Like Archinect on Facebook.
Sign up to our mailing list.
I came across a recent paper, which in summary made some of the following claims about landscape architecture:
"Landscape architecture is a troubled profession. It has no
historiography, no formal theory, no definition, direction, or focus. A vast schism currently
exists between its academics and professional practitioners. In universities across
the nation, researchers poach methodologies from other, more vibrant disciplines.
Meanwhile, in professional offices, designers yoked to the bottom line crank out
You can read the paper here:
Any thoughts on this? It struck me, as I am considering applying for MLA in the coming year.
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?