Landscape Architecture as an Art of survival
Penser l’éducation à l’architecture paysagère comme en continuité avec les anciens enseignements chinois sur l’horticulture et les jardins ne peut conduire qu’à une compréhension esthétique et visuelle du paysage, éloignée des actuelles pré occupations environnementales. L’architecture paysagère doit être un art de la survie, c’est’-à-dire qu’elle a pour tâche de rendre les paysages productifs tout en étant durables, de créer des villes adaptées au territoire, de construire des bâtiments
intégrés aux sites et en lien avec le lieu, la communauté, le passé. Trois étapes préparent l’émergence de cette position：la tradition du jardin chinois et de ses architectures en tant que travail artisanal; la mise en place de l’éducation moderne,marquée par la création de ponts entre horticulture,architecture et art des jardins au cours du xxe siècle; le passage d’un enseignement sur les jardins à un enseignement du paysage entre 1984 et 1987,axé sur les scènes paysagères, les jardins publics et le verdissement urbain. Ces programmes ont été abandonnés en 1997, entraînant de nombreux débats et l’émergence d’une nouvelle compréhension du paysage où architecture et villes sont considérées comme des éléments du territoire et du système paysager.
To conceive of education in landscape architecture as growing out of the ancient Chinese teaching on horticulture and gardens is bound to lead to an aesthetic and visual understanding of landscape remote from current environmental concerns．Landscape architecture must be an art of survival, that is to say, its task is to make landscapes productive and at the same time sustainable, to create cities that are adapted to their territory, to construct buildings that are integrated into their site and connected to the place，the community and the past. There are three phases that can prepare the emergence of this position：the tradition of the Chinese garden and its architecture as artisanal work；the putting in place of modern education，building bridges between horticulture, architecture and the art of gardens during the 20th century；the transition from the teaching of gardens to the teaching of landscape between 1984 and 1987, organized around landscape scenery, public gardens and urban green spaces．These programmes were discontinued in 1997, provoking much debate and the emergence of a new understanding of landscape in which architecture and cities are considered as elements of the territory and landscape system.
把景观设计教育认为是中国传统园林教育的延续，这只是从美学和视觉上的理解，与目前实际相关意义相差甚远。景观设计应该是一门生存的艺术，可以说它的目标是让景观富有生产力，同时是可持续发展的，能创造出适宜当地的城市，建造能够连接场地、社区和历史，融合当地的建筑。景观设计学概念的形成共经历了三个阶段：中国传统园林和建筑的工匠技艺阶段；在二十世纪期间综合园艺、建筑和园林艺术的现代教育实施阶段；从1984到1987年，园林教育到景观设计教育的过渡，涵盖了自然风景、公共花园和城市绿地。这些进程在1997年被终止，引发了更多的争论，并对景观设计的概念出现了新的理解，即建筑和城市是土地和景观系统的组成部分。
From the art of entertaining to the art of survival
We want to make it clear in this article that the way teaching landscape architecture has been thought about is completely wrong，or at least heavily biased by the intellectual ivory tower built in the past centuries．We are inclined to believe that landscape architecture evolved from the art of gardening，because all the history books trace our profession to the origin of gardening．Most of the influential programmes of landscape architecture worldwide evolved from ornamental horticulture and gardening，plus architecture as ornament，and scenery. This intellectual genealogy leads us to think more aesthetically and visually about landscape architecture，and less about the issues of working and production．
It is a mistake to consider landscape architecture as descended from highculture gardening，from the noble classes．If we keep on this track，we are doomed，because this high culture leads only to embellishment and superficiality and can not meet the challenges of today’s environmental problems．High and low culture sees survival very differently．Thinking has to be redirected，and this redirection is deemed to be revolutionary．
The revolutionary way of thinking about the profession of landscape architecture is to redefine landscape architecture as an art of survival．It is an art of working and functioning，the art of field making，irrigation，agricultural planting dealing with flood and drought，selecting sites for cities to avoid natural disasters, selecting sites and orientating houses for people to make use of the land while avoiding the non-beneficial forces of nature．If we can follow this track, making landscape productive，making our cities adaptable and one with the land，and making our buildings hold their place on the land，and making our selves feel at home (meaning being connected to the land，the community and the past)，the landscape is deemed to be safe and healthy, productive，and beautiful．Following this track and to make us someone playing a significant role in facing the contemporary challenge of survival，we need to get out of the beautiful ivory tower and let it become “world heritage”, we have to redefine the profession of landscape architecture as an art of survival，and we need to restructure the educational programmes to make younger generations prepared for the challenges of survival. This revolutionary thinking in educational programmes began in China in the late 1990s.
The chronological brief of landscape architecture education evolution in China: Along the conventional track
Gardening as craft: The Chinese tradition
As traditional crafts，both architecture and gardening were for a long time in China learnt by doing，master-handing-on-to-apprentice crafts．Gardeners and architects (builders) were kept as members of servant teams of noble families. Loyal architects，like Master Lei in the Qin Dynasty, designed both gardens and buildings，the garden being part of the building compound，or buildings as part of the garden，carefully arranged to create a scene．The master-apprentice way of learning-by-doing successfully kept alive the skills of making gardens and structures for thousands of years. The traditional skills and art of gardening including the making of rockeries，water features，plant arrangement and maintenance，garden buildings，such as pavilions，temples and tea houses，etc. The only text book was compiled in the Ming Dynasty by a gardener called Ji Cheng.
The birth of landscape architecture education within the modern education system
Following the establishment of a western education system in the late 1800s and early 1900s，horticulture and architecture studies began．In 1902，the first programme in architecture was drafted and issued at Peking University (established in 1898)，but not implemented due to the lack of architectural educators．It was not until 1923 that the first architectural education programme was established and offered by Suzhou Industrial School．As early as 1912，one of the earliest horticulture programmes (including ornamental horticulture) was established. Between 1949 and 1951，these two programmes，namely architecture and horticulture，merged and the first gardening programme came into being．
One can see how the gardening programme was influenced both by the location of Suzhou City (the garden city with most classical Chinese gardens)，and the fact that south China was the centre of applied sciences and technologies from the l920s until the l940s. In China since l949，the building of collective units of working and living made gardening a profession to green the exterior of buildings，therefore，it is understandable that from 1951 until the mid-1980s, horticulture was dominant in the gardening programme．
Since the gardening programme was established in 1951 in China，it has undergone many ups and downs，heavily biased away from modern landscape architecture education，due to the closed policies before the late 1970s，and heavily influenced by traditional Chinese garden heritage．
Landscape education for scenic landscape + public gardens and urban green
After the end of the Cultural Revolution，the nascent gardening and landscape gardening programme in China were again taken care of．For virtually twenty years，from the early 1960s to the early 1980s，little urban development and construction was carried out，therefore there was little call for architecture，landscape architecture，and even planning. Not until the first list of Scenic and Famous Spots was announced，and was put under the administration of the Ministry of Construction，the official patron of landscape architecture education， and landscape architects (if we can call them) employer．Suddenly, these designated scenic landscapes became part of what were recognized by the “client”,(the Ministry) of the landscape architecture profession，and which reasonably was added to the former scope of landscape as“public gardens and urban greens. The renaming of gardening into landscape gardening programmes followed，from 1984 until 1987．Programmes transformed from ornamental-horticulture-dominated single programme into two programmes: ornamental horticulture (and gardening)，and landscape design and planning．Unfortunately (or rather fortunately)，in 1997，the landscape gardening programmes were officially eliminated by the Ministry of Education，symbolizing the end of conventional landscape education evolution，which also gave birth to a new concept of landscape architecture initiated in the late 1990s
A revolutionary breakthrough since 1997: The redefinition of landscape architecture
With the ending of the traditional track of landscape architecture education by its official elimination by the Ministry of Education in l997，a redefinition of landscape architecture occurred in the late 1990s. Intensive arguments occurred between the contemporary and traditional approaches，forming two distinct camps in China．A dramatic change lies in the understanding of landscape based on the definition of geography：landscape as the holistic totality of land，and elements on the land．Accordingly, landscape architecture is defined as the planning，design and management of the holistic system of land and arrangement of elements on the land. Architectures and cities are considered as “elements” on the land，and part of the landscape systems．
