Meanings/Landscape and Appreciation Part I

First section

Case Allen---Post 36 -----18/11/2004
Perhaps in beginning this group, if I would have stated exactly
what I meant by the terms 'Landscape' and 'Appreciation', confusion
could have been lessened and foci could have been enhanced. So,
here is some clarification to help with discussions.

The term 'Landscape' as it applies to the name of this group, means
something that we can experience through the senses (i.e., sight,
sound, touch, smell, taste). Hence, even objects (e.g., a desk,
house, painting, barn, etc.) can be landscapes.

The term 'Appreciation' as it applies to the name of this group, was
meant to connote 'understanding' of the landscape in question.
Thus, if clouds (to cite an earlier hope of discussion) were the
landscape under discussion, then to 'appreciate' them we would
strive for understanding them both scientifically and otherwise
(e.g., via spiritualness, through artwork, etc.)

Hopefully that makes sense to everyone. I am by no means trying to
discount anyone's ideas, thoughts, or opinions. I merely hope these
explanations enhance our focus.
=========================================
Peter Willis ------ Post 37 ---------- 18/11

Just a brief note on the meaning of the world appreciation. As I understand it is it more than understanding which I tend to see as a project of the logical rational part of the psyche. Appreciation comes for the latin ankd is to do with price. When capital items appreciate or depreciate, the upward or downward movement is in terms of the cash value of the item.

Appreciate, as something people do in relation to things and places etc is to attend to the value aesthetic, financial etc of an item. The attending involves the power of desire.

If I can speak metaphorically, to appreciate something is to allow it to capture our imagination and move our heart. This involves a person in developing a capacity to be smitten which is one of the underlying themes in Alain de Botton's book The Art of Travel.
.
========================================
Case Allen ---------- Post 38----------- 19/11

Peter:Your point about appreciation being something that "moves our heart" and "captures our imagination" is well taken. As is the etymology of the word. Both are spot-on in the context of "Landscape Appreciation". I only wanted to point out to the group that, at least for our discussion purposes, the "appreciation = understanding" may be an easy way to think of "Landscape Appreciation".Personally, when I understand something, I am more apt to be "moved" or have my imagination "captured". But of course, that may be due to my curosity of All Things.

=================================================

Eddington -------------- Post 39 ------------- 24/11

I feel I must question Case Allen’s meanings of “Landscape” and “Appreciation”. He writes (in post 36 of this Board)that, had he stated exactly what he meant “confusion could have been lessened and foci could have been enhanced”; it looks to me that his proposed meanings could result in the entirely opposite effect.
By ascribing to Landscape the meaning of “something that we can experience through the senses” we would achieve such a generality that Landscape could be equated to any “Thing” or any “Object”; foci is not thus enhanced but rather lost altogether. The Appreciation of Landscapes would hence concern itself with the Appreciation of practically everything, a laudable task no doubt, but whose scope is too wide for a Group such as ours.

Case Allen indeed says that even objects like “a desk, house, painting, barn” can be landscapes; my objection is that to discuss each of them in depth requires specialized knowledge: the appreciation of houses and barns is in the domain of Architecture, that of a desk in Furniture Appreciation, that of a painting in the domain of Visual Arts, and so forth. Why not leave them to others and concentrate ourselves on a more restricted denotation of Landscapes? Generality will be thus lost but discussions could gain in depth and seriousness.
On the other hand I find Case Allen’s proposed meaning of Appreciation as “Understanding” is too limited (as they say: you can’t please them all!). Understanding a landscape is certainly a major component in its appreciation but we could not ignore the various affective or emotional responses that appear to come into play.

==================================

Case Allen ----- Post 41 ---------------- 24/11

In response to posting # 39, good thoughts; they are well stated. I offer the following paragraphs to more adequately explain my position, and expound upon the ideas of landscape appreciation.Because of my definitions put forth in post # 36, eddington7 notes that "The Appreciation of Landscapes would hence concern itselfwith the Appreciation of practically everything" and that it is thus a scope "too wide for a Group such as ours". But, this is precisely why I founded this Group: as a forum for appreciating ANY landscape – regardless of size, shape, location, region,gender, class, etc.

A glance at past postings and the Member list of this Group reveals quite an eclectic collection of landscapes and appreciators. There is discussion of landscapes in paintings, clouds as landscapes, music and landscapes. Members of the Group are from around the globe, and their expertise and experience is varied, from art history to environmental appreciation. In my view, this is exactly what this Group is about: bringing together many different appreciators from many different areas of expertise. Hence, my statement that objects (the "desk, house, panting, barn"phrase) can be studied as landscapes, is meant merely to convey a different way of looking at things.

Appreciating objects as landscapes (at least for me, as a geographer) is a rewarding experience. I am by no means an expert in Art History, Architecture, or the visual arts, but I certainly appreciate them. As the saying goes, you don't have to be a musician to enjoy music. I appreciate(i.e., strive to understand) landscapes – any landscape. I also put forth that with such an eclectic array of Members and interests, the "generality" of this Group is precisely what makes it interesting.

Generality need not limit depth and seriousness, as eddington7 suggests. Indeed, this is precisely the stereotype the discipline of geography has had over the years: that it is too general. But, in many institutions (for example, tertiary educational institutions and the U.S.'s National ScienceFoundation) the idea of generality – via interdisciplinary ortransdisciplinary collaboration – is overwhelmingly popular. And this is exactly what geography has done for over a hundred years! My argument of "appreciation = understanding", while seemingly-simple at first glance, may also seem too general by leaving out "the various affective or emotional responses that appear to come into play". But if it is "general", would it not cover these aspects as well? Einstein described his theory of relativity as "general" presumably because it encompassedso many different things (landscapes?)That is why I presented the meanings of Landscape and Appreciation as I did. This Group is for anyone who wants to understand (i.e., appreciate) landscapes (i.e., something that we can experience through the senses) – any landscape!

============================

Phil Leinart ---------- Post 45 ------------- 30/11

"Landscape" is a multidisciplinary matter – the natural sciences, the social sciences, the humanities and the engineering technologies all have a claim. Even though the disciplines are intertwined to a degree, the term "landscape" can get lost, confused or convoluted in the vastness. Indeed, it would be a monumental task to try to define or confine the term so that it has a universally meaningful to all. Nevertheless, for the sake of discussion, I am going to take a crack at the definition of "landscape".

As a point of reference, I am a geologist. Therefore, my notion oflandscape may be different from that of my liberal arts friends.Nevertheless, I believe the concept of "landscape" has some fundamental cross disciplinary commonalities.T he Dictionary of Physical Geography (1984) says landscape is a"term derived from the Dutch (landschap) which referred simply torural scenery. Its modern usage relates to rural or urban, and includes both natural and man-made features, i.e. both the natural and cultural landscapes."

The Encyclopedia of Geomorphology (1968) states that "landscape may be defined as a stretch of county as seen from a particular vantage point". The article continues regarding what landscape"is made up of"; in this usage, natural elements such as rock, soil, vegetation and streams. Also discussed is the "range of variation", e.g. tropics vs. desert, mountain vs. costal. The entry concludes with: "Just as the landscape is highly variable,so may the vantage point", e.g. a "view" from a hill top,aircraft or a satellite image.

Although it is a rather narrow definition, landscape is defined in the Glossary of Geology (1987) as "the distinct association of landforms…that can be seen in a single view, e.g. glacial landscape". According to the Webster's on my desk, the first sense definition of landscape is "a view or vista of scenery on land ." And, scribbled in the margin of class notes from a GIS course I took some time ago is: Landscape = surface features of the environment, both physical and human.

Here is the up-shot, based upon the definitions above: I think the concept of "landscape" must encompass the followingattributes:•An assemblage of tangible natural and/or cultural features or elements,•At the earth's surface,• Observed from a vantage or view point, i.e. a particular time and place. It is up to the viewer of the landscape - be it painter, ecologist, poet, paleontologist, tourist, philosopher or planner - to determinethe focus, assign the values, provide the ideas or interpret the meaning of the scene.

Perhaps I am an unimaginative geologist, but I am content with the common dictionary meaning of "appreciation": to recognize the quality, significance or magnitude of; to be fully conscious of or sensitive to; to be thankful of; and, an awareness or perception of aesthetic qualities (Webster's II, New Riverside Dictionary,1984). I do believe that having understanding and knowledge can makefor a "richer" appreciation. However, over the years, I have casually observed that one's capacity to "appreciate" is not necessarily coupled to their intellectual cache. But then again,I may be confusing wonderment with appreciation, eh?

All that said, I will leave you with these words most important to "landscape appreciation":"Do not burn yourselves out. …get out there and hunt and fish and mess around with your friends, ramble out yonder and explore the forests, encounter the GRIZZ, climb the mountains, bag the peaks, run the rivers, breathe deep of that yet sweet and lucid air, sit quietly for awhile and contemplate the precious stillness, that lovely, mysterious and awesome space. Enjoy yourselves, keep your brain in your head and your head firmly attached to the body….and I promise you this one sweet victory over our enemies, over those deskbound men with their hearts in a safe deposit box and their eyes hypnotized by desk calculators. I promise you this: you will outlive the bastards."- Edward Abbey, as quoted in the book "As the Earth Speaks" Keep lookin' at the ground!

===================================

Jorge G. ------- Post 46 ------- 2/12/04

Why Landscape appears to be a concept of such `hightension' ? Why controversies on the subject get so easily to "boiling point"?. Although there are probably a few more, I can come up for the moment with two main reasons: a) The implications of assigning meanings to Landscape and hence to their Perception and Appreciation do not remain enclosed within the walls of academic debate; they may and indeed do affect decisions regarding what could be allowed or forbidden in rural environments.

Most of us would like to keep our landscapes unmodified, (or as little as possible) by human intervention; this attitude conflicts many a time with powerful economic interests concerned with making profitable use of those resources. Certain concepts of Landscape may be used as ethical arguments to the advantage of those interested in their depredation. In such cases we tend to react passionately against those schools of thought in L.Perception and Appreciation that, unintentionally, favor the cause of the landscape spoilers.

Within that context, H. Washington, for instance, in his Post 21 raises the question: (quote)" Will, might that not explain why we have an environmental crisis, as the world is dominated by a Modernist worldview based on Cartesian dualism?"

b) Landscape is a concept of high tension because, in spite of landscapes being so familiar to each one of us they remain problematic. They are all around us and, as such, we'd like them to be real; we `westerners' are comforted by the idea that at least the world around us is real. So, when someone comes forward telling us that landscapes are mental/social constructs, 'figments of our imagination" we may be forgiven for over-reacting.

And not just mere `figments' `fabrications' `illusions': The Sun plunges into the sea every evening,; this, we are told, is also to an illusion, but at least is shared by any passer-by that happens to be looking. The way we perceive those figments-landscapes is, according to some scholars, not shared by all passers-by but dependent on class distinctions, colonialism, books we've read, stories we've been told,songs we've heard. Only a small step, from the above considerations, leads to the claim that not everything we perceive with our senses is real and another small step to the claim that the world `out there' is not solid and objective as we'd wish it to be. Something nearly as heretical as saying that the world is not quite as the one depicted in our TVscreens.

The debate about reality has concerned Philosophy, Science and the Arts since their beginnings; however it was largely kept within Academia and could be ignored by the general public with a condescending smile. Landscapes on the other hand are, pedestrian, plebeian, familiar to us all in our daily experience; which explains in large measure that, when the real vs. unreal debate is mixed with landscapes, the resulting cocktail awakes our passions.

=======================

End of Section I;

To go to Section II click here: Continuation