Advertisement

The Aesthetic Approach to Landscape

  • Richard Muir
Chapter

Abstract

The aesthetic approach to landscape sets out to answer the questions ‘What is it that we like about landscape, and why do we like it?’ (Appleton, 1996 p. xv). Despite this simple formulation, several writers have remarked upon the need for a unified theory of landscape aesthetics to be developed. Bourassa wrote: ‘A major obstacle in the way of development of a theory of landscape aesthetics is the fact that philosophers have given very little attention to landscape as an aesthetic object … As a consequence of their emphasis on art, landscape has been neglected in philosophers’ writings on aesthetics’ (1991 p. 10). ‘Landscape’, he added, ‘is rarely, if ever, just a work of art. Even the most contrived garden is to some extent composed of natural phenomena beyond the control of the designer … Furthermore, the everyday landscape is typically a combination of art, artifact and nature, and the relationships among those categories are complex’.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Appleton, J. ‘The role of the arts in landscape research’ in Penning-Rowsell, E. C. and Lowenthal, D. (eds), Landscape Meanings and Values (London: Allen & Unwin, 1986) pp. 26–47.Google Scholar
  2. Appleton, J. The Symbolism of Habitat (Washington, DC: University of Washington Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  3. Appleton, J. ‘Prospects and refuges revisited’ in Nasar, J. L. (ed.), Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research and Applications (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  4. Appleton, J. ‘Running before we can walk: are we ready to map “beauty”?’ Landscape Research 19 (1994) pp. 112–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Appleton, J. The Experience of Landscape, 2nd edn (Chichester: John Wiley, 1996).Google Scholar
  6. Balling, J. D. and Falk, J. H. ‘Development of visual preference for natural environments’ Environment and Behaviour 14 (1982) pp. 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barrell, J. The Idea of Landscape and the Sense of Place 1730–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972).Google Scholar
  8. Barrell, J. The Dark Side of the Landscape: The Rural Poor in English Painting 1730–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980).Google Scholar
  9. Bermingham, A. Landscape and Ideology: The English Rustic Tradition 1740–1860 (London: Thames & Hudson, 1987).Google Scholar
  10. Bourassa, S. C. ‘A paradigm for landscape aesthetics’ Environment and Behavior 22 (1990) pp. 787–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bourassa, S. C. Aesthetics of Landscape (London: Belhaven Press, 1991).Google Scholar
  12. Cornish, V. Scenery and the Sense of Sight (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1935).Google Scholar
  13. Cornish, V. The Beauties of Scenery (London: Frederick Muller, 1943).Google Scholar
  14. Cosgrove, D. ‘Prospect, perspective and the evolution of the landscape idea’ Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers NS 10 (1985) pp. 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Daniels, S. ‘The making of Constable Country, 1880–1940’ Landscape Research 16 (1991) pp. 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dewey, J. Experience and Nature (London: Allen & Unwin, 1929).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dewey, J. Art as Experience (London: Allen & Unwin, 1934).Google Scholar
  18. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. The Biology of Peace and War (London: Thames & Hudson, 1979).Google Scholar
  19. Goudie, A. ‘Vaughan Cornish: geographer’ Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 55 (1972) pp. 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Greenbie, B. B. ‘The landscape of social symbols’ in Nasar, J. L. (ed.), Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research and Applications (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) pp. 64–73.Google Scholar
  21. Inglis, F. ‘Landscape as popular culture’ in Pugh, S. (ed.), Reading Landscape: County-City-Capital (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1990) pp. 197–213.Google Scholar
  22. Kaplan, S. ‘Perception and landscape: conceptions and misconceptions’ in Nasar, J. L. (ed.), Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research and Applications (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) pp. 45–55.Google Scholar
  23. Kaplan, S. and Kaplan, R. Cognition and Environment: Coping in an Uncertain World (New York: Praeger, 1982).Google Scholar
  24. Kaplan, S. and Kaplan, R. Humanscape: Environments for People (Belmont, Calif.: Duxbury, 1978).Google Scholar
  25. Lowenthal, D. ‘British national identity and the English landscape’ Rural History 2 (1991) pp. 205–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Matless, D. ‘Nature, the modern and the mystic: tales from early twentieth century geography’ Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers NS16 (1991) pp. 272–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Matless, D. ‘An occasion for geography: landscape, representation, and Foucault’s corpus’ Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 10 (1992) pp. 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mills, S. F. The American Landscape (Edinburgh: Keele University Press, 1997).Google Scholar
  29. Morgan, M. ‘Perspectives on landscape aesthetics’ Progress in Human Geography 2 (1978) pp. 527–32.Google Scholar
  30. Nash, R. ‘Qualitative landscape values: the historical perspective’ in Zube, E. H., Bush, R. O. and Fabos, J. G. (eds), Landscape Assessment: Values, Perceptions and Resources (Stroudburg, Pa: Halsted Press, 1975) pp. 10–17.Google Scholar
  31. Novak, B. Nature and Culture: American Landscape and Painting 1825–75 (London: Thames & Hudson, 1980).Google Scholar
  32. Orians, G. H. ‘Habitat selection: general theory and applications to human behaviour’ in Lockard, J. (ed.), Evolution of Human Social Behaviour (New York: Elsevier, 1980) pp. 49–66.Google Scholar
  33. Orians, G. H. ‘An ecological and evolutionary approach to landscape aesthetics’ in Penning-Rowsell, E. C. and Lowenthal, D. (eds), Landscape Meaning and Values (London: Allen & Unwin, 1986) pp. 3–25.Google Scholar
  34. Prince, H. ‘Landscape through painting’ Geography 69 (1984) pp. 3–18.Google Scholar
  35. Rose, G. ‘Place and identity: a sense of place’ in Massey, D. and Jess, P. (eds), A Place in the World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995) pp. 87–132.Google Scholar
  36. Smith, D.M. ‘Introduction: the sharing and dividing of geographical space’ in Chisholm, M. and Smith, D.M. Shared Space, Divided Space (London: Unwin Hyman, 1990).Google Scholar
  37. Woodcock, D. M. ‘A functionalist approach to environmental preference’, Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1982.Google Scholar
  38. Zube, E. H. ‘Themes in landscape assessment theory’ Landscape Journal 3 (1984) pp. 104–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Richard Muir 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Muir

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations