PREFACE to the first internet edition
(1998)
GARDEN DESIGN IN THE
BRITISH ISLES: history and styles since 1650
Reading on screen is arduous, compared with reading a printed
page. I have therefore aimed to provide the reader with the
following compensations:
- The text has been updated. This includes some
corrections, some revisions and a few changes of mind
(which are also on the 2002
CD edition). Perhaps the most significant changes are to
the names of four styles of garden design:
- The first phase of the Serpentine Style has been named the
‘Augustan Style’, because its plan geometry was
not serpentine and its inspiration came from the Rome of Augustus.
- The ‘Transition Style’ is now called the
‘Landscape Style’ for two reasons. First, the
organisation of landscape paintings was a significant influence on
the style. Second, when applied to a style,
‘transitional’ generally means ‘halfway from one
style to another style’. A transition from regular to
irregular was the leading characteristic of the style, but it was
the culmination of a long period of stylistic change –
not a halfway house to something else.
- The ‘Irregular Style’ has been named the
Picturesque Style, because the Picturesque (with a capital
P) ideas of Gilpin, Price and Knight were the chief influence on
the style.
- The term ‘Gardenesque Style’ is now used,
precisely in Loudon’s sense, to describe a
natural arrangement of exotic plants, as in the great woodland
gardens.
- Bulleted lists and hyperlinks within the text have been
provided to compensate the reader for not being able to flick
through a set of printed pages. Clicking on these links provides a
way of moving around the book. My guess is that reading an internet
book will be more of a self-structured ‘postmodern’
experience than the linear progression encouraged by a printed
page.
- Hyperlinks to the gardens cited in the text have been
provided. The aim is to inform the reader of garden locations and
of what may be seen. If the links to Style Diagrams are followed,
the browser will find many examples of the identified styles.
Eleven styles were named in the first edition and there are
fourteen in this edition. The additional styles are: Augustan,
Gardenesque and Postmodern.
- The set of illustrations will not be the same as in the
printed edition: there are more pictures of gardens, and fewer from
books, because the internet edition has been planned to support the
guide to gardens open to the public.
- The bibliographc references have been omitted. Readers
who wish to consult them are likely to be in a library and will
find the printed text more convenient. Some bibliographic
information is provided with the hyperlinks.
The book’s title has been changed from English garden
design: history and styles since 1650 to Garden design in
the British Isles: history and styles since 1650. The change
was made partly in the interests of geographical accuracy and
partly with regard to the author’s view that garden design
is, and always has been, a Europe-wide art. One cannot make sense
of stylistic developments through looking at a political entity.
Those who chronicle the history of garden art at the end of the
twenty-first century will surely have to take a world-view.
The Preface to the 1986 printed edition of this book made ' a
personal plea for some restoration projects which would be of
special historical value as examples of poorly represented styles'.
The plea had no influence upon events but the following update may
be of interest to readers: (1) The semi-circular
parterre at Hampton Court, known as
the Fountain Garden, has not changed. But the nearby Privy Garden
has been restored with the greatest possible care for historical
accuracy. I believe this was an error of judgement: the Privy
Garden is an unremarkable as a Baroque parterre but looked good in
its picturesque 1986 condition. The Fountain Garden remains rather
ugly but would have been very splendid - if restored in the manner
of the Privy Garden. (2) The Giant Steps in Greenwich Park have not been restored. The
Royal Parks Agency commissioned a design for a Baroque water
cascade on the site. It was opposed by the local people. I can see
a strong case for restoring the original steps which would have
been like Bridgeman's theatre at Claremont Landscape Garden. Or one
could make a respectable case for a new design on the site. But
'restoring' a cascade which never existed would have been
illogical. (3) The Leasowes is now run as a country park.
(4) Nothing has been done about the parterre at
Melbourne Hall or the ornamental farm
at Great Tew (5) Gertrude
Jekyll's garden at Munstead Wood is, I
am delighted to report, being restored.
|