OK, so that title is meant as pretty sarcastic. But in a genuine sense I wanted to respond to someone who asked about the middle ground between the artistic side and the regional design side of the profession. So, for the students who are web surfing, here is a short first-stab at the firms that I would expect the average LAM reader to pick as mainstream-edgy-leaders (?) of the profession today:
Since I have rushed this as a response, I might sneak in and edit it later if I see one or two super-obvious ones to add. But I want to stress that this is NOT a list meant to define the proper boundaries of landscape architecture. If anything, it is the opposite. It is the list that demonstrates what is too easily seen as defining work when in fact the field is very broad, very creative, very hard to capture or define. Even after you account for the two previous posts, it omits the poorly publicized, the subtle, the hard to categorize, and the inappropriate.
No comments:
Post a Comment