WHO ARE WE? SHOULD OUR TITLE OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BE CHANGED TO SOMETHING ELSE?

[Brandon Reed, CVO, ASLA / Rooftop and Urban Designer / Landscape Architect]

ANYONE HAVE ANY BETTER NAMES THAT DESCRIBE WHAT WE DO AS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS?

I.E.- SITE ARCHITECT, EXTERIOR PLANNER, URBAN ARTIST, EXTERIOR ARCHITECT……

[Andrew Spiering]

Easy on the CAPS big guy… haha.

I like Landscape Artist, although Landscape Designer fits my role better. I can’t get the LA titled until I get licensed!

[nca]

I’ve heard “Land Architect” before a couple times. It’s simple and conjurs up a better image in the minds of potential clients, friends, and family IMO than “landscape architect.”

Landscape Defined:

1. visually distinct scenery: an expanse of scenery of a particular type, especially as much as can be seen by the eye

The word “landscape” seems to indicate that as a landscape architects what we do is to be seen as in ornamentation, as in parseley around the pig and such. The term “land” indicates to me as something dealing with art and science, functional and aesthetic properties of the earth and it’s environs. “Land Architect” is a more suitable title, in my opinion for the direction our profession is headed. The art, science, and philosophy of the development and preservation of land and natural resources…or something like that.

If there were some way to make an exodus in terminology from landscape architect to land architect or something of the sort I would be all for it.

[nca]

That’s it! I can’t take it anymore…I’ve been milling around this issue for a few days…I’m going to write an article and submit it. I haven’t written formally in a long time, but I think we may be on to something with this. After all, “Land Architect” for example, wouldn’t even require that much official change ie ASLA (American Society of Land Architects) same with CLARB…on CD packs, notes can be changed by simply deleting the “scape.” I feel very stringly about this. I know some historians and classicists may balk at the change to a given tradition coined by the great olmstead, but really it’s not so much a changeas an adaptation responding to an evolving role for the profession.

I think the change could have profound implications on how we are perceived and what kind of work and associated fees we are allowed to accept.

I’m commiting to this…Anyone want to try and beat me to it??

[Rico Flor]

“I’m commiting to this…Anyone want to try and beat me to it?”

Hello Nick and all.

Worked with that conundrum too; got the local College journal to publish it. If you’re interested, I could share a pdf draft with you. I doubt if it will be available online (The Oecodesignator: The Ecocentric Environmental Design Professional. Muhon 2:58 to 65. A Journal on Architecture, Landscape Architecture and the Designed Environment (ISSN: 1656-6505). College of Architecture, University of the Philippines. 2005.).

I’m more of a generalist and would like to use the already-used-title of environmental designer; I proposed the label “oecodesignator” though, in said article. Landscape encompasses stuff beyond the physical, so I would say reducing the qualifier to “land” would not capture the areas we delve into during our problem solving.

Later.

Rico

[Andrew Spiering]

Write an article for sure…

Nick Aceto said:

That’s it! I can’t take it anymore…I’ve been milling around this issue for a few days…I’m going to write an article and submit it. I haven’t written formally in a long time, but I think we may be on to something with this. After all, “Land Architect” for example, wouldn’t even require that much official change ie ASLA (American Society of Land Architects) same with CLARB…on CD packs, notes can be changed by simply deleting the “scape.” I feel very stringly about this. I know some historians and classicists may balk at the change to a given tradition coined by the great olmstead, but really it’s not so much a changeas an adaptation responding to an evolving role for the profession.

I think the change could have profound implications on how we are perceived and what kind of work and associated fees we are allowed to accept.

I’m commiting to this…Anyone want to try and beat me to it??

[Andrew Spiering]

I would like to read it… would you upload it here?

Rico Flor said:

“I’m commiting to this…Anyone want to try and beat me to it?”

Hello Nick and all.

Worked with that conundrum too; got the local College journal to publish it. If you’re interested, I could share a pdf draft with you. I doubt if it will be available online (The Oecodesignator: The Ecocentric Environmental Design Professional. Muhon 2:58 to 65. A Journal on Architecture, Landscape Architecture and the Designed Environment (ISSN: 1656-6505). College of Architecture, University of the Philippines. 2005.).

I’m more of a generalist and would like to use the already-used-title of environmental designer; I proposed the label “oecodesignator” though, in said article. Landscape encompasses stuff beyond the physical, so I would say reducing the qualifier to “land” would not capture the areas we delve into during our problem solving.

Later.

Rico

[nca]

Of course. It may take me some time to craft though. I guess there’s witnesses, so I’m committed.

Rico-

I’d like to see your article as well. I know this has been written about, but I’m not sure anyone has directly addressed this as an issue unto itself, perhaps your article does. I may not read it though as I’d rather formulate my own thesis and narrative, don’t want to plagiarize, even unintentionally. Know what I mean?

Well, I suppose in typical journalistic fashion I’m going to kick this around for a while (without the Wild Turkey)…

[Rico Flor]

Hello Andrew.

Emailing you a scan of the article soon.

Hello Nick.

Will do so only if you still need it via your email addie; respecting your need for intellectual integrity, not that I have anything really substantial to taint you with. You might rather find it in the end as plain hot Middle Eastern air.

Cheers.

Rico

[nca]

Thanks Rico..

[nca]

Chris-

If changing our name from “landscape architect” to “land architect” is the equivalent of puff daddy changing his name to p. diddy, your proposed solution might be the equivalent of puff daddy changing his name to “John Smith.” Now, not only to we have the problem of evry person we come in contact with assuming what we do deals with the picturesque; lawns, shrubs, and general scenery, but we also have to immediately reconcile ourselves to subordination as”consultants.” To me, this is worse than interior decorator. Or are they interior consultants?

The basis for my proposed solution is intended to reach far beyond a simple change of name, and in the spirit of the great minimalists of “our” profession, less is certainly more in this case.

[Brandon Reed, CVO, ASLA / Rooftop and Urban Designer / Landscape Architect]

Thank you so much for that enlightening, well articulated explanation of our great profession!!! I have to agree with you 100% on this subject…..I think everyones comments have persuaded me back to the thinking that landscape architect is and has always been the right term for all of us….Sure there are varied backgrounds and our profession is so broad that we can call ourselves alot of things based on our specialties…….

It truly is very important for us to promote and educate our state and local governments, peoples, and individuals on what it is exactly we do and to not be so shy in talking about all the great things that we do for this already beautiful world……

I have always loved the term landscape architect but I think I have been jaded a little by all the lay-people out there who know absolutely nothing about what we do and only associate us with the first word they hear us say….which is landcape……and lump us into the same category as all of our wonderful landscape contractors and designers that have a shovel and a truck or lawn mower……

Onward and upward I say…….Lets just be more informative and more proud to call ourselves landscape architects……It is really important that we promote our profession better to everyone…..

I am still in favor of our great name Landscape Architect……With the need of our professional skills continually rising, I think we will gain new respect and favor with those that come in contact with us and see that we are not just contractors or landscapers…..no offense to any of you contractors and landscapers…..

Damian Holmes said:

I think that all points are valid and we need to promote landscape architecture to the public. This is often left to associations and institutes with volunteers(usually working professionals with little time as is) looking after promotion of landscape architecture.

Who we are, what we do and our perceived role varies from country to country and how old and how respected the profession is by the public and other professions.

As for the title landscape architect as from what I understand is more respected in European countries whereas it seems in North America, Asia and Australia we lost the fight when anyone with a shovel or a pen started calling themselves a landscape architect or reality garden homemaker shows started using the term loosely to describe anyone who designed a garden. Also the word architect has lost some of its gloss when IT people grabbed hold of it and started calling themselves System or Information Architects.

On the other hand the word Architect is held onto by some due to the legal protection that it gives Landscape Architects, Such as in some states in Australia were the word is protected by law and we come under this protection. Also Insurance companies differentiate landscape architects and landscape designers based upon qualification. The misuse of the term landscape architect in some states is the reason that Australian Institute Landscape Architect qualified members are now called Registered Landscape Architect.

However, some Australian states see protecting the term of Landscape Architect as anti-competitive and against the law – yes stupid, I know, wonder how a Plastic Surgeon or Dentist would feel if I hang board on my office with Dentist and Plastic Surgeon M.D. under Landscape Architect. Don’t think it would last long.

OK Seriously I can’t see many universities giving our Land architect degrees to me it sounds a little too close to an engineering profession(not that there is anything wrong with engineers). I think on the whole it will always vary from country to country based upon the age of the profession and how powerful the association/society is and how outspoken its members are about protecting the term Landscape Architect or whatever term they choose.

My arguments are a little off tangent but I think you get the general message that its up to you in you state or country to promote landscape architecture and the profession of landscape architecture. I think that a title change is like syaing Land Architect (profession/consultant formerly known as Landscape Architect) . Name changes are the things that government departments or car companies do when there in the sh1t. Remember how great it was when Price Waterhouse Coopers changed their name to Monday – exactly.

I think that that promoting the great work we do and getting more publicity through local, state and country wide news will do far more for the profession, however we are often too shy or self-effacing to promote our work.
Architects and their associations (love or loath them) do a great job at promoting the profession, I bet most of your family or friends could name at least one or two starchitects or well known past architects but no great landscape architects.

Land Architects or Landscape Architects you decide – just promote your work as best you can.

[nca]

If this issue is such a lost cause, why is it drawing so much attention?

I think I would be remiss if I didn’t restate that I believe the issue goes far beyond the simple name change.

“Who are we?” is the real question. I don’t believe we’ve technically been unified under the banner of “landscape architect” for very long and may very well have adopted the name somewhat inadvertantly from the reference to architecture in landscape painting. In this case, I think it’s a valid topic, if only to initiate discussion on what we do and who we are.

Main Entry: 1land·scape
Pronunciation: lan(d)-skp
Function: noun
1 : a picture of natural scenery
2 : the land that can be seen in one glance

land [ land ]

noun (plural lands)

Definition:

1. solid earth: the solid part of the Earth’s surface not covered by a body of water

2. part of earth: a part of the Earth’s surface of a particular kind or that is used for a particular purpose
low-lying land
agricultural land

3. countryside: ground used for agriculture, or rural or agricultural areas as distinguished from villages, towns, or cities
He had worked on the land all his life.

I’m sure there are others like me out there just getting started in the profession who are still asking the same questions. The original question begs for answers to other, very meaningful questions which I think are critical to the future of “our” profession (I say our because I’m assuming if you are reading this you are a landscape architect or studying to become one). What is “good” landscape architecture? What is the scope of landscape architecture?

Looking at the actual definition of the word “landscape,” it seems clear to me that this is actually not very indicative of what we do from even the limited experience I’ve had in different firms and sectors. Essentailly, for arguments sake, “Land” is what we deal with, not “landscape.” The term landscape indicates scenic beauty, decoration, and the picturesque. Again, from my limited experience, this is not necessarily what we do, by definition. Chris, I’m agreeing with you and understand that we are in most, if not all instances “consultants.” Your last statement though is almost verbatim what I wrote previously. The basis for a change in title lies in a broader and more accurate definition of what a land architect does. I’m not being argumentative, just trying to push the topic.

I hope this is taken as constructive and responsive, rather than obtuse and argumentative.

Thanks for the great replies…

[Jay Everett]

I agree that the title is confusing and that it is a problem that has been with us from the start.

Olmstead struggled with the awkwardness of the title, at one point refering to the practice as “sylvan art.”
Biographer Witold Rybczynski writes of Olmsted’s response to Vaux’s attempt to get him to move back to New York and partner with him in 1865:

“The art is not gardening nor is it architecture,” he wrote. It was certainly not “landscape architecture.” “If you are bound to establish this new art,” he wrote Vaux, “you don’t want an old name for it.”*

the author adds: *twenty-five years earlier, John Claudius Loudon had published a book titled “The landscape gardening and landscape architecture of the late Humphry Repton. According to landscape historian John Dixon Hunt, this is the first documented use of the term landscape architecture.

I also agree that we have been using the title for too long to change it now (way too much trouble). I think the real underlying issue is the relatively low profile of the profession as a separate and distinct vocation. I have written about this before.

>http://media.http://www.reflector-online.com/media/storage/paper938/news/2006/04/05/Opi…

My opinion is that the profession is simply too small in size relative to engineering or architecture and I think the only way to solve our frustration is to grow in numbers and work to elevate the profile of the profession.

If our generation of would focus on recruitment and public awareness then maybe the next generation of landscape architects would have the resources to invest more time and money into scientific research and methods of practice. Unless we can quantify our contribution and definitively document what we “feel” we contribute to society, we will continue to be a service industry on the margins.

The question should not be “who are we?” the question should be “how do we shed our reputation as a luxury item?”

[nca]

Jay-

I agree with most of what you said. Still, I think in further distilling the question you posed “how do we shed our reputation as a luxury item?” you fundamentally arrive at the original question, “who are we?”

Your point on finding “quantifiable” values in the service landscape architecture offers society in dead on.

Personally, I believe in the potential of this profession, but again, from my limited professional experience, fear we’ve begun to plateau.

[Author]

Posts