Conversations with Michael Van Valkenburgh

The following exchange took place during the course of six visits made by Michael Van Valkenburgh to the Knowlton School of Architecture as the inaugural Glimcher Distinguished Visiting Professor. Additional comments by members of the design team are take

  • PDF / 3,208,710 Bytes
  • 17 Pages / 577 x 648 pts Page_size
  • 100 Downloads / 213 Views

DOWNLOAD

REPORT


The following exchange took place during the course

What were you exposed to, and how can

of six visits made by Michael Van Valkenburgh to

we identify thinking that has been car-

the Knowlton School of Architecture as the inaugural

ried from this into your current work with

Glimcher Distinguished Visiting Professor. Additional

parks at the urban scale?

comments by members of the design team are taken from a roundtable discussion.

Michael Van Valkenburgh: Ten years out of undergrad, I was concerned that the profession

Jane Amidon: You’ve mentioned that major

was turning its back on design. The garden was a

aspects of your early career were influ-

means to look more closely at design. I had recent-

enced by several of the leading postwar

ly signed on as an assistant professor at Harvard

modernists such as Dan Kiley and Rich

and had just worked for four years for Kevin

Haag. Much of your research at this time

Lynch, the city planner. Kevin had great respect

focused on the garden scale—appropriate

for landscape as a design medium; he believed

to the 1980s, as many in the profession

that if you could create beauty in a small space

returned to the idea of critical site design

and solve the programmatic requirements of the

after decades of greater concern with envi-

garden, you could probably work on landscapes

ronmental and social issues. Your research,

at any scale. I set out to interview garden design-

resulting exhibition, and publication of

ers whose work I admired, including James Rose,

Built Landscapes: Gardens of the Northeast

A. E. Bye, and Dan Kiley (many of whose projects

in 1984 helped support the renewed focus

I had visited on a self-guided tour in 1973). Alan

on articulation of site-specific qualities.

Ward sometimes traveled with me to capture the 11

gardens in photographs. I was also interested in

my early academic work and my office’s current

ied during a Dumbarton Oaks fellowship. It was

urban parks projects, one could say that Lynch

important to include her as a non-modern in the

influenced my understanding of the urban condi-

show, in addition to Fletcher Steele, who in some

tion as it relates to parks. In some ways, the design

ways was a bridge between the great neoclassical

of a park is not unlike the design of a garden. But

estate designers and modern landscape architec-

the scale is wildly different. And the complexity

ture. Most of all, I wanted to visit the gardens with

of context—what’s around it—changes a lot. Both

the designers themselves and to have the land-

provide experiences of color, space, texture, and

scapes properly photographed. I wanted to make

an immersion within landscape material as an art

the profession look noble, the way it is. I wanted

form. But a garden is for an individual, and a park

to create a museum-quality exhibition that would

is for everyone.

make people see landscape architecture as a profes-

There was an important internship in London

sion of beauty. Although they intimidated me, I

in 1970 with the English