The Role of Research in a Project- Oriented School of Landscaping
1. The Versailles National School of Landscape Architecture (ENSP) in Versailles, France is a
school of landscape projects , not an Establishment of Universal Knowledge, useful only as
resource for developing the project . Hence, there are two potential directions for research:
-
one deals with the knowledge and techniques used by the designer in order to support
the project, of which a list can be made ;
-
Another, for which a list is impossible to draw up because of a factor of unpredictability,
involves risk , when the researcher , aware of the role of the imaginary in all
dimensions of his project, speculates upon a new hypothesis , taking into
consideration future conditions of life. Obviously the latter should be the primary choice
for a school of projects in spite of the temptation to classify this as “ research-fiction”;
the point being not to write fiction but to seriously address the dimensions of the future
in the landscaping profession.
2. For a better understanding of research at the VNSL, it strikes me as necessary to clarify
its status and nature: landscape. Is this a field of proposals for investigation traditionally
conducted in the microcosm of the university? Or are we dealing here with cross-disciplines
of know-how subordinated to the imaginary? I favor the latter which appears open-ended
and coherent with the complexity of the landscaping profession.
a. Cross-disciplines
In an article entitled “A plea for Undisciplined Landscaping” the doctoral candidates Marie
Sabine Gourioux and Nolwenn Nicolas, after pointing out the difficulties in classifying
landscape : a science, a subject with no specific field, or a unique field, and addressing the
question of inter and pluri-disciplinarity, arrive at the conclusion of cross-discipline.
Reference is made to this article, in which the Chart of Cross-discipline appears, under the
signature of:
-Lima de Freitas
-Edgar Morin
-Basarb Nicolescu,
dated November 1994 ; Article 5 clarifies this position:
“A cross-disciplinary vision is open ended since it transcends the fields of the exact sciences
and enters into a dialogue with the humanities, art, literature, poetry and other intimate
means of expression.”
André Corboz comments: “ are fields of study nations jealously preserving their
sovereignty?”
b. Of “dreams” and research
A text written for the VNSL during a third year program in 1999-2000 on the teaching skills
for a project, entitled “Of dreams in landscaping” or dreams in the landscape expresses, from
my point of view, the landscaper’s wealth and the unique quality of “landscape research” as
carried out in a school of projects .I quote this text in its original form. There is no need to
modify it.
Teaching skills for a project : Of dreams in landscaping
A site imposes its defining elements. These elements determine its state.
A commission expresses the desire to modify this state with, as a point of departure, a brief.
Nevertheless neither the site nor the commission defines the project. If this were the case, it
would suffice to mix parts of the analysis and parts of the brief and adopt the results at
random.
In Versailles, we not only attempt to bring to light what exists , but we also attempt to
address what is yet to come.
A true project contains a higher dimension transcending traditional teaching techniques, a
dimension unattainable via archives and analyses. Rebellious to sharing, totally subject to the
errance of the mind depending upon the individual’s capacity to wander, it solicits the
imagination, and, within the framework of the project, orients and forges a dream, a utopia.
A landscaping utopia does not ignore topography, upon which the project depends. We are
dealing here with a dream subject to the imperatives of the site, as well as the proximity and
radical nature of art.
The type of project which today has established the reputation of the school in Versailles is
based upon a dual reality:
-the unavoidable
-the unforeseeable which can emerge
A project’s weakness never stems from a fault in analysis, which can be corrected,
but for a lack of a dream.
In Versailles, the workshop structure makes the teaching technique of project
development possible.
Two conditions are essential for this type of teaching. The first deals with the
professor’s profile, the second with the student’s knowledge.
A project, by definition, follows no set of instructions. It is necessarily an invention.
There is no reproducible method for establishing its layout. Consequently it cannot be taught
by predefined methods. Only a person well versed in project preparation can successfully
teach it, not by promoting his own work, but by the transmission of his audacity, his capacity
to innovate, and his perception of the accuracy of the student’s approach.
On the other hand, a student cannot operate in totally uncharted territory at the risk
of making mistakes: erroneous designing unsuited to the site; a poorly defined utopia, a
non-landscape. The source of inspiration must come from the site. At this point the elements
analyzed are of use. But how to determine the essential without the capacity to identify?
The formal universe functions within a limited vocabulary, while the living possesses a
wider choice via diversity: of species and behavior, of light and space, of landscape. This
profusion , difficult to describe, and, obviously essential to the landscaper – animals, vegetal
– forms the part of the field anchored in reverie :subject to the unpredictable factors of
the living , engaged in the process of evolution, intimately linked to the daily existence of
mankind.
Acquisition of basic concepts permits a comprehension of the living : species
identification, understanding of behavior patterns and ecosystems cement the project –
the dream - to a base of reality. The territorial factor can be added: ground, landscape,
history, society, the city and its management.
The conditions for dreaming must be nurtured and developed, the knowhow for creating
and sustaining enhanced. In conclusion, such workshops, furthering the capacity for creative
Imagination, as in the field of the arts, cannot be ignored by the school, even if its goal is not
to form artists.
c - The Thesis
Discussion of the importance of research in a school of projects leads to the conclusion
that the protocol of a thesis by the researcher as executed in a classic university structure
is not applicable. Why standardize? Diversity of expression and presentation is of general
benefit. I suggest that the thesis procedure be considered not as a model but as subject of
discussion and adjustment at each meeting with the thesis committee. This topic–frequently
brought up in numerous universities with a classical curriculum- is particularly pertinent in a
school which demands of its students creativity consistent with the imaginary in the project.
3. Can the principles for research in a school of projects be defined?
a. Interrogating, perhaps even inventing the unknown
In an article published in the magazine Cassandre/Hors Champs in April/May 2009 ,
Gérard Dessons, Professor of French literature at the University of Paris 8 critizes the idea of
separating the research fellow from the specialist in the field, “punishing” the “poor
researchers” by sending them back teaching, “What such a concept does not take into
account is that a teacher-researcher does not teach simply teach . He teaches his research.
To disassociate the twin activities amounts to instrumentalizing the teacher, assigning him a
strictly communicational function. The university fellow persuaded to do little research and
condemned to teach, teaches what? Something that a “true” researcher has produced for
him. This neglects the fact that beyond the point of his research, and, in a fundamental way,
the teacher-researcher teaches a method. He teaches how to do research, to address the
unknown, to innovate. The work of a teacher-researcher is relatively risky, since showing
what he does is associated to how he does it. He operates, so to speak, with no safety net.
In the field of landscaping, “addressing the unknown, indeed inventing ” means relying
upon field experience. A research fellow in landscaping or a teacher with no such
experience, is tempted to fall back upon historical reference and archives.
b. Text written for presentation at a day of discussion on research at the VNSL on December
6, 2002
VNSL
RESEARCH AND LANDSCAPE
Hypotheses and archives
Doing research assumes that the field explored focus upon a main line of reflection. One
cannot search in all directions; a hypothesis is necessary.
The assumptions of this hypothesis can always be questioned but the hypothesis itself, a
boldness of the mind, is an integral part of the research.
With the hypothesis as a point of departure, the research attempts to investigate the
aspect of a problem previously undemonstrated or undiscovered.
Research seeks the non-existent. It is an act of prospection. Its natural tendency is to
anticipate the scenarios of the future.
A logical basis of analysis, drawn from past and future elements, creates occasional
confusion as to the actual point of the research. For lack of perspective, it becomes a simple
historical compilation.
Searching for what is already known amounts to reorganizing archives: an obviously
necessary element which can hardly be called research.
Landscape – linked to both the natural and cultural – is a complex entity which, in a
general sense, can be assimilated to evolution or a constant change in composition and
behavior.
The only stable principle upon which research can base its hypotheses is the active and
inventive element with a capacity for change. Landscape research should concentrate upon
the dynamics of a situation and not the figures reproduced. Time is the objective.
In an institution of higher learning dedicated to landscaping, research fellows seem
necessary, not only to clearly establish the paths for research with results useful to the
profession, but also to connect teaching more firmly than presently done, to its
complicated objective – the living.
Almost all of today’s issues deal with the living: its fragility and sustainability. Our society
and living space are based upon new speculation, directly bound to the future conditions of
life.
Although, by definition, a landscape cannot be sustainable, it can at least attempt to deal
with the issue of “sustainable development”. Such considerations lead to a variety of
potential research which directly concerns the Ministries upon which the VNSL depends, in
particular the Ministry of Agriculture. For example – and there are all too many – one could
inquire as to what sort of landscape in Brittany could produce a “drinkable “ glass of water in
the middle of the 21st century, and on what sort of economic program. The issue of drinkable
water cannot be limited to technique alone: it is a political and spatial issue – a landscape.
Research must be accompanied by experimentation aimed at confirming the hypothesis.
The empirical aspect of such an approach can only serve as a guarantee to audacious
speculation which, without the proof offered by the “living”, remains intellectual prowess
doomed to gather dust in administrative cabinets.
Finally, research must be visible to a wide range of inhabitants, via non-confidential
documentation, accessible, marketable and available for consultation by all involved in
landscape who, obviously are not only landscapers, but industrials, farmers, planners : in
other words the population as a whole.
4. The Relationship between Personal Work at Conclusion of Studies (TPFE) and research
The personal work presented at the end of studies is of vital importance for the student: it
is probably the last time he or she will be permitted to formulate a bold project (a dream)
before being submitted to political, legal and social pressures. Innovation is possible.
During this period projects with true research value emerge. In the archives of the TPFE,
in the drawers of the NLS, slumber numerous serious projects for future research. Indeed, it
would seem logical that a student use his TPFE as a point of departure for a research project.
I cite two examples of final dissertations in 2009 which seem to me valid research subjects
(a choice made among subjects presented in my presence ; undoubtedly others existed the
same year.)
Chloë Daguillon – Water as a federating principle in the urbanism of tomorrow.
Benjamin Arnaud - Art as a subversive vision of landscape
The role of the examining committee of the Personal Work at conclusion of Studies
(“Travail Personnel de Fin d’Etudes”) can be important: without imposing, it can offer an
opinion.
The assessment grid for doctoral work provides the possibility for an evaluation” with
distinction” and possibility for publication. A further addition to the menu of the grid could
be added, specifying possible use (or not) of the TPFE as a subject for research.
Gilles Clément
Paris, December 6, 2009