Glad to be able to chuck a few more twigs onto your bonfire!

Yes, I can see that the FAO result is one of a method, a process. That the rigorous logic of their approach produces leaf-like results could be magical

I wonder if they feel rather miffed at the prospect of their work being
cluttered up? Something rather pared-down and elegant seems most compatible.

I am glad your wish-list (drama, mystery etc) suggests another set of priorities.

Of course I have been thinking more about your garden, and especially the embrace of the wall, the hill, the woodland. Thank you for the interesting correspondence. I like Raoul Bunschoten’s observation of the draped quality - that suggestion of the possibility of movement. These saw-tooth path sections, taking the walker up so close to the wall and away again… but how would it feel to be introduced directly to the wall? Possibly by the plants themselves? Even squeezed a little? I imagine the possibility of some secret place where the visitor could flatten their back against the wall.

The more I think about it, the more I feel this is the problem with the
FAO designs - their spikiness seems to me at odds with the embracing quality of the space - as though it’s trying to fight its way out.

This entry was posted on Thursday, August 31st, 2006 at 9:24 am and is filed under Correspondence. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.