«park»: from the traditional meaning to the post-modern
TRANSCRIPT
«Park»: from the traditional
meaning to the post-modern tendencies
Lorenzo BAGNOLI, Simone BETTIEUGEO 2013
GoalTo study the today’s polysemous concept of park in order to evaluate the implications for/of our society
Methodology1.analyze the concept of park (diachronically and synchonically)2.make a recognition of the several Italian parks3.organise an orthogonal matrix to classify them4.try to draw a few conclusions
1. THE CONCEPT OF PARK
�Middle Ages: in Europe, piece of enclosed wild land, reserved for hunting or fishing; in Persia, cultivated garden for enjoyment (Paradise): private in both cases�Renaissance: in Europe, attempts to combine the two aspects, for delightment and relax�XVIIIth Century: in England, artificial remakes of wilderness, in opposition to Italian style
� XIXth Century: in Europe, with the Industrial Revolution and the urban development: public parks; in USA: public parks, and national parks (Yellowstone, 1872)
� Since the first part of XXth Century: in several countries, national parks are created as natural reserves
� In the second part of XXth Century: a new approach to parks as cultural and scientific services is established (IUCN, Oct. 5th 1948)
PARK
Traditional meanings:a. rare and singular solution b. natural aspect(s) worthy of protectionc. exceptional laws concerning human activities
Present tendencies:a. huge distribution (95% of the countries) and diffusion (max 50.2%, in Venezuela)b. more human than natural aspect(s) (economy, culture…) worthy of protectionc. exceptional rules concerning human activities
3. THE ORTHOGONAL MATRIX
Analyzing diachronically the concept of park,and synchronically the above list, we noticedthat there are two most important variables:
�the status quo conservation (in a geographical sense, and not only the traditional environmental protection)�the recreational appeal
that vary from a minimum to a maximum level and that can be crossed in a matrix like the following:
THE «NOAH» PARKS� In this tipology, we include the parks
whose major aim is the status quoconservation (while the recreationalaspects are minoritarian)
Ex.: the botanical park; the marine park; the archeological park; the literary park…
THE «PINOCCHIO» PARKS� In this tipology, we include the parks
whose major aims are the recreational aspects (while the status quoconservation is minoritarian, if not absent)
Ex.: the adventure park; the luna park; the entertainment park; the shopping park…
THE «PHILEAS FOGG» PARKS� In this tipology, we include the parks
where there are high recreational aspectsas well as high status quo conservation
Ex.: the fluvial park; the cyclotouristic park; the mining park…
THE «ROBIN HOOD» PARKS� In this tipology, we include the parks
where there are low recreational aspectsas well as low status quo conservation
Ex.: the social park; the scientific and technological park; the eolic park…
4. CONCLUSIONS� we think a classification of the parks with these two variables is possible, and useful to better comprehend them;� entertainment has become the most important aim of the parks, so that even the ones founded for other purposes have organized their own leisure, tourism and amusement activities;� should in our post-modern world the traditional classifications – such as town/country or centre/periphery… – go along with the park/not park (=facetious/hard-working) one?
Thanks for your attention!