Theory and criticism in landscape architecture critical thinking

Landscape is a word that is used to describe the objects that are on earth that are physical in nature. These include features like land, oceans, rivers, hills, mountains, terrains and seas. On the other hand, landscape architecture involves modifying and designing these objects in order to achieve the objectives of individuals as well as large organizations. Landscape architecture has been viewed as one of the reasons why there are a lot of changes in the landscape in various parts of the world.

The theory of landscape architecture has certain elements which need to be critically examined. Various authors have used different definitions to explain the word landscape. Some of them raise eyebrows among us. In one of his definitions, Meinig related landscape to problems in the society. The aspect of this definition lacks autonomy since the source of problems of landscape is not explained. Furthermore, landscape is known to bring many benefits in the form of economic and political activities. More so, most of the problems related to landscape are merely brought about by the actions of ignorant inhabitants. This is not outlined by the concepts of these readings.

In the journal regarding landscape, several arguments have been made regarding landscape architecture. The concepts used in these articles fail to explain the failure of shifts in the use of landscape. The journal should have included this, together with the reasons why shifts have not been explained in landscape architecture. The concepts also lack clarity in showing how technological changes have been experienced landscape architecture. Although they have shown how technology has been used in landscape architecture, they have not shown how changes in technology have affected this sector.

The theory of landscape architecture has done well in explaining how improvement in the landscape has led to development and improvement in the attractiveness of our environment. The journals explaining this theory however do not explain all the negative aspects of landscape architecture. For instance, they don’t explain the losses incurred due to the transformation of landscape from one use to another. Ideally, if land for farming is used to establish a building, then the output from farming in the surrounding area will reduce to some extent.

The theory has mainly focused on the developed countries in explaining the history of landscape architecture. The journal should also have included the developing countries to see how these countries have been benefiting from landscape architecture. This would be with a view to improve planning in these countries with regard to landscape architecture. Furthermore, the articles have not pointed out the various aspects that have caused differences in landscape architecture. The concepts have shown different landscapes but have not explained the reasons for the differences.

Although landscape architecture has been able to form a major part of development in many countries, there is still room for improvement in this sector. The above criticisms will help in improving landscape architecture in various countries. These critics also show that the theories regarding landscape stand a chance to be critically examined. Criticizing these theories will help to improve the quality of education regarding landscape architecture.