(Si prefieres leer esta entrada en español, la puedes encontrar en el siguiente enlace de este mismo blog: Planting in a Post-Wild World - Designing Plant Communites for Resilient Landscapes- Versión en español)
Among the gardening books published last year
there are two that caused particular excitement in social virtual worlds I am
familiar with: Hummelo: A Journey Through a Plantsman's Life by Noel Kingsbury,
and Planting in a Post-Wild World by Thomas Rainer and Claudia West. Both are
very interesting if you like gardening and really exciting if you like
naturalistic planting style. This entry is dedicated to the second one, a book
I waited for quite impatiently as it is no exaggeration to ensure that a
significant part of this blog exists thanks to Thomas Rainier. With his
fantastic Grounded Design Thomas gave me the reference of what I would like to
achieve with my blog. If I have met my goal or not, is my fault. If I keep trying, is his fault.
Planting in a Post-Wild World has been written
collaboratively by Claudia West and Thomas Rainier, two professional
landscapers that develop their activity in the United States and consider that
now is the time for resilience and sustainability to take the lead in
gardening. Both prove that different and distant memories may converge in
common concerns and aesthetic tastes. Thomas grew up in Alabama watching how
builders devoured forests that had been the scene of his childhood. The
scenario of Claudia's childhood was on the other hand the polluted and
impoverished landscape of East Germany. But Claudia had the opportunity to
experience the fall of the Berlin Wall, a unique historical moment that brought
about a very different economic, political and cultural model that opened a
door to the rebirth of nature in places where even the most optimistic wouldn't
have expected to see it again. Thus the story of Thomas is a story of lost nature
and the story of Claudia a history of recovered nature. Both stories are
actually chapters in the same story, a story of omnipresent nature that has
been profoundly altered by humans.
Some time ago, I wrote a review about
Rambunctious Garden by Emma Marris. The author encourages us to stop seeing
nature as something hidden in the few landscapes protected from human influence.
Nature surrounds us, from the weeds that dare grow in our back garden to the
immense Amazon rainforest. With an important difference: it’s unlikely that the average person will
have an important and direct influence the Amazon, but it’s sure he can do
something beneficial for nature in his back garden. With this change of
perception, we can all become guerrillas fighting to protect the planet, and
back yards or urban wasteland will become battlefields as important as the most
protected national park. Rambunctious
Garden concludes as Planting in a Post-Wild World begins. Human influence on the environment is so
powerful that we must accept that the care of nature requires our design and
management. Naturalism and humanism should go hand in hand to work on the most
attainable and curable elements. Gardeners must work together with scientists
and engineers in the fight for ecology. It’s time we took Gilles Clement’s
Third Landscape seriously. The time has come for us to listen to Fernando
Caruncho and become the Earth’s gardeners. Thus, the book is dedicated to
anyone who would like to transform a plot of land in an ecological way.
Among the many fronts in this vast battlefield,
the book is dedicated to one of the most important: planting design. Simplifying
a lot, gardening has traditionally consisted in placing a series of decorative
elements seeking a final aesthetic goal. Plants have been (incredibly not
always) an essential part of such decorative elements, and any additional value
such as sustainability of the garden, has often been relegated to a much lower
level compared to the aesthetic goal. Thomas and Claudia propose, instead, to create
spaces that add natural beauty to its surroundings and provide an aesthetic
value, and these two objectives will have equal importance. In order to balance
aesthetics and sustainability we must stop thinking about plants as isolated
species serving a decorative function. Instead, we have to use plants as groups
of compatible species which interact with each other and with their environment
forming a community that will be able to operate in the most autonomous way.
If our plant community must be maintained over
time with a minimum requirement of inputs and an enrichment of the environment,
our plantations should be designed and managed according to very clear
principles. Among those mentioned by the authors, my favourite is the
acceptance of stress as an asset. Instead of trying to convert the garden into
a paradise of fertility in which anything can grow; an unrealistic ideal
because there is no place in which anything can grow, let us focus on selecting
species for which our limitations are beneficial. We can follow Beth Chatto's
example that shows us how an exuberant garden can grow even in the poorest
gravel field. Another basic principle is the maintenance shift towards
management. Both may seem the same, but while maintenance involves a static order
of things and the preservation of the garden in a given state, management moves
us towards evolution and adaptation to change, in a cycle fed steadily by
design and motivated by reducing the inputs required by our plantation.
Talking
about the aesthetic value of the garden, the authors champion the creation of
plantations that are able to activate the memory of nature in the viewer’s eye.
This memory can be both personal and collective. It is quite possible that both have long been
asleep in the shade of the concrete blocks that surround us and awakening them
won´t be easy. But those successful gardens may awaken in the viewer such
personal and atavistic feelings that they could prove to be as unforgettable as
modest Proust's Madeleine. But personal memory is a very well hidden treasure,
so the authors propose to focus on that other collective memory that obeys recognizable
patterns and stimuli. To make a plantation awaken in us the memory of nature,
it is necessary for the patterns of nature to be translated into a
horticultural language. Identifying these patterns based on the study of
different natural ecosystems would be an unapproachable task, given the
enormous variety of existing systems. Big doses of abstraction are necessary. Thus,
to obtain the basic patterns that form the main plant communities in temperate
climates, the authors offer a series of archetypes or main patterns from which it
will be easy to derive specific cases. A
forest can be a pine forest, a beech forest or a forest with a big diversity of
broadleaved trees, but all of them will share common characteristics, because
after all, a forest is a forest. Claudia and Thomas propose four archetypes
which are a gradient of plant communities depending on the wood density:
grassland, shrubland or woodland, forest and the border between forest and any
of the former.
Transition between grassland and woodland or forest is very common |
All of these have a series of characteristic patterns which help
us to design our plantation. Unfortunately for all of those who wish to design
gardens, these patterns are not enough, they are only a starting point, because
good garden design requires a much more complex approach. Claudia and Thomas point
out that great planting design is the result of three harmonious interactions: the
relationships of plants and place, plants and people, and plants and other plants.
Achieving
a good relationship between plants and place requires knowing and understanding
the location of our garden very well. We are not only talking about scientific
knowledge based on aspects such as the structure of the soil, climate zone or
number of hours of sunshine, but also about an artistic vision that is fed by constant
watching and listening, which can lead us to discern what archetype our
landscape requires. Remember: Consult the genius of the place in all.
A
successful relationship of plants and people
faces the paradox that enormous doses of design are needed to make a garden
that efficiently evokes the wild. We do not seek to copy nature, but to create
an attractive interpretation of it, because a garden that just copies nature will
almost always be mistaken with an abandoned lot and it will hardly evoke
anything. To achieve an evocative effect, the plantation must adapt to two
frames, a conceptual one and a physical one. The conceptual frame will show us
the archetypal landscape which must be addressed and which special features our
garden impose. Should we hide a wall or cut back those shrubs? Do we want to
evoke an open space or a protected environment? All of them are decisions that
will determine our conceptual framework and we must answer them by designing a
series of patterns that will be legible and attractive to the public. This
requires selecting, distilling and amplifying character-giving elements and having
structural elements that bring order and coherence to the planting. Aspects such
as the shape of the planting beds, the height of the plants or certain elements
such as a walls, hedges or fences which can frame the plantation, are
key if we want our plantation to become intentional and evocative.
Its curved shape and the contrast with the mowed meadow are key if we want this plantation looks like a plantation. |
Finally,
the relationship of plants with other plants will define our plant community.
Claudia and Thomas have drawn from studies of authors such as Richard Hansen,
Friedrich Stahl, John Philip Grime or Norbert Kühn to define a simplified model
of selection and combination of plants. Condensing selection systems based both
on the idea of using plants that grow naturally in an environment similar to
our garden's environment, and survival and adaptation strategies of different species,
they conclude that we must sequentially add interlocked layers that will cover
the ground. The authors detail four layers: structural plants, seasonal theme
plants, ground cover plants and filling plants. Together, the four layers will be
able to provide the aesthetic and visual component throughout the year, and the
diversity and coverage that a plant community requires to be beautiful and
resilient.
IMiscanthus are structural plants, Hemerocallis are definitely seasonal theme plants, and Daisies can be both. |
I
like this book because I think it summarizes ideas that have never been
presented with the clarity and conciseness Thomas and Claudia convey. I find it
informative and inspiring and as a Hispanic amateur gardener, it has given me
some food for thought:
- The challenge of artistic creation: Claudia and Thomas don't give us lists of species, nor an instruction book, but they give us a conceptual framework that each designer can adapt to their creativity and circumstances. And that means facing the inescapable fact that garden design is artistic work which does not allow for shortcuts if you want to get somewhere interesting.
- Only naturalism? The book claims that the design of plant communities isn´t necessarily limited to naturalistic gardens. And indeed among the three gardens discussed at the end of the book they include one by Heiner Luz where naturalistic plantations develop within a framework of formal hedges of boxwood. Another good example could be any of Christopher Bradley-Hole's gardens where exuberant plantings of perennials grow within blocks of Corten steel cubes which have been placed following strict geometric rules. We could say that Heiner Luz's garden is formal and the Christopher Bradley-Hole's gardens are modern, but I think the essence of both is purely naturalistic. By the way, the two other gardens that they use as examples are in their own style two wonderful naturalistic gardens: Federal Twist Garden by James Golden (who is indeed another great inspiration for this blog) and the iconic Derek Jarman's Prospect Cottage which once inspired the masterful Beth Chatto.
- Mediterranean archetype: although the authors quote four different archetypes as sources of inspiration, I think they consciously or unconsciously opt for the prairie as a reference model. It is not surprising since both of them drink from Dutch, German and American sources that have contributed so much to the perennial planting style. But in Spain and the majority of Mediterranean landscapes, the main archetype is what they call shrubland. For us it is so important that we can’t even agree on the name: matorral, garriga, chaparral, maquia or just "monte bajo". Our landscape tends to evolve after forest degradation or abandonment of crops and grassland, and move towards vegetation communities where shrubs dominate. Maybe that's why Mediterranean landscapers of a naturalistic style such as Olivier Filippi or Heidi Gildemeister, find their main expression in that archetype in which shrubs are much more predominant than perennials.
- The
fifth archetype: the agricultural landscape. We can think the agricultural
landscape is the opposite of a wild landscape and therefore it must be outside
the scope of the book. But at the beginning of this post we said that we must change
the paradigm and consider that nature is all around us. Thus we must accept
that an olive grove in Jaen is as natural as a beech forest in Asturias. I
suppose it's due to my Mediterranean spirit, but in grasslands, shrubland and
forest I can't identify our olive groves, great dehesas, vineyards, cereal
crops or orchards around our towns. All of them are ecosystems that can be
sustainable and that, like those showed in the book, provide a pattern that can
be used in order to trigger an emotional impact on the viewer. What is 'Mas de
las Voltes' then? On leaving aside agricultural
landscapes, we miss the opportunity to achieve two things: first, if we work
with this archetype we can improve the treatment of agricultural ecosystems
balancing sustainability and aesthetic factors with the pure productivity goal
that now prevails. On the other hand, many gardeners who do not feel motivated
by naturalism, but instead find inspiration in geometric and formal patterns,
can find an attractive model in the agricultural archetype. Last year we took a
trip to Tuscany, Provence and Catalonia. These are areas where there are plenty
of inspiring landscapes, but if there was a place where I found a special
feeling, it was a small olive grove in a village in Girona. The land had not
been plowed for a long time and olive trees grew among grasses. The contrast of
geometric planting with wild meadow, and sculpted forms by pruning olive trees
with the spikes of grasses, was spectacular. So spectacular that I think I have
found my particular archetype.
Il Colombaio of Ferenc Maté. Can we find a more archetypal and seductive landscape that this transition from vineyard to olive grove and from olive grove to the forest?