Showing posts with label small gardens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label small gardens. Show all posts
Monday, December 26, 2011
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Water Feature

Yay! another little garden! A water feature this time: a bird bath. This is another one of those gorgeous "inefficiencies" that I love so much: someone stepped on the plastic sheeting cleaning the gutters, and left this indentation. The birds love to bathe here. High and safe.
It appeals to me as a lovely notion that "nature" is about that which takes advantage of opportunities, of niches, of inefficiencies in design or maintenance...therefore suggesting that such inefficiency are a really beautiful thing to plan into design.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
2008_pre-major
I just realised how this relates to small gardens: another type of public parkland._Oops, just realised those labels are back to front. The verge is of course the public parkland - for now, anyway.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Bringing architecture and nature together

This is by Terunobu Fujimoi.
I took the photo of a slide at his lecture on Wednesday night. He has a piece in the "Shelter: On Kindness" exhibition at RMIT gallery for the Melbourne fringe festival.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Scale of the new garden.
Yep, there's a lot of differences. Some too obvious to mention. Most obviously they look different. One is a stinking great palace garden manicured, managed, loved and cultivated carefully and systematically by a huge squadron of horticulturalists, aware of the full import of their every action on the history of France and landscape architecture in the western world. The other is four square inches of weeds growing in a footpath somewhere in Brunswick (or was it Preston?) about which probably no human being would care if it's not even there anymore. Quite a lot more people would be fussed if the Versailles gardens got a damn good dose of agent orange.
Chance: the chance events of viable seeds somehow managing to land in an hospitable soil in a vast desert of cement, and the chance of history preferencing one species over another for a complex planting of human-preferred geometries.
Design next to nature makes an interesting question: does nature design? To bring it a more manageable size I'll use Bill Mollison's axiom: everything gardens. This is as true of plants as it is of us, rabbits and ring tailed possums: everything tries to modify the conditions that it finds itself in to be more amenable, more capable of meeting its needs and comfort and ensuring the continued survival of itself as an individual and a species.
To get to the point, it's probably more fair to ask what's the same?
Because I'm tempted to say there's no difference, from this point of view:
both of these gardens are a whole bunch of plants and other animals (insects, microbes...) struggling to survive in a hostile environment managed by human beings. What we describe as difference is often around how we, as aesthetically focused, historically minded cultural animals feel, how we consider what are the histories of these styles of garden, on the one hand the intensely managed royal gardens that speak of power and privilege, on the other the vertiginous survival despite the odds: the wandering suburbanite, roundup in one hand, lawn mower in the other, how much odder do you get than that?
I don't know about the French floral condition, but here we know these little plants as garden weeds. And weeds in our bush. From their point of view they are living organism doing what living things do: their best to survive in the condition in which they find themselves.
As far as the concept of garden goes, is it too big of a leap to consider these little gardens with as much fidelity to the notion of garden as the Versailles gardens, to the notion of public parks as a botanical garden, as a soccer field, a reserve, a suburban park, a regional park? As the garden in the main street? As the front yard? It's about scale.
Chance: the chance events of viable seeds somehow managing to land in an hospitable soil in a vast desert of cement, and the chance of history preferencing one species over another for a complex planting of human-preferred geometries.
Design next to nature makes an interesting question: does nature design? To bring it a more manageable size I'll use Bill Mollison's axiom: everything gardens. This is as true of plants as it is of us, rabbits and ring tailed possums: everything tries to modify the conditions that it finds itself in to be more amenable, more capable of meeting its needs and comfort and ensuring the continued survival of itself as an individual and a species.
To get to the point, it's probably more fair to ask what's the same?
Because I'm tempted to say there's no difference, from this point of view:
both of these gardens are a whole bunch of plants and other animals (insects, microbes...) struggling to survive in a hostile environment managed by human beings. What we describe as difference is often around how we, as aesthetically focused, historically minded cultural animals feel, how we consider what are the histories of these styles of garden, on the one hand the intensely managed royal gardens that speak of power and privilege, on the other the vertiginous survival despite the odds: the wandering suburbanite, roundup in one hand, lawn mower in the other, how much odder do you get than that?
I don't know about the French floral condition, but here we know these little plants as garden weeds. And weeds in our bush. From their point of view they are living organism doing what living things do: their best to survive in the condition in which they find themselves.
As far as the concept of garden goes, is it too big of a leap to consider these little gardens with as much fidelity to the notion of garden as the Versailles gardens, to the notion of public parks as a botanical garden, as a soccer field, a reserve, a suburban park, a regional park? As the garden in the main street? As the front yard? It's about scale.
Labels:
design,
human ecological relationships,
maintenance,
site,
small gardens
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
what's the difference?
From: http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0508/images/versaille.jpgHere's a little puzzle for you...what's the difference between the formalist garden at Versaille, and this little garden in Brunswick?
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Friday, September 4, 2009
Sunday, August 30, 2009
More Little Gardens
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Very very very samll gardens
Monday, August 24, 2009
Green Gutter

Walking the streets and laneways, coming across one of these beautiful gardens is such a joyous moment!
Labels:
bright ideas,
design,
inefficiencies,
life,
maintenance,
site,
small gardens
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Inefficiency
Labels:
bleeding edges,
bright ideas,
design,
joy,
life,
maintenance,
natural forces,
site,
small gardens
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)















