The inspiration of “Splice Garden” Analysis by Martha Schwartz

Posted: August 26th, 2021

Student’s Name

Instructor’s Name

Course

Date

The inspiration of “Splice Garden” Analysis by Martha Schwartz

Introduction

Purpose Statement. In this paper, I intend to offer an in-depth discussion and critique analysis of Martha Schwartz’s design concerning the splice garden. To be precise, the design encompasses a garden room that is sub-divided into equal halves, each attributed to a different artistic inspiration. Therefore, the consideration of the splice garden will inspire me to choose two different design styles that have been thoroughly studied across the course, and thus form a merger of their distinctivestyles (Franco 104). The purpose of combining these stylesis meant to create myversion of a splice garden after learning from Schwartz’s inspirational design. I strongly feel that this concept of splice garden analysis offers a better chance to learn and earmark varied structural, artistic appearances of configurations, thus underscoring the impactful effects of constructive critique on the complete designanalysis(Kitt). Additionally, this act of taking two different design styles and integrating themseems a better artistic approach to expressingmy understanding of how homeowners utilize space to create impactful exterior garden designs.

Precedent Study of the Splice Garden by Martha Schwartz

Overview of the garden. Splice Garden is an artistic-oriented architectural design that was first advanced by Martha Schwartz in Cambridge, MA, as a way of arranging the exterior landscape. Notably, the whole concept capitalizes on the elements of form and function. Schwartz is widely recognized for the remarkable ability to push beyond the boundaries of the architectural landscape by creating mixed up designs that change the entire dynamics of an exterior appearance (Franco 104). Her designs signify her exhibition of compromising ideas, ranging from traditional to modern architectural landscape practices. Indeed, she has managed to promote the viewpoints of women architects across the field of landscape design. Notably, the embodiment of her architectural landscape splice garden design entails the merging of both the Japanese with formalistic design, each section attributed to a particular form, serving a standard functionality. Her composition utilizes concentric shapes ascribed to structural inconsistencies, hence advancing her artful expertise designs (Cultural Landscape Foundation). Therefore, fig.1 is Schwartz’s Splice Garden design consisting of both the Japanese landscape art practices coupled with Modernistic influences. For example, the attributes of concentric circular forms of pea gravel sand garden promote the concept of perforating boundaries with vegetation qualities of the natural environment (fig.1).

Figure 1.An example of Splice Garden by Martha Schwartz (“Whitehead Institute ‘Splice Garden’)

Summary of the design.The entire idea of splice garden design seeks to bring about a compositional balance in the architectural landscape by effecting mixed components of planar, vertical, and horizontal forms. Schwartz has managed to draw the attributes of vegetation illusion to her design, where the surrounding locality of the border disguises the natural plant-life. Further, the compositional balance is inherently attained through the alteration of colors and textures of the involved building materials (“Whitehead Institute ‘Splice Garden’). Contrastingly, one-sided boundary perforation imitates dark blues shades, whereas the other part looks dissimilar with lighter green chromatic feel. The vegetation in each perforated boundary shows conspicuous opposition since the left-side features in lighter pigmentation, while the right-side fosters a darker atmosphere scenario(Kitt). The left-sided perforated border exhibits smooth-textured vegetation, while the right-sided one shows a rather rough texture.

Critique of the design.The functionality of the garden seemsirrelevant to the physical provision of user essentials, apart from the implementation of the textual characteristics. Precisely, there are no benches and nodes, and thus does not conform to the individualistic needs of a static environment (Janša 15). However, one’s perception of the textual qualities of the garden seemingly contributes to the human interest of grazing as the only way of drawing utility from the design. Still, there is no plurality in physical affordances for the user,given that visual affordances seem unmistakablya different form as well as textures in the site design. Besides, Schwartz reinforced the visual interest of the garden by using vantages above the grounding plane of a building. In this sense, the slice garden employs more of artistic influences as compared to the architectural elements of landscape design(Kitt). In my view, the garden design is, therefore, is an inspiration of far more artistic composition of visually-attributed features of landscape design (Cultural Landscape Foundation). Moreover, I consider Splice Garden just as a perforated boundary composition associated with enhancements of visual beauty at the expense of advancing in-depth functionalism (Cultural Landscape Foundation). In brief, I view that the boundaries of the garden offer one the desire to experience it once. Still, one cannot afford to frequent its surrounding since its derived marginal utility is short and non-impactful.

Two Different Garden Styles Review

The two landscape designs that I am inspired to apply in my splice garden analysis are Cahokia, Celestial landscape, and the Thomas Church in California.

Cahokia, celestial landscape design style. The organizing concepts of the design entail a prehistoric native civilization of the northern part of Mexico. The whole idea signifies an imitation of a celestial archetype that characterizes the mythical cultures of the Mississippians. The central tenets of the design style involve a false representation of the landscape with countless mounds arising from the earth with a significant presence that appeals to the ancient cosmological beliefs (Janša 18). Accurately, the central tenets ascribe to the four vast plazas attached to honoring the cardinal directions of the great Monks Mound. The critical elements of the design consist of a large circular square coupled with high rising mounds. Each mound has an adequate spacing setting it off from another mound(Kitt). Thus the modular spacing between them serves inherently to unify the general dimension of the landscape. The landscape is characterized by diversified, green, wet, and marshy vegetation, classifying the growth of maize and cones as botanical plants associated with improving the fertility of the place (Landscape Architecture). The Mississippians considered the iconographical landscape like the magnificent Monk mounds making relevance to the people’s cosmological beliefs.

Figure 2. Pictorial landscape view of the Cahokia design style (Franco, Michael)

Thomas Church ‘California School’ landscape design style. The California style was advanced by Thomas Church – an architect who ascribed to the aspect of modernism. The design style features in the unity of purpose where the house is integrated with a garden through free flow spaces.  The central tenet of the design is the modernist freedom which offers a sense of movement to the users of this landscape environment (Landscape Architecture). Key elements of design involve a garden with no end and beginning in the sense that semi-circular pathways surround a pool of water. There is no separation of the house from the garden; therefore, the diversified green vegetation consists of trees, flowers, and grass. The design style offers a feeling of freedom to the occupants of the garden as they would move freely across the open landscape, thus fostering the aesthetic values of the surrounding natural co-existence.

Figure 3. Pictorial landscape view of the Thomas Church (Califonia School) design style (Franco, Michael)

Comparison and contrasting of the two designs.Cahokia celestial design compares and contrasts with the California style in the following ways. Both architects utilized outdoor spaces separated by pathways (Landscape Architecture). The models implement sensory elements such as smell, touch, and sight. Further, both design styles applied the use of diversified green vegetation, which attributed to the aesthetic values of the open landscape. The dimension of the landscape in Cahokia design has varied sloping with numerous mounds, whereas that one of California School is flat (Janša 17). The landscape in Cahokia design employs a country’s influences prehistoric native civilization based on cosmological beliefs. On the contrary, the second design ascribes to the modernistic influences of a free society, where the vegetation composes of varied cultures.

Annotated Sketch Plan

Figure 4. Pictorial view of my annotated sketch merging Cahokia celestial and California style designs

Discussion of Your Design

Through the inspirations of Cahokia celestial and California school styles, I managed to merge both the prehistoric mythic experience of traditional cultures with the freedom-oriented modernist approach of a landscape. Indeed, the dimensions of my landscape design have established a free flow naturalistic sensory empathy, which offers the personal appeal of cultural diversity.

Notably, I incorporated into my design the blending philosophies of the inspired styles. For example, the entire landscape signifies the unity and simplicity of forms, where the backyard is open and extends with no formal, structural boundaries. A pool of water is only surrounded by asphalt pavement. Benches and bed-like structure are creating a human affordance feeling of relaxation. Moreover, the small flower gardens take circular forms with varied species, thus fostering Thomas Church’s principle of modernistic freedom. Besides, there are several mounds widely spaced apart with a path passing across them as a sign of preserving the naturalistic, cultural concept of the Cahokia’s design style.

I have placed two plazas, and several mounds feature completely far back as a way of appealing to the celestial tenets of a traditionalistic society. The green vegetation of grass runs throughout the landscape together with fruit trees, thus aspiring to the aesthetic values. The widely spacing between the main features creates a feeling of free movement coupled with sensory perception.

I intended to create an atmosphere full of sensory qualities enhancements through the use of flowering bushes around the patio and trees around the perimeter of the site. These features have established a textual plant life with properly integrated spaces for relaxation purposes. As for pre-existing site circumstances, the mounds and plazas signify the rugged topography of the landscape with an increased sloping at the back of the garden.

Conclusion

The cross-analysis of the Splice Garden project by Martha Schwartz offers a boundary perforation that is sub-divided into equal halves, with each entirely focusing on a different quality of landscape design. The structural examination of the garden is intended tocreate landscape scheme features that are effectively reinforced together, thus appealing to a different set of opposing artistic and architectural philosophies through an experience of sensory dynamics. The analysis of the splice garden made me understand thesubject material, proper co-existence of opposing landscape features, and a commonality synthesis that would bring the whole landscape into the unity of its purpose. The efficient merger of these two different design principles arises the need for fostering a kind of balance between art and functionality while advancing the future study of landscape architecture. Indeed, this splice garden project has inspired me to mergethe design styles of Cahokia celestial and Church’s California school design philosophies.

Works Cited

“Case Study – the ‘Splice Garden.’” (2008, October 13), www.douban.com/group/topic/4374990/. Accessed April 30, 2020.

“Whitehead Institute ‘Splice Garden’, Cambridge, MA, USA.” Martha Schwartz Partners, April 4. 2017, www.marthaschwartz.com/whitehead-institute-splice-garden-cambridge-ma-usa/. It was accessed on April 30, 2020.

Cultural Landscape Foundation. “Gallery of Thomas Dolliver Church.” Connecting People to Places, www.tclf.org/pioneer/thomas-church. Accessed April 30, 2020.

Franco, Michael. “Martha Schwartz’s Collections.” www.pinterest.com/mfranco44/martha-schwartz/. Accessed April 30, 2020.

Janša, Nika. “Between Land, Art, and Landscape Architecture with Examples from Martha Schwartz.” Landscape Artists, 2011, pp. 1-28, www.stud.epsilon.slu.se/2165/1/Jansa_N_110119.pdf. Accessed April 30, 2020.

Kitt, S., A. Cahokia: Cosmic Langscape Architecture: An excerpt from Cahokia: Mirror of the Cosmos. Accessed on 30^th April, 2020 from https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/101363.html

Landscape Architecture. “Thomas Church.” www.retnauer-design.com/images/Thomas_Church.pdf. Accessed April 30, 2020.