10 



Boston in 1890) assumed the title "landscape architect." It should be under- 

 stood that, both in its inception and in its application, the term "landscape garden- 

 ing" referred primarily to planting and grading operations, and also that it implied 

 the use of but one style for all situations namely, the parklike. Thus it would 

 seem that persons still adhering to this title should, to be consistent, practice 

 Mr. Repton's theories theories very good in some ways but very limited and, in 

 some respects, unquestionably wrong. Today the work of the landscape archi- 

 tect includes the planning of parks, of subdivisions, of park systems, and, occa- 

 sionally, even of entire cities. Furthermore, the planning of residences may in- 

 volve architectural settings appropriate for city homes, as well as those suitable 

 for both simple and architecturally elaborate country estates. In such a variety 

 of work, in order to suit all situations it is necessary to deal in both formal gardens 

 and parklike scenery. Further, in planning and in executing designs for park 

 systems, parks, gardens, and the like, one finds himself confronted by problems of 

 engineering, economics, agriculture, building construction, and, last and most 

 important, design. 



Hence it would seem that the expression "landscape gardening," as a general 

 name for the profession or its work, is entitled to no status today, and, in fact, 

 most persons so styling themselves are but gardeners and florists. With these 

 distinctions made clear, perhaps a definite statement of the aims and scope of the 

 profession will now be more readily undsrstood. 



Landscape architecture aims, first, to produce an economic arrangement of the 

 objects and parts of a property, or unit of land; and, second, to attain beauty in 

 the kind of scenery that is suitable to any particular property. These aims are 

 developed, not in sequence, but simultaneously in the design. For the amateur it 

 may be best to think of planning in this way as a dual function. 



Then it is the aim of the landscape architect to plan both for convenience and 

 for attractiveness of setting. For a certainty, a convenient and compact ar- 

 rangement is also the most easily decorated. In fact it is surprising how well a 

 group of buildings look which have been given an orderly disposition; or how well 

 a new residence appears when the house is suitably placed, the walks and roads 

 are laid to a good line, and the ground is well-graded; and this is noticeable even 

 before any planting has been done or any mature or settled condition has been 

 attained. The orderly arrangement, though bare of decoration, is attractive in 

 tself. 



But some persons will attempt the improvement of a residence without any 

 previous thought for the plan as a whole. They imagine that merely by plant- 

 ing trees and shrubs, or by laying out flower beds, or by making a garden, this is 

 possible. In such cases the result proves not very successful, and usually more 

 planting is resorted to, with the mistaken idea that success in the result depends 

 only on the amount of material planted and on its cost. A disorderly plan is 

 bad enough; but an excess of planting further clutters a yard and adds to the 

 appearance of confusion. The importance of starting with a good plan would be 

 appreciated by such persons if they could but see how well even a half-finished 

 example of landscape work looks, even while there is evident only the skeleton 

 of its ultimate arrangement. The effect is pleasing at this stage of its progress 

 because it is apparently orderly and compact, and because each part is coordinat- 

 ed with other related parts. It looks useful and yet has style also. An awkward 



