Comments on: Certose di Pavia Cloister Garden

By: Christine

Christine — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:48:14 +0000

Yes it is always a good idea to discuss the subjects that everyone is passionately committed to without feeling the need to resort to less pleasant means of settling disagreements! [ie. Burning at the stake!]

Perhaps a sign of our spiritual and human advancement should be our capacity to debate topics ranging from the least controversial (care of cloister garths) to the most controversial (doctrine or sex).

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 06:44:56 +0000

Yes, I think it is a big problem. But, most unusually for historic spaces, almost all the examples of cloisters are in the ownership and control of a small group of would-be-and-should-be-friendly organizations: the Christian churches. If they can’t agree on doctrine, or sex, they could easily get together and have a debate about the care and management of cloister garths.

By: Christine

Christine — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:39:18 +0000

Tom perhaps the more follow your interest in monastic gardens the more diversity of styles and approaches you will discover!

Not only were there changes and developments in monastic ideals, spiritual charisms and their architectural expression there were also reform movements at various times. The result of these reforms were a proliferation of communities living under the same charism but with a different rule resulting in a different material expression. An example is the Carmelite Order. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmelites ]

There will, however, probably be an organising taxonomy and approach typical of these gardens.

The idea and acceptability of luxury is most often linked with theological debates at that time about the value of poverty and stability for a community and an order.

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:31:52 +0000

It is not really that I am wavering: its more that I am assembling considerations about a question which have been at the back of my mind for years. The nearest I have got to conclusions are (1) setting graves and memorials into the grass is a bad idea (2) since there is a good possibility that medieval garths were managed as ‘flowery meads’ then this type of management should be tried in at least one cloister (3) there is a need to think about cloisters as a group and consider the issues with monastic care.

By: Adam Hodge

Adam Hodge — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:01:14 +0000

This blog seems to be suggesting a slightly different basis for ecclesiatical landscape style to the previous one. Previously the blogger argues that the landscaping should strongly reflect the architectural genre and is therefore frustrated by the contrary landscaping illustrated.
This blog recommends a landscape style aligned to the original precepts of a religious order irrespective of the fact that the building itself is a contradiction to those precepts. Visconti, the local Duke [of Milan] chose the Architect-Marco Solari and paid for the construction of the buildings in the latest Renaissance style. The picture shows great ornamentation in the cloisters. Is there any of the plainess in this building that the Carthusian order embraced ?
To respect Tom’s challenge in his previous blog might one argue that the planting is perhaps insufficiently ornamental to keep within the Rennaisance styling as adopted by Solari’s grandson Guinoforte Solari ?
So, is ecclesiastical landscaping style decided by the precepts of the religious Order or by architectural style, both seemingly recommended by the blogger !