The Idea of Villa Castagna
A garden is both a real place, and a cloud of possibilities. What you will find here will be both something real, and something that may or may not become real. For this reason you will find no map: Instead you will meet fragments, part real, part possible.
No Instagram images were found.
Pages
Links
Instagram
Archives
- July 2019
- May 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- August 2018
- June 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- December 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- December 2014
- November 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- November 2013
- June 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- April 2010
Categories
- All Posts
- Architectural paintings
- Architecture
- Art
- Arts and Crafts Movement
- Baroque architecture
- Baroque Gardens
- Book Commentaries
- Catalogue of painting by G. P. Panini
- Comment
- Construction
- Country Houses
- Daylesford
- Design
- Elizabethan Architecture
- English Gardens
- Fabriques
- Garden History
- Menu
- Montacute
- Movie Commentaries
- Paintings by G. P. Panini
- Plants
- Restoration and Conservation
- Reviews
- Rome
- Town and Village
- Uncategorized
- Villa Castagna
- Villas
- Wombat Hill Botanical Gardens
Tags
- Art Deco architecture
- Arts and Crafts
- Arundel Castle
- Australian Gardens
- Bagatelle
- Baroque Gardens
- Bolzano
- Burghley House
- Chaumont
- Chestnut trees
- Chinoiserie
- cladding
- Clough Williams-Ellis
- Colosseum
- creative gardens
- Daylesford
- Dunmore Pineapple
- Elizabethan architecture
- English Gardens
- Evelyn Waugh
- Fabriques
- follies
- Fontainebleau
- Fountains
- future ruin
- Garden History
- Garden Sculpture
- Gaspar van Wittel
- Giulio Romano
- Grand Designs
- Grosssedlitz
- hanseatic timber building
- Harold Peto
- Highgrove
- Hobbit
- Ian Hamilton Finlay
- Iford Manor
- jemima grey
- Journal of the History of Gardens
- Kelmscott Manor
- Lord of the Rings
- Lorenzo Maitani
- Luigi Rossini
- Mantua
- Marcel Duchamp
- milk crate
- monkey puzzle trees
- Montacute
- natural timber finishes
- Orvieto
- Palazzo del Te
- Piranesi
- Portmeirion
- Poundbury
- Roman topography
- Rome
- Schloss Luisium; Wörlitz; architecture; Neoclassicism;
- silvertop ash
- Structures
- suburban design
- Tim Richardson
- Trautsmandorff
- Trento
- triglyph
- Tynesfield
- Vanvitelli
- van Wittel
- Vignanello
- Villa D'Este
- Villa Doria-Pamphilj
- W.G. Sebald
- Willem van Nieulandt II
- Wombat Hill Botanical Gardens
- wooden churches
- wrest park
- The Villa Castagna Daylesford website operates under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-NoDerivs 3.0 licence. For a summary account of the terms of this license see Creative Commons
Tim Richardson’s The New English Garden and the Personal Intellectual Garden
I have just acquired Tim Richardson’s The New English Garden. One of his bugbears is that the art world won’t take gardens seriously as art, a theme he develops in the introduction. I was reminded of my own Gardens and the Death of Art article in Journal of the History of Gardens and Designed Landscapes (one of the world’s worst journal titles) which expresses much the same point of view, coming from the direction of the Getty Garden, though I don‘t imagine anyone has read it. Richardson is very good on explaining subtexts in the English gardening world that can baffle the uninitiated. He points out why (apparently; I did not know this) such gardens as The Laskett by Roy Strong and Julia Trevelyan Oman get the British back up—too autobiographical, too many incidents, and he’s not the right class anyway. Apparently the National Trust (in which Richardson has a role) was sniffy about taking it on (it is now a private foundation). I tried to visit it but they only take groups. It is in fact hard to find anything useful written about it, other than little articles mostly written by Strong himself, but Richardson sets it into a critical framework that would otherwise be absent.
Richardson also explains a certain sniffiness in reactions to Prince Charles’ Highgrove—not on class grounds, but because it, too, has too much incident. This is a theme that I need to return to, because the really creative gardens are not the designer gardens—which can afford to be cool and complete and not too busy because they stop at the creation stage, and the designer moves onto something else. The really interesting gardens are both personal and intellectual: Ian Hamilton Finlay’s Little Sparta (the only garden I know acceptable to the art world, because Finlay was an artist first and gardener second); Charles Jenck’s Garden of Cosmic Speculation; The Laskett, and Highgrove, all of which are highly personal creations by people who have something they want to say but don’t care whether or not they have an audience. (All, have been wholly private for much of their existence.) The fact that you can disagree with the point of view expressed is what they are all about. It is hard to disagree with a designer garden, which gradually modulates into the suburban once the garden makeover world takes notice. Naturally the creative gardens get added to and become more cluttered, because their creators don’t move on, which is what makes them interesting.
Share this:
Like this:
Related