken Smith, and Claude Cormier, the use of materials contemporary to our own times has been explored.

1.4 Primary Reading on Materiality

Bruno LaTour, “Agency at the time of the Anthropocene”

Robert Smithson,Robert Smithson: The Collected Writings

2 Theoretical Groundings for the Truth of Materials

10 尼爾森·伯德·沃爾茨設(shè)計(jì)的北貝塞斯達(dá)馬里蘭市場(chǎng)臺(tái)階（2008—2010年），位于美國(guó)馬里蘭州羅克維爾市Steps designed for North Bethesda Market (2008—2010) by Nelson Byrd Woltz, Rockville, Maryland, US

“Materials…matter because of the ways they can be treated. Neither stone nor glass possess any essence or “truth,” nor is one or the other singularly apposite to our time. The whole matter rests on the ways the materials are shaped and transformed, the ways they become what they had not been before, the ways they exceed themselves.”[26]

David Leatherbarrow,“Material Matters”,2009

Here the architectural theorist David Leatherbarrow is referring to the “truth” of materials, a subject that has troubled designers since the art critic John Ruskin (1819—1900)brought the question of the “honest use” of materials to the forefront of design thinking in the nineteenth century. InThe Seven Lamps of Architecture(1849), Ruskin envisioned that each lamp would serve as a guide to material selection in the design process. His advice was largely in reaction to industrial materials, such as wrought iron, that were increasing employed in architecture and engineered structures during his lifetime.Ruskin proposed grammar included: Sacrificehuman craft in service of God, Truth-honest use of materials and structure, Power-to impact the human mind with massing, light, shadow, Beautyornamentation inspired by nature, Life-buildings should be made by human hands with the rhythms they afford, Memory-buildings should respect the culture where they have been designed, and Obedience-avoiding originality for its own sake.

11 克勞德·科米爾事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)的口紅森林（2002年），位于加拿大蒙特利爾會(huì)議中心Lipstick Forest (2002) by Claude Cormier + Associés,Montréa

In particular Ruskin was against camouflaging material or making a material look like it was something else. He argued, “to cover brick with cement, and to divide this cement with joints that it may look like stone, is to tell a falsehood”[27].The truth of materials also informed William Robinson’s assessments of parks in France. During his visit to Parc Butte Chaumont in Paris, Robinson reproves the use of artificial rock. “Instead of true rockwork” we find “plastering over heaps of stones… A hole is left and there is this mass from which may spring a small pine or an ivy, but the whole thing is incapable of being divested of its bald character”[28]. Look at the image of the railing designed for the Parc Butte Chaumont (Fig. 5).According to the landscape historian Ann Komara,the engineer Jean-Charles Adolphe Alphand(1817—1891) designed “throughout the park stair risers and hand railings in reinforced concrete that imitate wood logs or tree limbs”[29].

What would Robinson not approve of?

More than fifty years after Alphand’s design work in Paris, reinforced concrete was used for it expressive potential, rather than its imitative capabilities. At the International Exhibition of Modern Decorative and Industrial Arts in Paris(1925), Robert Mallet Stevens, working with the sculptors Jan and Joel Martel, created trees made of concrete panels to exploit the versatility afforded by reinforced concrete in their garden,Jardin de l’habitation modern. Unfortunately the tress were not well received as critics found them an unfortunate joke[30]. Look at the image of Robert Mallet Steven’s concrete trees (Fig. 6).

12 安博戴水道事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)的特納公園（2010年），位于美國(guó)俄勒岡州波特蘭市Tanner Springs Park (2010) by Ramboll Studio Dreiseitl,Portland, Oregon, USA

How does this use of concrete differ from the Parc Butte Chaumont railings?

Is one more honest than the other?

A concern for “the truth of materials”continued to occupy modern architects and landscape architects during the twentieth century as designers distrusted illusion, particularly historical illusion. The honest use of material became a tenet of modern architecture and early speculations on modern landscape architecture followed suit. InGardens in the Modern Landscape(1938, 1948), Tunnard contended“there is no artificiality where there is no attempt to disguise materials. Most concrete paving aims at being a substitute for stone; the deception is even encouraged in laying, when crazy or random courses give a path or terrace of this material an ill-conceived air of inappropriateness in any surroundings”[31].Tunnard preferred the pavers at St. Ann’s Hill House,“which do not pretend to be other than they are;the texture and shape of each slab is as precise and formal as a machine-there is no attempt to make them appear natural”[31].

Minimalist sculptors also avoided illusion and personal expression in their work, relying,instead, on the arrangement of building materials,such as fired bricks, or industrial fabrication in order to erase any sign of the artist’s hand.Describing the minimalist work of artists, such as Carl Andre and Donald Judd, the art critic Rosalind Krauss explains, “these artists reacted against the sculptural illusionism which converts one material into the signifier for another:stone, for example, into flesh-an illusionism that withdraws the sculptural object from literal space and places in a metaphorical one”[32]. The minimalist artists’ selection of non-conventional art material also sought to transform traditional interpretive practices-from the artist as the generator of meaning to the audience. “For minimal art, ‘meaning’, is not internal to the work of art, embodied in composition and originating in the mind of the artist; it has no ‘a(chǎn)rtistic’conventions, detail or incident that would even prompt us to consider the possibility of intrinsic content. Rather, for any meaning to exist at all,that meaning must be actively created within our reflective apprehension of it.”[33]

2.1 Why Truth of Materials Matters

The honest use of materials is linked to their tectonic and expressive capabilities. Thus, it is particularly valuable for designers to understand these capabilities. As Frampton suggests, the tectonics of material construction can form the poetic dimension of design. He notes, “I am not alluding to the mere revelation of constructional technique but rather its expressive potential.Inasmuch as the tectonic amounts to a poetics of construction it is art, but in this respect the artistic dimension is neither figurative nor abstract”[34]. In essence, the most basic character of a landscape’s expression can be the way it has been constructed with material.

Moreover, typically sites for landscape architecture projects already have material qualities,the site’s soil and bedrock for example. By using and reshaping or revealing site material you can communicate something about the site before it was designed, a subject discussed in the next section. This practice can also reduce the impact that the design makes on environmental systems,a subject that will be discussed in detail in the last section of this chapter, consequentialism.

2.2 Truth of Materials in Action

2.2.1 Tectonic Expression

Materials possess a tectonic logic, physical capabilities that pertain to their properties,which can be expressed in design. The strength of a material, its buoyancy, its flexibility, or its aspect when cut or sanded can serve as tectonic expressions. Loose material has an angle of repose,and this is expressed at Pedra Tosca Park. Look at the image of the park by RCR (Rafael Aranda,Carme Pigem, Ramón Vilalta) Architects (Fig. 7).The park covers the Olot volcanic field and is geologically very special with 40 volcanic cones and numerous lava flows[35]. Pedra Tosca Park, was once farmed and the thick layers of basalt boulders(2 to 1.5 metres thick) needed to be cleared to make the land tillable. The designers used this solidified volcanic lava and CorTen steel (or weathering steel given that it quickly oxidizes, creating rust that actually strengthens the material) to define the entrance and exit ways to the new park and to express both the cultural and natural history of the region.

The landscape architect, Julian Raxworthy,notes “The detail of the walls is miraculously simple: about 500 millimetres wide slabs of steel standing approximately two metres tall in a palisade arrangement, with 75 millimetre gaps between them, through which one can see the rocks piled behind”[36].

Can you see the tectonic expression?

What do the piles of rock say about this type of material’s angle of repose?

What do think determined the size of the gaps?

2.2.2 Geomorphic Agents

Look the terraces at theNovartis Campus Parkby Vogt Landscape Architects, in Basel,Switzerland (Fig. 8). During the design process,which included extensive field trips, map analyses,and model making, a found “hidden landscape”of unusual glacial sediments was discovered in the Rhine Valley embankments. Vogt Landscape Architects sought to act as agents in expressing this material and the design was conceived “as a model of the prehistoric Upper Rhine Valley”[37]135. The terraces were served as a mimesis of the Valley’s geomorphology at a miniature scale to be observed by the park users[37]137. Combining clay and Rhine gravel excavated from the parking garage that lies beneath the park, the terraces were installed to create channels for the park’s pathways. Once the material was stable its gravelly texture was revealed and expressed by etching and chiselling into the terrace.[38]

Can you see how the texture and the scoring give the effect of glacial striation?

2.2.3 Aspects of Stone

Aspect is the transformation of a material as a result of tooling and natural colour. Designers can reveal the different striations and veins of stone through different surface treatments. Look at the image of Ole Bulls Plass, a public square named after the violinist and composer Ole Bull in Bergen Norway (Fig. 9). Designed by the landscape architect, Arne Saelen, this careful meditation on stone employs two types-local grey gneiss with pink veins and pink granite-and seven different aspects: “raw, rough picked, fine picked, flamed,sawn, hone, and polished” to create a subtly diverse set of colours and textures[39].

Can you see how the rain enhances the aspect of the stone in this plaza?

2.2.4 Material Allusion

Materials can allude to or refer to site conditions that might not be visible to people.Look at the steps designed for north Bethesda Maryland Market by Nelson Byrd Woltz (Fig. 10).According to principal Thomas L. Woltz the region rests upon sedimentary bedrock, but given the site’s urban condition, people were rarely aware of its presence. To allude to this underlying Triassic period rock Nelson Byrd Woltz selected paving quarried from locally sourced stone.

There are probably many landscape architectswho use locally quarried rock, but can you see how this detailed design of the stairway highlights this material allusion?

2.2.5 Artificial, But Not Fake

This statement is frequently made by the landscape architect Claude Cormier, who refers to his landscapes as artificial-but not fake. Fake to Cormier is a material that is meant to deceive,to look indistinguishable from something it is not.Artificial turf for example is fake. For Cormier,“Artificial still refers to something authentic…like a canopy of trees in a forest, even if it’s a sky-blue canopy made of fibreglass.”[40]

Look at the image of Claude Cormier’sLipstick Forestat the entrance to the Montreal Convention Centre (Fig. 11). Collapsing two seemingly distant phenomena- the dignified beauty of trees with the glamorous innuendo of cosmetics and the viscousity of resin-Lipstick Forest demonstrates that landscapes are not merely the distant pleasures of sight. The forest contains giant tree trunks rendered in resin to mimic the forms of trees in a nearby park. Referring to the Montreal Lipstick Kiss logo, the trunks are painted glossy shades of pink for that “just applied” look.

Do you see how these are not fake trees, but artificial ones?

What would artificial trees look like?

2.3 Truth of Material Debated

In landscape architecture, by the 1980s designers began to reject modern tenets, such as “the truth of materials” in their work. For example, in 1986, Martha Schwartz designed with plastic topiary shrubs, plastic flowers, and metal forms covered in AstroTurf to resembled neatly clipped hedges for the Splice Garden in Cambridge Massachusetts. Indeed, in some instances it was only viable to use fake material, prompting designers to draw from unexpected sources as part of their design process. For the rooftop of the Museum of Modern Art in New York,for example, the landscape architect Ken Smith could have no live plants or heavy materials, so he created Camouflage Garden, employing 185 plastic rocks, 560 artificial boxwoods, glass, and recycled rubber mulch. The composition of this material was derived from the camouflage pattern of his skateboarding pants![41]

Do you think claims to “the truth of materials”can be over-weighted by feelings of moral superiority?

As noted in “The Truth of Material in Action”,Claude Cormier likes to distinguish fake materials from artificial ones. For Cormier, if plastic is shaped to look like a plant or concrete paving is imprinted to look like stone, this is fake. Plastic formed into to pink plastic balls is artificial, as it is truthful to a synthetic material that can be easily molded into this shape. Yet, sometimes budget or scarcity might prevent the use of a particular material. There also might be ethical reasons (think of fake fur) that would lead a designer to select a material that gives the illusion of another material.

There is certainly a long-standing tradition in landscape and garden design to employ materials that represent something else. Think of the traditional Japanese garden, which is often full of materials that reference other things. In the kare-sansui gardens or dry gardens of Japan, for example, sand or gravel refers to water. The raking of this material into ripple-like formations also brings to mind wave effects in water. Materials representing things other than what they are can be witnessed in western gardens as well. The philosopher Stephanie Ross clarifies, however,that this is not an example of illusion. During a visit to kare-sansui garden you are not deceived into thinking that you can take a swim in the sand.Likewise, during a visit to Stourhead Garden you would not actually think that the central lake is the Mediterranean. Rather the lake alludes to this sea as part of Virgil’s epic,The Aeneid, one of the central themes of the garden. Ross describes this experience as a type of two-foldedness whereby“we are simultaneously aware of the physical and the virtual garden.”[42]As discussed in illusionary space, there are design elements or techniques that are employed precisely to create illusion. The ha ha, for example, gives an illusion from the house that grazing animals in the distance are part of the garden. In fact, the etymology of the term ha ha is thought to come from the surprise upon realizing that you were about to fall from a retaining wall.

Materials can also be handled in a way that makes you think of the material in a different way.I’ve often thought that the wall made with recycled railway tracks at Portland’sTanner Springs Parkby Ramboll Studio Dreiseitl have been placed in a way that makes this normally hard material appear almost like fabric. Look at the image ofTanner Springs Park（Fig. 12）.

What do you think?

2.4 Primary Reading for Truth of Materials

William Robinson,The Parks, Promenades and Gardens of Paris, Described and Considered in Relation to the Wants of Our Own Cities

John Ruskin,The seven lamps of architecture

Christopher Tunnard,Gardens in the modern landscape

3 Theoretical Groundings of Palimpsest

“The surface of England is like a palimpsest,a document that has been written on and erased over and over again; and it is the business of the field of archaeology to decipher it. The features concerned are of course the roads and fields boundaries, the woods, the farms and other habitations, and the other products of human labour; these are the letters and the words inscribed on the land.”[43]

Osbert Guy Stanhope Crawford,Archaeology in the Field, 1953

Here, the archaeologist, Osbert Guy Stanhope Crawford (1886-1957) employs the term palimpsest to describe a landscape.

Do you know why he would compare the landscape to a written document?

13 拉茨事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)的花園墻（1991年），位于德國(guó)安帕特紹森The garden wall of Peter and Anneliese Latz (1991) by Latz + Partner, Ampertshausen, Germany

14 VOGT事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)的K花園的土墻（1994年），位于瑞士蘇黎世Earthen wall at the K Garden (1994) by Kienast Vogt Partner, Zürich, Switzerland

15 堪培拉國(guó)家植物園100片森林，泰勒與格瑞爾建筑事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)（2011年）National Arboretum Canberra 100 Forests (2011)by Taylor Cullity Lethlean and Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects, Canberra, Australia

One of the earliest uses of the term palimpsest in relationship to landscape-both figuratively and literally-was Frederic William Maitland’s (1850-1906) nineteenth-century description of an English landscape ordinance map as a “marvellous palimpsest”[44]. Studying this map as a palimpsest, he was able to decipher the historic settlement patterns, particularly Germanic versus Celtic communities. Palimpsest refers to the ancient practice of writing and erasing and writing again over the same surface, such as parchment paper or vellum. With time, the writing surface accrued faint traces of former texts called the scriptio inferior or the “underwriting”, which were later interpreted by scholars. The archaeologist Gavin Lucus argues that the term palimpsest emphasizes the material aspect of writing as well as the memory-laden material acts of inscription. What is underwritten as well as overwritten, scripto secunda, is part of the site’s material story. Indeed the landscape“palimpsest encapsulates the dual process of inscription and erasure”[45].

Since the landscape serves as the material evidence of past cultures and natural events,Crawford’s metaphor was adopted by both archaeologists and geographers studying landscapes,particularly those working in the English language[46].These studies often represented both natural and cultural changes in the landscapes as a series of distributed layers. As the landscape archaeologist Oscar Aldred points out, “the palimpsest takes a particular view on the material accumulation of events, viewing these in terms of sequence as if a linear temporality; one of accumulation of one layer and then another, in which previous layers are shadows of their former self”[47]70.

While the theory of palimpsest was initially used to describe rural landscapes, it also has been used to analyse memorials and monuments designed for urban landscapes in the twentieth century. In his analysis of memory practices in Berlin, Buenos Aires, and New York City, Professor of German and Comparative Literature, Andreas Huyssen, argues that public memory making, like a palimpsest, is selective, and that much of the selection process is in service to politics and the formation of an urban identity in a global context. In particular Huyssen singles out the city of Berlin as a palimpsest urban landscape. “There is perhaps no other major Western city that bears the marks of twentieth-century history as intensely and self-consciously as Berlin.This city text has been written, erased, and rewritten throughout that violent century, and its legibility relies as much on visible markers of built space as on images and memories repressed and ruptured by traumatic events.”[48]

Material palimpsest has been advanced by designers as an analytical method and design approach as well. In each usage, the landscape serves as the parchment paper upon which natural and cultural changes make imprints over space and time. Natural changes might include rocks left by glaciers, while cultural changes might include the addition of structures or the subtraction of earth.Of course, these two types of activities, natural and cultural, interact with each other over time.For example, deforestation by humans increases soil erosion and flooding, which then prompts the erection of dykes. What is crucial to palimpsest is to consider simultaneity of these layered changes and their interactions.

3.1 Why Palimpsest Matters

Palimpsest offers a conception of landscape design as a material exhibit of multiple temporal and spatial events and artefacts. This theory is particularly helpful with projects where communicating the history of the site is paramount to the design brief. The geographer, Paul Vidal de La Blache,argues that palimpsest means to “understand the correspondence and correlation of things, whether in the setting of the whole surface of the earth, or in the regional setting where things are localized”[49].

Palimpsest also serves as an underlying theory in the landscape architect Peter Latz’s approach to design. As Udo Weilacher reveals, “Peter Latz knows from experience that it is very rare for the various levels of a landscape to be completely undisturbed. Each new use added to a landscape disturbs what is already there to a certain extent,and brings its own characteristic structures with it.These then manifest themselves as an information layer in their own right. What qualities the historical and contemporary levels have, whether they are still complete or fragmented, whether they can be completed or repaired, or whether it might make more sense to replace them completely with new information layers are questions landscape architects have to address constantly when designing”[50]26.

3.2 Palimpsest in Action

3.2.1 Residuality

Residuality is put forth by Aldred as a way of thinking about the accumulated and removed layers of the landscape. “Residuality depends on the relations within its networked assemblage and the way in which the residual elements work together when gathered with other entities.”[47]66What is pertinent to the designer’s use of residuality is the emphasis on the changeability of materials and elements for future use. “The ability to change while remaining a recognizable material form in terms of their residuality is perhaps a key issue that needs to be explored in landscape.”[47]68Look at the image of the garden wall at the Latz office in Ampertshausen,Germany, where they have carefully retained the site’s material memory（Fig. 13）.

As Weilacher recounts, “a whole series of enclosing and retaining walls in Amperthausen are obviously made of reused builders’ rubble, old roof tiles, used paving stones, shapeless lumps of concrete, bleached wooden planks and similar things.”[50]28-29And in keeping with the theory of palimpsest this material communicates something to visitors in their garden. Weilacher argues that these remnant materials “tell a story of their own that cannot be overlooked-possibly recalling the days when bricks were still made by hand, perhaps complaining about demolition of carefully built barns, commenting on the increasing uselessness of old sheds”[50]29.

Can see how this material might tell you something about the site’s history?

3.2.2 Palimpsest Revealed

16 位于美國(guó)紐約市淚滴公園的冰水墻概念圖，由MVVA事務(wù)所設(shè)計(jì)Ice-Water Wall concept drawing at Teardrop Park, Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates, New York City, New York, USA

Sometimes features of a site’s palimpsest can be hidden from view, scriptio inferior, and it is the task of the designer to reveal this hidden dimension as a scripto secunda. A beautiful example of a hidden palimpsest revealed is the K Garden by the landscape architect Dieter Kienast. Look at the image of Dieter Kienast’s earthen wall from his garden in Zürich（Fig. 14）. The structure is 10 meters (33 feet) long, 60 centimeters (2.4 inches)thick, and 2.5 meters (8.2 feet) in height and it was built with tamped layers of loam. Kienast says,“the layers of soil remain invisible in their various shades of brown. The wall shows a lovely mutable picture, which changes in colour and structure depending on the time of day and year. It has thus become the bearer of the image of the ordinarily hidden earth”[51]. Weilacher also adds, “pure soil,pure dirt is not just a construction material but a medium with its own inherent history, mythology,and meanings, interacting with all other elements in the garden and reacting sensitively to changes in the surrounding microclimate: whenever the humidity in the air rises, the wall reacts immediately and intensifies its natural play of colors”[52].

Can you see the soil layers?

How does the earth wall express the structureof the soil?

3.2.3 Future Palimpsest

Material palimpsests need not only refer to the past. They can also project into the distance future as well. Look at the image of 100 Forests by Taylor Cullity Lethlean with Tonkin Zulaikha Greer in Canberra, Australia（Fig. 15）. The 250-hectare landscape for Australia’s National Arboretum commemorates Canberra’s widespread,devastating fires of 2003. Each forest is comprised of threatened or ethnobotanically significant singlespecies from around the world. “The forests, each 2-3 hectares in size, are arranged via a grid across the undulating topography”[53].

3.2.4 Fictional Palimpsest

As a working method, palimpsest enables the landscape architect to select what elements to reveal or cover as part of the design process. The landscape architect Rebecca Krinke posits that a palimpsest also invites the designer to add fiction to the site. She writes: “Thinking of the site as a palimpsest allows designers to utilize the site’s layers of history to reveal aspects of the site, or even to add a new layer of self-conscious fiction”[54].In other words, fictional palimpsest enables the designer to intervene with invented constructions that might not be derived from the site, but they’ve been added to prompt imaginative interpretations.

Look at the image of Ice-Water Wall at Teardrop Park, designed by Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates (Fig. 16). The existing site was previously filled land along the Hudson River shoreline. With the episodic layering of chunks of blue stone that arc out of the ground to the height of 9 meters high and 56 metres long, the Ice-Water Wall may prompt all types of interpretations. The artist, Ann Hamilton, who worked on the project with Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates and Michael Mercil, describes the wall as “recalling a natural history of the Hudson River Valley, these sections might also recall the processes of quarrying, or of masonry. But this stonework neither comes from nor quite belongs to any of those things. And because it was never any other built thing,the stonework is not a ruin”[55].Teardrop Parkwas designed for children and with the intent that the very materials of the landscape would provide a source of play and imaginative engagement.

Do you think the wall’s fictional quality will prompt children to imagine all types of things, like pretending that it is a mountain or a dragon?

3.3 Palimpsest Debated

Palimpsest is in opposition to a design process that treats the site as a blank slate or tabula rasa.Thus, there has been sustained interest in palimpsest by many landscape architects. Eelco Hooftman,landscape architect at GROSS.MAX contends, “We never have a tabula rasa; it’s nearly always an existing site that needs a new chapter in its process of transformation…I think this idea of projects is not only about redesign but also about recycling pieces of fabric into new projects”[56]. Indeed, a palimpsest conception of design can allow for a richly texture portrayal of the past and future through its materials.However, this theory also demands critical decisionmaking by the designer.

Palimpsest involves both the underwritten as well as overwritten material, and the designer often functions like a curator, selecting what material will be divulged to people and what material will remain hidden. For politically contested landscapes this can pose problems for those individuals and social groups who are underwritten in the palimpsest. This situation potentially creates what Brenda Bender calls a proprietor palimpsest, where those in power ultimately decide the appropriate interpretation of historical and cultural material[57].While Bender addresses the proprietor palimpsest of Stonehenge and its appropriation by the heritage industry, a wave of postcolonial studies scholars have critiqued proprietor palimpsests, particularly ones regarding indigenous people in North America.

For example, consider the mission gardens created by the Franciscans during the eighteenth century in California. Today, these renovated gardens, with their chapels, extensive gardens,plaques, memorials, and ruins have been retained as idyllic educational retreats for those tourists willing to pay a small fee to visit. Employing a postcolonial critique of the history of these mission gardens and their current design features,the anthropologist Elizabeth Kryder-Reid finds that the renovated garden elements function to situate the mission gardens in a broader history of California’s origins, overwriting commemoration and Christian heritage-making while erasing the legacy of these missions as sites of forced labour.Indeed, these missions were instrumental in the Spanish colonization of the indigenous people in what is now California. By telling this underwritten history of oppression Kryder-Reid, “offers an alternative, challenging the imbalance of power in contemporary cultural heritage practices and opens space for silenced voices and perspectives”[58].

Can you see how the mission gardens are a proprietor palimpsest?

What material might you include in these gardens to make them more balanced in their message?

Do you think that if individuals or groups areonly represented through their material artefacts that you run the risk of not helping this group if they are still repressed?

3.4 Primary Reading for Palimpsest

Osbert Guy Stanhope Crawford,Archaeology in the field

Andreas Huyssen,Present Pasts: Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory

Acknowledgements:

We would like to thank the publisher, Routledge, for allowing the publication of this excerpt inLandscape Architecturejournal.

Sources of Figures:

Fig. 1?Jon Piasecki, New York State, USA; Fig. 2?Benedikt Gross, Unterwaldhausen, Germany; Fig. 3?Ferdinand Ludwig,Lake Constance, Germany; Fig. 4?Fenchurch Garden, by Paul Hensey/Elysium Design with Remo Pedreschi, Edinburgh College of Art The University of Edinburgh, Royal Horticultural Show Chelsea 2009, London, England; Fig. 5,12?author;Fig. 6?public domain, Paris, France; Fig. 7?public domain,La Garrotxa Volcanic Zone Natural Park, Catalonia, Spain;Fig. 8?Christian Vogt, Basel, Switzerland; Fig. 9?Arne Saelen, Bergen, Norway; Fig. 10?Eric Piasecki/OTTO,Rockville, Maryland, USA; Fig. 11?Jean-Fran?ois Vézina,Montréal Convention Centre, Canada; Fig. 13?Monika Nikolic, Ampertshausen, Germany; Fig. 14?Udo Weilacher,Zürich, Switzerland; Fig. 15?Taylor Cullity Lethlean and John Gollings, Canberra, Australia; Fig. 16?Ice-Water Wall concept drawing at Teardrop Park, Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates, New York City, New York, USA.