XX 



INTRODUCTION 



rural landscape." Even the great masterpieces of idealized rural land- 

 scape created by Olmsted and others of the pioneers in park building had 

 in many instances been transformed from places where "city dwellers 

 could secure the genuine recreation coming from the peaceful enjoyment 

 of an idealized rural landscape, " to active recreation areas. Broad, open 

 meadows had been appropriated for golf or baseball diamonds; the swift 

 moving automobile had usurped the pleasant carriage driveway, destroy- 

 ing the restful atmosphere of the area, and in some rare instances even 

 the amusement devices of the commercial amusement park had been per- 

 mitted entrance. Intown parks had been appropriated either for children's 

 playgrounds or for neighborhood playfields. 



Both Eliot and Olmsted recognized that the supreme functional use 

 of parks was for the recreation of the people, but the type of recreation 

 they advocated was of a passive and semi-active kind, the dominant 

 ideal being peaceful enjoyment amid beautiful surroundings of a natural- 

 istic kind. There can be no doubt that this conception was fundamentally 

 sound then, especially as applied to city dwelling people. It is of even 

 greater importance today, as cities have grown larger and the stress and 

 strain of living has become greater. This phase of the teachings of the 

 great early planners should never be lost sight of in all present and future 

 planning of parks. It so happens, however, that the life needs of people 

 which can be expressed in their leisure are far wider than those compre- 

 hended in the early conception, and a wide range of active forms of 

 recreation have come to be included. 



Beginning in the eighties with sand courts for children and outdoor 

 gymnasiums in the Charlesbank area of Boston, the so-called "play- 

 ground movement for children," expanding into the "recreation move- 

 ment" comprehending all age groups in the two succeeding decades, 

 exerted a most profound effect on the entire pioneer conception of parks 

 and their recreational functions. It was natural that with the expanding 

 idea of recreation people should turn to the agency then most closely 

 identified with recreation for the facilities and supervisory services which 

 the new movement demanded, and that there should be a strengthening 

 of the feeling which had been growing up that properties then compre- 

 hended in existing park systems should be rendering greater dividends 

 in service. 



The effect was epochal both in regard to properties and to the func- 

 tional services of park departments. The new movement for many forms 

 of active recreation changed the functional uses of many existing park 



