Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||THE LANDSCAPE: A GOOD OF CULTURE, IDENTIFICATION AND RICHNESS||Issue Date:||19-Jul-2006||Journal:||Proceedings of the Conference THE CULTURAL TURN IN GEOGRAPHY, 18-20th of September 2003 - Gorizia Campus
Part V: Economical Trends and Cultural Environmental Chances
The adoption of a systematic in geography has helped to "revolutionize" and in the same
time to complete the notion of landscape that, until the half '900, has mastered the
international geographic research.
We are passed from definitions of the landscape like complex of the sensible features of a
region of landscape like theatre etc. to that of landscape as structured system, where the
natural and anthropic component are melt in a system which complexity is given by the
inextricability of their relations as seen in a historical perspective.
Already L. Gambi, however, in 1964 had adopted a first interpretative approach to the
complexity of the landscape, looking no more at the man in the nature, according to Biasutti's
point of view, but putting the "man in history" near the nature who, exploiting his kind of life
contributes at the constitution of the "Anthropogeographic landscape".
The centrality of the history in the processes of complexification of the landscape has been
put, most recently, in evidence by Paola Sereno (2001): the landscape is composed of
elements that belong to the various processes of territorialization, then at more territorial
systems that the history produces, transmit some components that, changing even meaning and
function, are reunited in a new system, establish new connections with other elements inside
of new processes of territorialization.
Not exist however a true "past" of the landscape if not in the whole of the continuous
morphogenetic processes that had characterized it. In this perspective the landscape's tutelage
not is immediately connected at the tutelage of a cultural, architectonic or monumental good
that would be, because the same landscape configure itself as the historical - geographical
context that the single object inside it get meaning; a context complex, however, because not
only the simple union of elements, but the architecture of the nexus that tie them.
The landscape configure itself as a whole of signs imprinted by the community to the own
territory; it become then expression of belonging that consents to the men of recognize and
identify themselves in the "places". Every landscape then has strong individualizing characters
that consent the emersion of the deep roots of the realities that constitute the identity of the
human groups that in time have established themselves in the territory. (Mautone, 1999). It is
uncovered then an ambivalence that, according to M.C. Zerbi (1999) constitute the very
essence of the complexity of the notion of landscape: from a side the landscape as visible,
external, objective reality, that the observer can see, on the other side the mental image that
the observer build for himself, the subjective dimension that is more strictly connect to the
notion of cultural landscape. In particular Zerbi see how in the contemporary geographic
research, the notion of landscape is seen in three different aspects that presuppose various
uses. The first aspect concern The notion of cultural landscape, to whom geography has
dedicate much time, as landscape modified by human work. Is derived a large meaning of this
term, because the human work -directly or indirectly- manifests itself in a great number of
landscapes. Is, however, according Zerbi, a good starting point to pick the past and present
dynamics through an approach at the same time ecologic and historical - geographical.
When then some elements of the cultural landscape stand out which are particularly
appraised or are perceived as menaced in their own existence, it comes out the concept of
landscape as patrimonial heritage. Is a more selective concept than previous, which concerns a
reality full of values: archaeological sites, traditional agrarian cultivations, ancient houses
become a heritage to protect and maintain more than to hand down. The historical gardens and
parks too find place in this concept, becoming a planning object.
There is even, according M.C. Zerbi, a third notion of cultural landscape that, this time,
consider the landscape not only a objective reality, but a subjective interpretation of elements
held in the ambient to which various human groups attribute different meanings and values.
Landscape then as way to see that surrounds us. At first sight it could seem an abstract
approach, less responding to reality; is, instead, an approach that has validity even on the
operative plane when is needed to know the values of the insiders, to make them aware of the
planning of their complex of life.
|Type:||Proceedings||URI:||http://hdl.handle.net/10077/854||ISBN:||88-8303-180-6||Rights:||© Copyright 2003 Edizioni Università di Trieste - EUT|
|Appears in Collections:||The cultural turn in geography|
Show full item record
Page view(s) 101,173
checked on Jan 17, 2021
checked on Jan 17, 2021
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.