The Aesthetic Exploitation o f Landscape
T h e aesthetic discovery o f land scap e in E u ro p e is fairly re c e n t a n d dates b ack to th e 18th c e n tu ry w hen th e th re a t o f in d u strialisa tio n b e c a m e visible a n d tang ible. To p u t it succintly, lan d sca p e is th e overall view an o b serv er (im m o b ile o r in m o tio n ) has o f his su rro u n d in g s fro m a given an g le. H ow ever th e focus o n th e lan d sca p e in its v aried form s, like th e p le a su re o n e derives from observ in g it, d elin ea te s a c o m p lex shift in sensibility a n d th in k in g fro m a h isto rical a n d c u ltu ra l view point o p e n to p r o f o u n d a n d m e ta p h o ric a l m ean in g s b o u n d u p with bein g . T h e lan d sca p e th u s ca n b e seen as a c o n c e p t c o n c e rn in g n u m e ro u s disciplines. I f we re stric t o u r analysis to th e a re a o f aesthetics, to th e taste fo r n a tu re w hich d e v e lo p e d d u r in g th e A ge o f R eason, th e sce n e w hich im m e d ia tely u n fo ld s b e fo re us p re se n ts th e p ic tu re sq u e as a vision o f n a tu re .
H istorically th e c o n c e p t o f th e p ic tu re sq u e has b e e n in te r p r e te d as th e re a p p ra isa l a n d view o f n a tu re fro m th e p o in t o f view o f an a e s th e tic reflec
tion o n beauty. Signs o f this researc h o n land scap e a n d the e n v iro n m e n t can b e tra c e d even p rio r to its th e o riz a tio n in G re a t B ritain a t th e e n d o f th e 18th c e n tu ry to Vasari w hen this term was u sed m erely to in d ic a te a te c h n iq u e in p a in tin g »alia pittoresca«. Even th e n these signs w ere h ig h ly p a r
ticu lar ways o f d e p ic tin g life a n d ob jects in re la tio n to th e p e rc e p tu a l a n d psychological activity o f th e subject. D u rin g th e 17th c e n tu ry a n d abo ve all d u rin g th e 18th c e n tu ry th e p ic tu re sq u e progressively d ev e lo p e d in to a taste th ro u g h a p re ssin g visual strategy by v irtu e o f w hat was » p ro p e r to p a in tin g a n d pain ters« . T h u s in th e c o m p le x tra n sitio n fro m th e classical to th e ro m an tic, we w itness th e ae sth e tic discovery o f lan d sca p e p a ra lle l to th e posi
tive discovery o f th e n a tu ra l scien ces. M oreover, b e c a u se o f th e re a so n s m e n tio n e d above, a fe rtile e x c h a n g e b etw een th e eye w h ich ob serves a n d c o n te m p la te s (th e n a tu ra l eye) a n d th e selective eye o f p a in tin g (th e p icto rial eye) can b e d isc e rn e d in th ese pathways. T h is e x c h an g e is also e x te n d e d to th e re la tio n b etw e en c re a tio n a n d u tilizatio n , b etw een p a in te r a n d o b server. S ince psychological pro cesses a re lin k e d to th e ev o lu tio n o f taste, see in g (I am re fe rrin g to th e h isto ric o -p e rc e p tu a l strateg ies o f th e p ic tu r
esq u e) im plies a view; w h ereas c o n te m p la tin g a n d re p re s e n tin g a re see n as
p ro m o tin g a p o e tic b ro a d e n in g o f p e rc e p tio n , giving rise to a n a e sth e tic e m o tio n a n d an a u th e n tic vision.
In its sea rch fo r effect a n d its taste fo r ru in s th e p ic tu re sq u e m arks th e passage fro m th e b a ro q u e to ro m an ticism as it d istan ces itself fro m re a so n a n d fro m th e rules o f classicism relying o n freed o m o f in ven tio n. It does n o t convey a p ro fo u n d a u th e n tic feeling, b u t a suggestive stag in g o f cu riosities a n d im p ressions from w hich u n u su a l a n d pow erful im ages o f wild a n d s p o n ta n e o u s n a tu re arise. D u rin g th e 18th c e n tu ry in G re at B ritain th e p ic tu r
esque m in g le d with th e sublim e th eo rized by B urke, with th e gothic a n d with th e p asto ra l tra d itio n o f lite ra tu re . It is a p lu ra l c o n c e p t in w hich beauty in p a in tin g m erg es w ith beauty in nature. T his can be seen in th e visual arts, a r
c h itec tu re, g ard en in g , lite ratu re (visual descriptivism ) a n d th e taste fo r travel a n d faraway places.
In this investigation th e p ictu resq u e is probably also th e first im p o rta n t th eo ry co n c e rn in g th e landscape. O utside E urope, in C h in a fo r exam ple, the aesthetic in terest in the landscape flourished m uch earlier - ab o u t a m illenium e a rlie r - a n d led to the view o f m an a n d n a tu re co n jo in e d w ithin a cosm ic, sp iritual design. B eh in d its evolution a n d its visual discovery seen as a fram e
w ork o f o b serv atio n , co m p o sitio n a n d p o in ts o f view (lights, p a n o ra m a s, scenes) a d esc rip tio n un fo ld s w hich in tim e selects, im proves, orders, estab
lishes criteria, sets u p com parisons, a n d elaborates ideas. From th e feeling o f w o n d e r ex p e rie n c e d b y jo h n D ennis (1693),J o h n A ddison (1705), A n th o n y S haftesbury (1709) a n d G eorge Berkeley a t th e sight o f ov erh an g in g rocks, ro a rin g to rre n ts, ru g g ed cliffs a n d waterfalls, a n d shadowy forests to th e re
search c o n d u c te d by W illiam Gilpin, Uvedale Price a n d R ichard Payne K night a n ticip atin g ro m an tic, frenzy, an aesthetic th eo ry em erges, halfway betw een o u r im ag in atio n a n d the p leasu re o f sight an d o f th e senses. It is a re a so n e d sensibility fo u n d e d o n the value attrib u ted to the irregularity, variety, intricacy a n d ro u g h n e ss o f a wild a n d disorderly n a tu re , an aesthetic p leasure w hich relies o n sp o n tan eity a n d caprice. N a tu re is a spectacle, a th e a te r o f th e u n usual, th e stage o f o u r im aginings, a p o in t o f d e p a rtu re a n d o f re tu rn . T h e a sto n ish m e n t expressed by G o eth e (1779) a n d H egel (1795) b efo re th e view o f th e B ernese Alps can easily be re a d as a ro m an tic passion e m erg in g from a p leasu re typical o f p ictu re sq u e taste. T h e trav eller o f th e p ic tu re sq u e was g u id e d towards solitary a n d u n c o m m o n landscapes, arch itectu ra l ru in s a n d ta n g le d vegetation. T h e descrip tio n o f landscapes beco m es a com p ositio n o f selected im ages, a classification o f events an d im pressions, c o n jo in ed ju d g e m en ts m a d e explicit, an elab o ratio n o f general con cep ts a n d o f practical in
terventions, a p a th o f analogies a n d m em ories, a p ro je c t o f variable p attern s, a focus o n p artic u la r know ledge to attain a h e ig h te n e d sensibility. In the writ
ings o n th e p ictu re sq u e a t the e n d o f th e 18th c e n tu ry a n d a t th e b e g in n in g o f the 19th cen tu ry a b ro a d an d systematic in te rp re ta tio n o f th e w orld a ro u n d us a n d o f vegetable, anim al an d h u m a n life began to take shape. W h at we find interesting today, despite the differences betw een the various au th o rs a n d their cultural a n d tem p o ral backgrounds, is th e strategy a d o p te d in th e observation o f n a tu re , th e m easures to im prove its a rra n g e m e n t a n d th e p leasu res th a t this arouses also in re la tio n to spectacu lar o utcom es, effect a n d feeling. It is a re o rd e rin g th a t follows the laws o f n a tu re a n d the w ork o f m an , an illusion w orth re tu rn in g to in o rd e r to re fo rm u late o u r attitudes. T his illusion was to a p p e a r again in th e o bservation s o f S chinkel a n d C o n stab le a n d la te r ex
p a n d e d in a p ro je c t fo r a new sensibility in philosophy.
M any things have ch a n g ed since th e e n d o f th e 18th century, b u t this p ro fo u n d feelin g fo r n a tu re has n o t d ie d o u t, fo r we still seek a n in tim a te c o n ta c t w ith th e landscape, seen a n d ex p e rie n c e d as a w hole by o u r m in d s a n d bodies. B etw een the w orld o f n a tu re a n d th e w orld o f a rt w hich reflects it, beauty, grace, th e sublim e, th e p ictu re sq u e a n d o th e r aesth etic ideas co n tin u e to sp re a d th e ir seeds an d suggest in fin ite form s to th e im ag in atio n . To perceive th e lan dscape u n d o u b te d ly brings in to play an aesth etic a c t w hich form s o u r cu ltu re a n d history in general. In this c o n n e ctio n th e teaching s o f R osario A ssunto in Italy w ere decisive in p o in tin g o u t how th e lan d sca p e a n d its in terp re tatio n p ro m o te a high d eg ree o f civilization in the evolution o f taste.
H e re m in d e d us th a t the lan d sca p e co n tain s th e traces o f th e id en tity o f n a tu re a n d o f th e sp irit in p ro p o sin g sensibilities illu m in a te d in tu r n by various aesth etic categories. C o n tem p la tio n , h e asserted, is n o t p u re fantasy, b u t an ex ercise in feeling. C ertain m o rp h o lo g ie s o f la n d sca p e ca n b e c o m e traces o f poetics, o r id eal indication s. B en e a th these analyses a n d th e sen ti
m e n t o f n a tu re lies a criticism w hereby m ateria l b e in g is th e re s u lt o f a w ork
in g p rocess eq u a l to ae sth e tic b ein g. L an d sc ap e is an a e sth e tic in stitu tio n by v irtu e o f itself, o f literary a n d travel testim o n ies, o f visual arts a n d o f th e su b je c t’s im ag in atio n . T his takes us back to th e re la tio n b etw een n a tu re a n d c u ltu re w ithin w hich th e ecological co m p ariso n falls. In A ssu n to ’s th o u g h t lan d sca p e is th e fo rm o f c u ltu re a n d history, th e form in w hich c u ltu re a n d history have b e e n ab so rb ed . As fo r th e p ro b le m re g a rd in g th e value o f n a tu ral beauty, h e o p p o ses th e views ex p ressed by C roce (Aesthetica in nuce) w ho re ite ra te d th e tra d itio n a l se p a ra tio n b etw e en n a tu ra l a n d artistic beauty.
A ssunto (Introduzione alia critica del paesaggio, 1963) also p ro p o se s to estab lish w h e th e r it is possible to e la b o ra te a »landscape criticism « c o m p a ra b le to a r t criticism . T his w ould give rise to a lan d sca p e criticism c e n te rin g o n th e fe elin g o f n a tu re involving p h ilo so p h ic al reality, c u ltu re , a n d th e vision o f th e w orld in a c o n n e c tio n s u p p o rte d by th e ae sth e tic id eal. T h is id e a l
u n d e rlie s th e discovery o f n a tu re a n d tran sfo rm s m an in to an artist. As the m e d ia to r b etw een n a tu re a n d history, m an today m u st flee fro m th e city o f P ro m e th e u s fo u n d e d o n ec o n o m ism , tech n ic al ra tio n a lism a n d scien tism a n d seek s h e lte r in th e city o f A n fio n e w ho so fte n e d th e ratio n ality o f b u ild in g w ith m usic a n d song.
In re c e n t years th e a tte n tio n has b ee n focused n o t so m u ch o n th e co m p a riso n b etw een ae sth e tic sensibility a n d artistic p ro d u c tio n , o n th e aim s o f p h ilo so p h y a n d th e »objectivity« o f n a tu ra l beau ty as o n th e fact th a t n a tu re itself m ay b e p erceiv ed as a w ork o f art. As a re su lt o n e n e e d s to go b e y o n d th e p erspective o f a study o f lan d sca p e in art, as K e n n e th C lark did , o r c o n versely, o f a rt in landscape, as th e th eo retician s o f the p ictu re sq u e a t th e e n d o f th e 18th c e n tu ry p ro p o se d . M oreover, even th e d iffe re n c e b etw e en g ar
d e n s a n d th e n a tu ra l a n d c u ltu ra l lan d scap e, th e la tte r b e in g th e re s u lt o f th e w ork o f m an w ho m o ld e d it, is fo r th e m ost p a r t in te rp re te d today as an a r t o f n a tu re capab le o f enco m p assin g g ard en a n d landscape. T h e land scap e (n a tu ra l o r ru ra l) o f th e e n tire w orld co u ld b e view ed as a g a rd e n , a n d all th e g a rd e n s o f th e w orld, even th e sm allest on es, co u ld be c o n s id e re d la n d scapes in re la tio n to th e w orld in its totality.
A n aesthetics o f lan d sca p e is thus d e lin e a te d w hich, b ey o n d th e d e b a te o n th e system o f th e arts, a p p e a rs to b e far re m o v e d fro m th e p rin c ip le o f
»aim less finalism «, o f th e »disin terested pleasure« o f a r t e la b o ra te d by K ant.
T h e b ro a d e n e d n o tio n w hich is p re se n te d allows o n e to co n sid e r b o th th e o retical a n d practical aspects ra n g in g from the fields o f p hilosophy to art, from psychology to anthro p o lo g y , from ag ric u ltu re a n d g eo g rap h y to biology a n d ecology: in sh o rt, a e sth e tic u to p ia beco m es also an eth ical p roject.
T h e aesth etics o f la n d sc a p e is based o n th e fact th a t we a re th e o n e s w ho have c re a te d th e im age o f w hat s u rro u n d s us, b o th o n th e p la n e o f feel
in g a n d o f th e re p re s e n ta tio n o f things, in h istory a n d th ro u g h history. T h e very m yth o f th e w ilderness, fu e le d by th e fa th e rs o f m o d e rn e n v iro n m e n talism , sh o u ld b e re c o n s id e re d in th e lig h t o f o u r vision o f n a tu re , ev en th e w ildest la n d sc a p e very o fte n b ea rs th e signs o f m a n a n d , in any case, th e w ild ern ess o n c e ag ain expresses th e search o f th e im ag in atio n , th e will o f c reativ e in s ig h t to d isco v er th e in tim a te g e n iu s o f th e w o rld a r o u n d us.
N a tu re a n d h u m a n p e rc e p tio n (u n d o u b te d ly o rie n te d a n d h e ig h te n e d p e r
c e p tio n ), like th e re la tio n sh ip b etw een o b ject a n d subject, are n o t two dis
tin c t k in g d o m s a n d c a n n o t b e se p a ra te d . A p a n o ra m a is fo rm e d by th e vari
eties o f th e given m aterials o f w hich it is c o m p o sed , b u t also by th e m e m o ries w hich have b u ilt u p a n d o v erla p p ed over th e ce n tu rie s in a p rocess c o n te m p o ra n e o u s to w riting. As S im on S h am a asserts, it is o u r p e rc e p tio n th a t creates th e d iffe re n c e b etw e en raw m ateria l a n d lan dscap e.
T h e la n d sca p e th e re fo re is a p ro d u c t o f m a n ’s w ork a n d m in d . It is in this way th a t we m ay c o m p re h e n d how th e sight o f n a tu re aro u ses th e im agi
n a tio n . T h e im a g in a tio n , as we know, is strictly lin k e d to p e r c e p tio n in c o n te m p la tin g th e lan d scap e. T h e g en iu s o f a single artist is re p la c e d by th e g e n iu s o f th e e a rth a n d o f o u r m e e tin g w ith n a tu re w h e n , v o lu n ta rily o r involuntarily, we are p ro m p te d to assign th e value o f a rt to it, b e a rin g in m in d th a t h istory a n d m em o ry m u st n ev e r be see n as d istin c t fro m m a n ’s living ex p e rien ce . As M aurice M erleau-P onty aptly p u t it, th e la n d sca p e is situ a te d b etw een th e gaze cast by th e o b serv er a n d th e flesh o f th e w orld. It is th e re s u lt o f a sy naesthetic a c t a n d is a t o n e w ith us.
Psychological tim e, c o n n e c te d to th e fru itio n o f w hat s u rro u n d s us, ex
p a n d in g an d su dd enly contracting, is n o d o u b t im p o rta n t fro m the view point o f ae sth etic re c e p tio n a n d artistic creatio n , b u t m o v em en t is also c e n tra l b e
cause o f th e v a ria tio n o f th e p o in ts o f view it p ro d u c es. W ith re s p e c t to th e ae sth e tic p e rc e p tio n o f lan d scap e, m o v e m e n t au to m atically involves o th e r senses: besides sight, a fixed gaze a n d its p a rtic u la r v ertig o o f fe elin g , h e a r
ing, sm ell a n d taste as well.
M o vem ent exerts an all-em bracing grip on th e w orld a n d involves th e w hole body. A t a m o re careful ex a m in a tio n w hat em erges is a c o n tin u a l in terplay o f view points in tim e a n d space a c c o rd in g to d iffe re n t sp eed s a n d m eans. W alking, dancing, swimming, riding, cycling, travelling by m otorcycle, car, train o r p la n e are, in o u r case, ways o f ex p e rien cin g th e lan d sca p e aes
thetically. As d esc rib ed by lite ratu re , p a in tin g a n d o th e r arts a n d as we can directly e x p e rie n c e ourselves, th e landscape ch ang es its a p p e a ra n c e . We live in th e w o n d e r o f fe e lin g , ra n g in g fro m a so lita ry stro ll, r e m in is c e n t o f R ousseau, to a jo u rn e y by plane. T h e land scap e alters its a p p e a ra n c e thanks to o u r m ovem ents, b u t also thanks to o th e r factors - atm ospheric, clim atic a n d seasonal variations o f light, color, w ind a n d tem p eratu re - to variations caused by n a tu ra l p h e n o m e n a (vulcanic e ru p tio n s, ea rth q u a k e s a n d so o n ) o r to co n tac t with d iffe re n t m aterials such as sand , e a rth , water, grass, m arb le, etc.
T h e p e rc e p tio n o f m o v em en t, tim e a n d space is c o n d itio n e d by th e c h a n g in g lan d scap e. In this c o n n e c tio n it m u st b e p o in te d o u t th a t today m a n ’s in te rv e n tio n s are n o t re stric ted to cultivated la n d a n d w o o d lan d s, b u t also co m p rise those o f c o n te m p o ra ry a r t such as lan d art, e a rth art, en v iro n m en tal a rt a n d ecological art. T hese events are the co n c ern o f en v iro n m e n ta l aesth etics w hich, o n th e o n e h a n d , observes a n d th eorizes artistic processes linked to th e en v iro n m e n t, and, on th e o ther, lau nch es the id e a o f safeg uard
in g n a tu re in th e sam e way as o n e do es works o f art. At any ra te , e n v iro n m en tal aesthetics a n d the aesthetics o f landscape m ay be usefully in teg ra te d .
T h e ev o lu tio n o f taste fo r an ae sth etic ca te g o riza tio n o f o u r s u rro u n d ings in a p e rc e p tio n o f b o th d istan ce a n d closeness m u st n o t be seen as fo
cu sin g exclusively o n th e p ast o r o n p u rp o se s o f co n se rv atio n a n d re s to ra tio n , b u t also o n th e fu tu re . A m o n g th e lan d scap es th a t this aesthetics co m prises (n a tu ra l, cu ltu ra l, u rb a n ), tho se p ro v id e d by space e x p lo ra tio n m u st also b e in c lu d e d . W ith in a few years h u m a n b ein g s will co lo n ize vario u s p o in ts o f o u r so lar system , a n d it will n o lo n g e r b e a q u e stio n o f o b serv in g p rivileged landscapes; we will have the thrill o f a new G ra n d Tour. H ow th e n will sensibility re sp o n d a m id virtual reality, new m e d ia a n d ad v e n tu res o u t
side o u r p lanet? We will so o n fin d o u t by u n d e rg o in g ra p id c u ltu ral changes.
H ow ever we m u st take n o te o f th e fact th a t o u r sensibility ex p a n d s b etw een th e u n iv erse o f c o m m u n ic a tio n a n d space e x p lo ra tio n as h o m o g e n iz a tio n advances (th e n u m b e r o f species is d im in ish in g as well as th e n u m b e r o f lan g u ag e s a n d c u ltu ra l h a b its ). T h e ap p raisal o f n a tu re can re a c h a n d is alread y re a c h in g b o rd e rs u n d re a m e d o f even a few years ago.
T h e aesthetics o f lan d sca p e is an o rg a n ic re th in k in g o f th e s e n tim e n t o f n a tu re , a p ro d u c t o f th e o u tco m es o f civilization a n d art. It is a t th e sam e tim e h isto ry , c ritic is m , c u ltu r e , c o n s e rv a tio n , e d u c a tio n a n d w o rk ; it tra n fo rm s m an , ca p ab le o f seeing, co n te m p la tin g , re sp e c tin g a n d p ro m o t
ing, so th a t h e m ay b e c o n d u c te d from a p la n e o f m e re re c e p tio n to o n e o f active, p ro f o u n d p a rtic ip a tio n , b ey o n d th e c o n s u m p tio n o f g re e n sp ace, b e y o n d a logic lin k ed to th e use o f leisu re tim e, b e y o n d sim plistic so lu tio n s o f e n v iro n m e n ta l im p a c t a lo n g a p a th o rig in a tin g in a n c ie n t G re ece a n d le a d in g to th e p re se n t. A long this p a th we are invited to c o n s id e r c e rta in m o rp h o lo g ie s o f lan d sca p e as traces o f a poetics, as id eal suggestions, a n d to d e ta c h ourselves from a ravaged sp ac e-e n v iro n m e n t in o rd e r to re la u n c h a n ae sth etic a n d ecological p ro je c t o n a vast scale. Because a place is n o t only a set o f physical a n d g e o g ra p h ic a l featu res, b u t an irre p ressib le, sym bolic, u n c o n sc io u s, individual a n d collective m em ory.
B esides th e a u th o rs a n d ideas usually asso ciated w ith th e ae sth e tic s o f land scap e, two fu rth e r co nsiderations m ust be a d d e d . T h e first o n e co n c ern s th e c a th a rtic effect o f a »beautiful view« in A rth u r S c h o p e n h a u e r, th e sec
o n d is th e m o tif o f illusion in Ju rg is B altrusaitis.
In B o o k III o f th e Supplem ents (1 8 4 4 ) [E rg ä n zu n g e n : Vereinzelte Bemerkungen über Naturschönheit] to The World as Will and Idea, S c h o p e n h a u e r dwells o n th e observ atio n s re g a rd in g th e b ea u ty o f n a tu re a n d states th a t every m o d ificatio n , even th e slightest, w hich an o b je c t u n d e rg o e s d u e to its p o sitio n , s h o rte n in g , distan ce, illu m in atio n o r lin e a r a n d aerial p erspectiv e is infallibly given by its effect o n th e eye a n d tak en in to ex a ct ac co u n t; th e In d ia n p ro v e rb »every g ra in o f rice casts a shadow « is th u s validated. In this
c h a p te r th e assertion »how aesthetic n a tu re is« refers to th e variety a n d sp o n taneity o f n a tu re a n d praises its w ildness. However, w hat strikes o n e m ost a b o u t th ese pages is th e c o n sid e ra tio n th a t th o u g h t p u rsu e s th e m e th o d o f n a tu re a fte r receiving its first im pulse. H e explicitly declares: »A b e a u tifu l view is th e re fo re a c a th a rtic o f th e m in d , j u s t as m usic ac c o rd in g to A ristotle is o f th e feeling, a n d in its p resen ce o n e will th in k m o st correcüy« [Eine schöne Aussicht ist daher ein Kathartikon des Geistes, wie die M usik, nach Aristoteles des Gemütes, und in ihrer Gegemuart wird man am richtigsten denken]. T h e se reflec
tions a re in flu e n c e d by several passages in p a ra g ra p h 39 o f The World as Will and Idea w h e re th e se n tim e n t o f th e su b lim e a n d o f th e variety o f n a tu re in th e re p re se n ta tio n o f o u r m in d is discussed. D espite th e d iffe ren c e b etw een th e m otifs, th e b ea u tifu l view as a ’c a th a rtic o f th e m in d ’ (Supplements) e c h oes a passage in The World as Will and Idea w h e re co n scio usness is d e sc rib e d as dissolving in to n o th in g n e ss, like a d ro p o f w ater in an o ce an : we a re o n e w ith th e w orld. S c h o p e n h a u e r observes th a t m any objects o f o u r in tu itio n aro u se th e s e n tim e n t o f th e sublim e in us b ecause, by v irtu e o f th e ir g re a t e x te n sio n a n d antiquity, in o th e r w ords, o f th e ir d u ra tio n , we feel re d u c e d to n o th in g n e ss in th e ir p re sen ce , yet we are in e b ria te d by th e jo y o f c o n te m p latin g them ; h ig h m ountains, th e Pyram ids a n d th e colossal ru in s o f a n c ie n t tim es b e lo n g to this category. It is in this sense th a t n a tu re is th e ae sth e tic m an ifestin g itself as art. T h e ca th a rtic effect a n d th e p rin c ip le o f a n n u lm e n t a re valuable in a id in g o u r u n d e rs ta n d in g o f th e very qu ality o f fe e lin g a n d co n tem p latin g .
Equally valuable in B altrušaitis’ view a c c o rd in g to w hich th e g a rd e n is a p lace o f illusion (a term already em p lo y ed to g e th e r with r e in v e n tio n ), n o t only in th e sense o f a fantastic m icrocosm , b u t also as th e su m o f th e m o st diverse form s o f e x p e rie n c e a n d know ledge, fro m p lan ts to anim als, fro m w a te r to m in era ls, in an in fin ite b ro a d e n in g o f h o rizon s. N a tu ra l history, acheology, th e h isto ry o f civilizations a n d te ch n o lo g ies take p a r t in this evo
lu tio n o f th e g a rd e n in th e perspective o f a new en cy clop edia. As an im ag e o f th e w orld, th e lan d sca p e, like th e g a rd e n is revealed to be a te rra in o f illusion, totality, e te rn ity a n d beau ty in a su rg e o f n o stag ia a n d m elancholy.
T h e lan d sca p e is a c o m p le te d vision, endlessly e n tw in ed a n d flu c tu a tin g in th e d e p th s o f spirituality a n d p e rv a d e d by th e inexpressib le: it is an in te r
n a l vision w hich c o rre sp o n d s to an e x te rn a l vision in a m u tu a l d isa p p e a r
an c e o f n a tu re a n d m an. T his vision can b e u n d e rs to o d as spiritu al fo rm a n d w ork o f a r t (in a pro cess) o f styles ca p ab le o f dissolving in to a n o rig in al, es
se n tia l, o n e iric n o th in g n e s s . B altru šaitis d ev e lo p s his th e o ry o f illu sio n th ro u g h affective e le m e n ts in a b e c o m in g o f re c o g n itio n o f o b je c t a n d sub je c t. Illusion is th e basis o f a p h ilo so p h y o f th e e a rth , o f th o u g h t re g a rd in g
o u r affective o rig in in n a tu re in th e lig h t o f h o p e a n d tru st in th e salvation o f hum anity. L et us instill th e vision o f an e a rth ren ew ed , an e d e n re g a in e d , a d re a m a b o u t to be fulfilled. As illusion is n o t alien to o u r im a g in a tio n , it is n o t, n o r sh o u ld it b e alien to o u r doing .
Bibliography
A A.W ., »Paesaggio«, E nciclopedia Universale d e ll’Arte, Vol. X, U nedi, Firenze- V enezia 1976, pp. 332-378.
A A .W , Art et paysage, »C ritique«, juin -ju illet 1995, n" 577-578.
A A .W , L a natura tra Oriente e Occidente, Atti del I C ongresso N azionale AISE, L uni, M ilano 1996.
A A .W ., Lapolifonia estetica. Specificità e raccordi (Sezione IV: Estetica ambientale), Atti del II C ongresso N azionale AISE, G uerini, M ilano 1996, pp. 385-458.
A A .W , Nature et Paysage dans la pensée et l ’environnement des civilisation antiques, e d ite d by G é rard S iebert, De B occard, Paris 1996.
A A .W ., Le Paysage et la question du sublime, e d ite d by C h ristèle B u rg a rd e t B aldine S aint G irons, R éu n io n des M usées N atio nau x, Paris 1997.
A A W., Jardins et paysages, »C ritique«, J u in J u ille t 1998, n° 613-614.
A A .W ., Environmental Aeshetics, »The J o u rn a l o f A esthetics a n d A rt Criticism «, e d ite d by A. B erlea n t a n d A. C arlson, vol. 56, no. 2, S p ring 1998.
A A .W ., Ilpaesaggio dett’estetica (Sezione III: Tra ecologia e estetica), Atti del III C ongresso N azionale AISE, T rau b en , T orin o 1998.
A lison A., Essays on the Nature and Principles o j Taste, D ublin 1790.
A ssunto R., Introduzionealla critica delpaesaggio] in »De H om in e«, N. 5 ,6 ,1 9 6 3 . I l paesaggio come oggetto estetico', in »II Verri«, n. 29, 1968.
Tre saggi di estetica sul paesaggio del Settecento, N ovecento, P alerm o 1984.
L a natura, le arti, la storia. Esercizi di estetica, G uerini, M ilano 1990.
Ilpaesaggio e Vestetica (1973), N ovecento, P alerm o 1994.
B altru šaitisj., Jardins, pays d ’illusion, A A .W , Jardins enFrance 1760-1820, Caisse N ationale des M o n u m en ts historiques e t des sites, Paris 1990.
B anfi A., Vila dell’arte (»bellezza n atu rale« ), O p e re , Istitu to A. Banfi, R eggio Em ilia 1988.
B erlea n t A., The Aesthetics o f Environment, T em ple U. P., P h ila d elp h ia 1992.
L iving in the Landscape: Neiu Essays in Environmental Aesthetics, U.P. o f Kansas 1996.
B e rq u e A., Les Raisons du paysage: de la Chine antique aux environnnements de synthèse, H azan , Paris 1995.
B u rk e E., A Philosophical Inquiry into the Origins o f Our Ideas o f the Sublime and Beautiful (1757-59), O x fo rd U.P., O x fo rd 1990.
C am p o resi P., Le belle contrade. Nascita del paesaggio italiano, G arzan ti, M ilano 1992.
C h a te a u b ria n d ER. de, Lettre sur le paysage en peinture, R u m e u r des Ages, La R ochelle 1995.
C lark K., Landscape into A rt (1949), 6th ed., L o n d o n 1991.
C ozens A., A Neiu Method o f Assisting the Invention in Drawing Original Compo
sitions of Landscape (1785), a c u ra di P. Lavezzari, C anova, Treviso 1981.
D ’A ngelo P., II ritorno del bello naturale, » C u ltu ra e scuola« n. 10, 1993.
D a g o g n e t E (e d ite d by), Mort du paysage. Philosophie et esthétique du paysage, C h am p V allon, Paris 1982.
Dil they W., L ’analisi deli’uomo e l ’intuizione délia natura, d a lRinascimento al secolo X VIII (pref. e trad. it. di G. S a n n a ), 2 voll, L a N uova Italia, F irenze 1974.
G ilpin W., Three Essays on the Picturesque to Which Is Added a Poem on Landscape Painting, B lam ire, L o n d o n 1782.
G oetheJ.W . von, L a teoria della natura (a c u ra di M. M o n tin a ri), B o rin g h ieri, T o rin o 1959.
H eg el G.W.F., Viaggio nelle alpi bemesi ( 1796), a cu ra di G.A. D e Toni, L u b rin a, B ergam o 1990.
K em al S., Gaskell I. (e d ite d by), Landscape, N atural Beauty a nd the Art, C am b rid g e U.P., C am b rid g e 1993.
K erenyi K., Landschaft u n d Geist, in Apollon u n Niobe, W erke IV, 1980, p p . 80- 92; trad. it. »Paesaggio e spirito«, in L a madonna ungherese di Verdasio.
Paesaggi dello spirito epaesaggi deü’anima (a cu ra di A. R u c h a t), D ado , L o
c a rn o 1996, pp. 17-32.
K lonk C h., Science and the Perception o f Nature, Yale U.P., New H a v en -L o n d o n 1996.
R nigh R.P., A n Analytical Inquiry into the Principles o f Taste, L uke H a sa rd , L o n d o n 1908.
L an so n A. M. G., Le sentiment de la nature en France de J. J. Rousseau à Bernar
din de Saint-Pierre (1907), L en o x H ill, New York 1971.
Lovejoy A. O ., L a grande catena dell’essere (1936), F eltrin elli, M ilano 1966.
M arch ian ô G., Sugli orienti delpensiero. L a natura illuminata e la sua estetica, 2 voll, R u b b e ttin o , Soveria M annelli 1994.
M erleau-P onty M., Phénoménomenologie de la perception, G allim ard, Paris 1945.
M ilani R., IlPittoresco. L ’evoluzione del Gusto tra classico e romantico, L aterza, Bari 1996.
M o d e r n e l o J ., D el arte del pajsaje a l pajsaje como arte, in » R e v is ta d e l ’O c cid en te« (Pajsajey arte), F e b re ro 1997, n.189.
M o n k S., The Sublime (1935), UM I R esearch Press, A n n A rbor, M ich. 1962.
P rice U ., Essays on the Picturesque, as Compared with the Sublime and Beautiful, R obson, L o n d o n 1798.
R itte r J ., Landschaft Zur Funktion der Aesthetischen in der modernen Gesellschaft, A sch e n d o rff, M u n ster 1963.
R o g er A., Court Traité du paysage, G allim ard Paris 1997.
R ousseau J.J., Les reuêries du promeneur solitaire (1782), F lam m arion, Paris 1964.
R uskin J., Lectures on Landscape delivered at Oxford, L o n d o n 1897.
S ain t G iro n s B., Fiat lux. Une philosophie du sublime Q uai V oltaire, P aris 1993.
S a le rn o R., Archiettura e rappresentazione del paesaggio, G u e rin i, M ilano 1995.
S aussure H.B. de, Journal d ’u n voyage à Chamonix et à la cime du M ont Blanc (1787), Lyon 1926.
S ch in k el K.F., Architettura e paesaggio (a c u ra di M. P o g a č n ik ), M otta, M ilano 1992.
S c h o p e n h a u e r A., Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung, (1819), It. ed. G. R ico n d a editor, M ursia, M ilano 1982; Ergänzungen (1844), It. ed. G. De L o re n zo e d ito r, L a te rz a , B ari 1986; Sämtliche Werke, C otta-V erlag, S tu ttg a rd - F ra n k f u rta m M ain, 1960, vol. I e II, II p. 519-521; The World as Will and Idea, K egan, L o n d o n 1896, III, pp. 173-175.
Seel M., Eine Aesthetik der Natur, S u h rk am p , F ra n k fu rt am M. 1991.
S h am a S., Landscape and Memory, F o n ta n a Press, L o n d o n 1996.
Sim m el G ., Philosophie der Landschaft (1912-13), It. e d ., Il volto e il ritratto. Saggi su ll’arte (a c u ra di L ucio P e ru c c h i), ii M u lino, B o lo g n a 1989.
Tiezzi E., II capitombolo di Ulisse. Nuova Scienza, estetica della natura, sviluppo sostenibile, F eltrin elli, M ilano 1991.
T rip e t A., Rousseau et l ’esthétique du paysage, »A nnales de la Société, J.J. R ous
seau«, n ” 3, 1990.
V e n tu ri F e rrio lo M., Giardino e filosofta, G u e rin i, M ilano 1992.
Giardino e paesaggio dei romantici, G uerin i, M ilano 1998.
W e illach er U., Between Landscape Architecture and L an d Art, B irkhauser, Bos
to n 1996.
Weiss A. S., Unnatural Horizons: Paradox and Contradiction in Landscape Archi
tecture, P rin c e to n A rc h ite c tu ra l Press, New York 1998.
W h ite h e a d A.N., N atura év ita (1934), It. tr., by G.M. C respi, Bocca, M ilano 1951.
Yi-Fu T u an , M ountains, R uins and the Sentiment o f Melancholy, »L andscape«, Fall 1964, pp. 27-30.
