The 2019 ASLA conference questioned US identity in troubled times. A Congressional Report The term “elephant in the room” has a nice double meaning. On the one hand, it describes something important that is known to everyone but not explicitly addressed. On the other hand, it also describes a huge, trampled something that can dismantle given structures without much sensitivity. In this […]

The 2019 ASLA conference questioned US identity in troubled times. A conference report

The term “elephant in the room” has a nice double meaning. On the one hand, it describes something important that is known to everyone but not explicitly addressed. On the other hand, however, it also describes a huge hitchhiking something that can dismantle given structures without much sensitivity. In this ambiguity, the current US President Trump was precisely the elephant at this year’s annual conference of the ASLA, the American Society of Landscape Architects, in San Diego. There was little explicit mention of The Donald and his sometimes elephantine policies. But their consequences for the American present played an implicit role again and again.

Of course, this applied most directly to the many panels and presentations dealing with the consequences of climate change. The environmental politician and researcher Gina McCarthy laid the atmospheric foundation for this, so to speak. In her rhetorically brilliant presentation, she made it clear that the Obama administration has launched many concrete legislative initiatives. Not all of these have yet been revised – and it is unlikely that they can all be withdrawn. “The train is running”, was her ultimately optimistic message. The audience acknowledged this with standing ovations, but as a fact-oriented European, it took some getting used to McCarthy’s mass preaching style.

A kind of moderate basic ecological optimism almost inevitably emanates from events such as the ASLA conference, because they deal with concrete steps towards improvement. One field session, for example, presented the regeneration of the San Diego River ecosystem. Other panels presented solutions for areas in the hot and dry southwest of the USA, some of which are becoming uninhabitable due to global warming, or landscape architecture approaches for better air quality. The impression is that landscape architecture is aware of its responsibility and accepts it even in a harsh political climate.

However, this political and social climate also played another role. Many discussions addressed the identity-shaping and negotiating role of spatial planning. The USA (and not only the USA) appears today as a country in search of its “identity”. There is a kind of existential insecurity in society as a whole. The space in which we live can take on an orientation function – for entire societies, for smaller cultural units, but also for individuals and their immediate social environment. In this context, a panel on US post-war squares was very exciting.

The head of the “Parks Conservancy” of the city of Pittsburgh presented the careful redesign of Mellow Square in Pittsburgh. Ken Smith, a well-known landscape architect in the USA, presented three different redesigns from New York and San Francisco, including the outdoor space in front of Mies van der Rohe’s iconic Seagram Building in Manhattan. It was clear from all the plaza projects presented that US-American collective memory is being negotiated here. Post-war modernism was formative for US culture – and must be treated with corresponding care. “It’s about spatial integrity, but also historical integrity,” says Charles Birnbaum, head of the Cultural Landscape Foundation.

The elephant “La Frontera”

The question naturally arises as to who ascribes integrity or to whom it applies. After all, the idea of society as a homogeneous unit is disintegrating, and not just in the USA. Accordingly, it is important to unite different perspectives in landscape planning or at least allow them to have their say. Allowing heterogeneity was the overarching theme of many panels. “Landscapes with an edge” could be created, was the tenor of a discussion on the importance of subculture in planning. “Allow provocation, create spaces for subversion”, was the plea of planner and podcaster Michael Todoran (he runs the podcast “LArchitect”). The question is where subculture, where provocation ends and where mere commercialization begins. Whether, for example, the eScooters that are also filling the streets in the USA can be considered a subculture, as suggested in the panel, is open to debate.

Nevertheless, the cultural sensitivity of this year’s ASLA conference was high. However, one culturally charged topic that would have been obvious given the San Diego venue was unfortunately largely left out: Mexico and the planning challenge of the border. A (quickly booked out) field trip to Tijuana did take place. But the border was hardly mentioned in the content panels. And this despite the fact that the new ASLA President Wendy Miller told Garten + Landschaft in an interview that the planners had the planning dimensions of “La Frontera” in mind (you can read the interview in full at www.topos-magazine.com). But perhaps that border also represents a kind of elephant in the mental room of US culture. It’s there, it’s huge, but it’s being hidden as much as possible.

On April 12, 2021, the first webinar of the Big Stuff community for technology preservation starts. Big Stuff restorer Eva Wentland will introduce the topic of coatings for industrial heritage The Big Stuff community for technology preservation is launching a series of webinars. The community brings together people from different backgrounds to share their knowledge and passion for the preservation of […]

On April 12, 2021, the first webinar of the Big Stuff community for technology preservation will begin. Big Stuff restorer Eva Wentland will introduce the topic of coatings for industrial heritage

The Big Stuff community for technology preservation is launching a series of webinars. The community brings together people from diverse backgrounds to share their knowledge and passion for big tech preservation. Big tech heritage is valued, recognized and preserved as an asset that promotes well-being, generates economic value and supports community cohesion and growth. Big Stuff encourages interdisciplinary and cross-group thinking and action and welcomes ideas from academics, professionals, volunteers and private owners. While the core areas include material conservation and science, engineering, mechanical crafts, curatorial studies, architecture and urban planning, Big Stuff also welcomes the inclusion of people and ideas from other disciplines and communities.

The first of two webinars per year will start on April 12 at 1:00 pm. To kick off this first seminar, Eva Wentland, an aspiring Big Stuff conservator, will introduce the controversial topic of coatings for industrial heritage, with a focus on heritage exposed outdoors. The basis for this session is the goal of preserving historic coatings as primary sources of information and connection, either visibly through the use of transparent coatings or invisibly by overcoating with pigmented systems – all while providing corrosion protection.

As always, there is never one right way, especially in heritage conservation, where we always have to develop individual solutions for each property. However, we can learn from past case studies and from the behavior and (in)stability of the materials that are applied to objects for conservation purposes. The aim is to exchange experiences: Which coatings are used? How can their performance be assessed after long-term exposure? How costly are subsequent maintenance measures, and are they even possible?

Registration

These webinars are designed to get interested parties talking. Short presentations introduce the current topic of the webinar. Participants then have the opportunity to share their thoughts and experiences. The webinar is open to all interested parties. To participate, please register here using the contact form. The language is English.