 |
| Ian McHarg |
In the introduction to Design with Nature, a book Ian
McHarg self-described as his “most powerful identification” (McHarg, 1996, p.
206), Lewis Mumford succinctly sums up the philosophy of his friend and
colleague: “. . . McHarg’s emphasis is
not on either design or nature by itself, but upon the preposition with, which implies human cooperation
and biological partnership.” (McHarg, 1969, p. viii)
Ian McHarg was not a typical landscape architect, especially
for his time. He was an animated
interdisciplinary thinker who was unconcerned about who he might offend. His way of thinking was guided by a deeply
felt connection to nature and an explicit mistrust in human motivations.
Our
failure is that of the Western World and lies in prevailing values. Show me a man-oriented society in which it is
believed that reality exists only because man can perceive it, that the cosmos
is a structure erected to support man on its pinnacle, that man exclusively is
divine and given dominion over all things, indeed that God is made in the image
of man, and I will predict the nature of its cities and their landscapes. I need not look far for we have seen them—the
hot-dog stands, the neon shill, the ticky-tacky houses, dysgenic city and mined
landscapes. This is the image of the
anthropomorphic, anthropocentric man; he seeks not unity with nature but
conquest. Yet unity he finally finds,
but only when his arrogance and ignorance are stilled and he lies dead under the
greensward. We need this unity to
survive (McHarg, 1969, p. 24).
Born in 1920 in Clydebank, Scotland, outside of the
industrial city of Glasgow, McHarg grew up viewing the city during the
depression era. Though he describes his
home of 18 years as one of “no distinction whatsoever” (McHarg, 1996, p. 14),
he emphasizes the distinctive landscape: one which lies on the threshold between
town and country. The years of
discovering the beauty of nature juxtaposed with the grimness of the city would
influence the rest of his life, and consequently the design profession.
McHarg voluntarily joined the British Army in 1938 and after
a distinguished 7-year career as a paratrooper in World War II, the resulting
self-confident Major invited Harvard to admit him into the graduate program for
Landscape Architecture—an invitation which was accepted.
Obtaining degrees in landscape architecture and city
planning after 4 years at Harvard, McHarg returned to Scotland, but was drawn
back to the United States in another 4 years.
It was at this time, in 1954, that he accepted a position as founder and
chairman of the Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning at the
University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Fine Arts. Besides architects, landscape architects and
city planners, the faculty McHarg brought into his department included a
geologist, an ethnographer, an anthropologist, a medical anthropologist, a
geochemist, a hydrologist, a soil scientist, a plant ecologist, a limnologist
and a resource economist (Holden, 1977, pp. 379-380). In addition to teaching, he also founded a
private firm later known as Wallace McHarg Roberts & Todd (WMRT) which designed projects in both the
United States and internationally.
 |
WMRT plan for the Valleys (Greenspring & Worthington Valleys, MD), 1964,
|
 |
| WMRT plan for the Woodlands, TX, located about 28 miles North of Houston. McHarg was sought out for this project to protect the hydrological system and the woodlands, 1970, http://ladprofile.weebly.com/ian-mcharg-1920-2001.html |
It is his book, Design
with Nature, that brought him to the forefront of his profession and best
describes for what he aspires. His
ecological based planning methods applied to design by superimposing layers of
geographical data to reveal relationships which become apparent at spatial
intersections to determine suitability for development. His theories were based on the idea “that
nature is a single interacting system and that changes to any part will affect
the operation of the whole” (McHarg, 1969, p. 56). Applying these methods, one can determine
that “the lands that best preform work for man in a natural condition will not
be those that are most suitable for urbanization. . . . (I)f one selects eight
natural features, and ranks them in order of value to the operation of natural
process, then that group reversed will constitute a gross order of suitability
for urbanization. These are: surface
water, floodplains, marshes, aquifer recharge areas, aquifers, steep slopes,
forests and woodlands, unforested land” (McHarg, 1969, p. 154). While overlaid maps had been used by
designers and planners before McHarg, he was the first to use ecology as the
organizing structure. Accordingly,
McHarg’s planning methodology is credited with creating the intellectual
framework for GIS technology and application (Steiner, 2008, p. 147).
 |
|
© Ian McHarg, 1969, pp. 105-111. Staten Island study
|
Till his death in
2001, McHarg pushed to increase the base of knowledge from which landscape
architecture and urban planning drew. He
deplored design for design sake and the transformation of natural systems into
artificial systems due to careless urbanization. In part due to the innovative ideas of McHarg,
the concept of designing with nature is no longer new; this is why Ian McHarg
is among the most influential urban design thinkers.
“We are of nature, we live in nature. The appropriate response is to understand its
ways and behave accordingly” (McHarg, 1996, p.6).
Holden, C. (1977). Ian McHarg: Champion for Design
with Nature. Science, 195(4276), 379-382. Retrieved October 04,
2016, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1743286.
McHarg, I. L. (1969). Design
with nature. Garden City, NY: Published for the American Museum of Natural
History the Natural History Press.
McHarg, I. L. (1996). A
quest for life: An autobiography. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Steiner, F. R. (2008).
The Ghost of Ian McHarg. Log, 13(14), 147-151. Retrieved October
04, 2016, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41765241.
Do you agree with his theories on the human connection to nature? Or do you think he was so passionate about it because he was a landscape architect? Since typically you only hear architects talk about human vs nature when describing their perfect utopia...
ReplyDeleteLandscape architect. While they are one of the few approaches within the urban professions that take human beings into account, they often want to mimic nature everywhere
DeleteI think there is a varying degree of inherent human connectedness to nature regardless of any kind of training. It is a bit hard for me to answer this question unbiasedly since I relate to Ian McHarg both in that I think nature should be a primary consideration in design and that I am an LA in training—but I do believe there is evidence of passion toward nature in various 'back to nature' movements and ideas such as 'forest bathing,' which originated in Japan. Regardless of that, however, for the sake of our overpopulated world, as designers, it is reckless for us to not take environmental considerations into our designs. I know that there is always some give and take when it comes to designing—the material source, the disruption of what existed, etc.—but I believe that thinking with the idea of "verses" already sets one off on the wrong foot. And that's the whole idea of Design with Nature; rather than look at human vs nature, we need to look at human with nature to design a utopia.
ReplyDeleteVery good choice. Good use of images. His methodology is to overcome the issue of complexity in design. In his view, human are a part of an ecological system.
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that it is possible to truly design "with" nature as it pertains to the current urban landscape? Wouldn't any implementation cause nature to be altered in some capacity? If so what do you think is the correct path to take when designing?
ReplyDeleteIt causes the death of nature by overloving it - like smothering a puppy.
DeleteI don't believe that the goal is to not alter the way nature looks, but rather work with ecological systems, using them as the base layer for design, to result in minimum environmental impact. In McHarg's case, he looked at 'nature' as something that could be either natural or human-made. His aim was to develop land that was least suitable for other purposes, whether that be wildlife or agriculture.
ReplyDeleteCurrently, I believe the best solution is something we are all familiar with and working toward: finding ways to increase density within our already developed areas. And in order to do that, we also need to find ways to make these denser areas attractive to live in, hence, urban design.
He had some okay ideas, sometimes, but look at the bottom image of the WMRT plan for the Valleys. I think that picture says it all. It's like Evergreen, Colorado, a place built in the fire tinders of the Rocky Mountains where residents suffer one of the worst commutes in Colorado. No wonder US cities are so awful if people listened to this nonsense! Urbanism is simple: street grid and mixed use with parks are commercial at the center.
ReplyDelete