When reading the Landscape Architecture Research, I have been attracted by the saying “theory can be both a stabilizer and a disruptive mechanism”“a third, hermeneutic, role for theory”(Corner, 1990).
As the description from the author, in different ages, the three roles of theory–as instrumental stabilizer, critical disrupter, and interpreter of change–were all evident and in tension. I think it is an interesting perspective of interpreting the history of landscape architecture. It reminds me another book I have seen, Invisible Gardens: The Search for Modernism in the American Landscape.
Invisible Gardens is a composite history of the individuals and firms that defined the field of landscape architecture in America from 1925 to 1975, a period that spawned a significant body of work combining social ideas of enduring value with landscapes and gardens that forged a modern aesthetic. It also offer a similar perspective to look at all the history in a deep and interesting way. And it gives me a whole scene of landscape architecture’s cultural contribution struggling to define a modernist aesthetic out of the startling changes in postwar America.
So I highly recommend if anyone also is interested in this area and has not read that book that you should have a try. It may help you see the history of landscape architecture in postwar America in a totally different way.
I think I also read Invisible Gardens again so I can use the perspective mentioned in the Landscape Architecture Research to analysis the evolutionary process, maybe it will broaden my mind.