A Landscape Studio

• How does the cognition of open space happen? How is it mapped experientially?
• What are the interpretations for the terms "environment", "site" and "REFUGE" when land is viewed through a media of space, enclosure and drama along with natural phenomena and a Fictional Protagonist (User)?
• How can the media of natural landscape elements (broadly- Land, water and vegetation) be generators of spatial and site character?
• Can programmed cognition of movement, light and sound influence the way a site will be perceived, and help locate a REFUGE in a particular manner/specific place on the site?
• What influences the design of sequences, transitions and thresholds in such gestures?

Questions such as these formed the underpinning to the recently concluded studio exercise where the programme was to site a Refuge of 10 sq.mts in an area of 1000 sq.mt (20 x 50m) whose terrain and datum was open for modulation.The Refuge would be immovable and meant for a maximum of 5 people.

This exercise was by preceded by Experiential mapping of a linear/ lineo-cyclic pedestrian path, to enable the participants to conjure their versions of plane, light and space.

There was some exciting work. The protagonists/ users included Shah Rukh Khan, Thumbellina, AR Rahman, Mistress of Spices, A Dear Friend, Hobbits, Charlie (of the chocolate factory), Sherlock Holmes, The mother from The God of Small Things, Devdas, the Mermaid, Shrek, Mowgli, Frank Lloyd Wright meets Antonio Gaudi in a park etc.

Some work was quite literal, while some of it was Adamant. Adamant meaning "It has to be this way","I Think this is It" and its avatars. It's not a very good attitude to have especially when one is having preliminary forays in the subject no matter how brilliant one may be. But... the horse can be only taken to the water as the saying goes.

Overall, the designs were "safe". Neither truly outside-of-the-box nor romantic. For e.g. no one considered the rectangle to be a vertical surface. No one designed the rectangle for "Themselves". A very potent narrative formed by characterizing oneself was not explored. Because it wasn't "specified" didn't mean it was not permitted. One person designed it for a friend and the results showed a scintillating, personal dialogue with the site, despite kitschy elements like artificial tree trunks. A warmth that was nice to see.

SCALE AND LAYERING - When the project started, many of the works were out of scale in terms of what the designer wished for the protagonist. 1:100 is a very easy scale to understand and draw landscape plans with its multiple layers...The Final sheets overall were an improvement .The design that tested my sense of scale the most was Thumbellina.

VIEWS AND MODELS: The dimensionalities of open space can be best expressed by views. Hand drawn or SketchUP-ed. Not many had this requirement, possibly due to lack of orientation. It is high time colleges opened up to CAD atleast in non-Viva subjects. What you cannot draw, make a model, then take a photocopy and then GT it to make a plan. This modus operandi was also made available to faciliate complex site design.

No takers.

There were just 2 models in the entire duration of the exercise.

Sadly, there was no application of the learning from the previous exercises and talks in the landscape studio which tried to point towards the role of textures, forms light etc as perception aids. This HADTO BE tied into the design GRAPHICALLY, but most works did not. Perhaps the assumption that there was "Learning" involved needs to be re-examined.

My benchmark of Awesome Views in KRVIA is Rajeev...from Rutwick/Thomas/Pooja's batch. I wish I had an artistic hand like that. He aced landscape markings by just doing views..and a very basic plan. His Imagination, Ability and Talent allowed him that liberty.

A good example of Attitude backed up by Aptitude in my book. (my sms version of the original powerpacked "koan" coined by Tapan).