The End

Summarize your experiences of, and write a definition of Danish greenspace

I could berate you with my experiences in Danish Greenspace or try to rattle off characteristics, but I think my previous blog posts can serve that purpose. Instead I'll try to communicate  the concept I've been trying to understand for three weeks now.

What I've come to find is that Danish Greenspace is tightly connected to and largely defined by the identity of the Danish people. Denmark is a small country, and its civilization and land developed closely in tandem, by necessity. Land provides for and restricts human activity. Humans alter and change land to better fit their purposes. This tight relationship is evident today in the Danish psyche, in way they think and what they eat and how they play and work and exercise and relax. Danish Greenspace is a state of mind.

Maybe that sounds silly. Maybe I'm pushing too far. But I think to really understand Danish Greenspace, you need to live it. It's about the place, and the place is about the land and the people. This is a topic one could study for a lifetime, looking into psychology, geology, climate, history, government... you get the gist. If I could say I've gained one thing this semester, it is an expansion of my understanding of what "place" means. It's a concept we discuss all the time in architecture school. It's about specificity, and I now realize it's something you can't understand until you live somewhere new.

I've had a wonderful first three weeks here, and I think this course was the perfect segue into my Urban Design Studio, starting on Tuesday. A huge thank-you to Toby Musgrave, our fearless leader, and to my fellow students.

Skål!

Robin

Thank you Maddie Hineman (front center) for this selfie-stick gem.
Instagram @maddiehiney
Toby is at the back in the hat.
I'm the tallest because Adam is crouching.
Maria and Mitch were lost and did not make it in the picture. Sorry guys.
Mckenzie is at far-left with the "most stoked" award.

Ownership of Historic Sites

Does the historic and elitist institution of the country house estate have a role and purpose in Denmark’s egalitarian society?  Explain your answer.


Today we visited Egeskov, on the island of Fyn. This enormous estate and castle is privately owned by the same family that originally had it built in the 16th century. They have kept it in pristine condition, turning the castle itself into a sort of museum and carefully maintaining the lawns and gardens. Today, Egeskov is a tourist attraction and family-oriented establishment – it has entry fees, a gift shop, cafés, museums, tours and an amazing playground that made me wish I had been there as a ten-year-old.

thanks, google

i took a picture of the map. lots going on here.

I think this is a case where private ownership works very well. The family has found a way to make the establishment profitable, giving them the opportunity to keep the historic site in good condition. It is an amenity for locals as well as bringing in tourist dollars. It has won awards for its gardens, putting Fyn on the map for garden-lovers, and the architecture draws historians and architects from all over the world. It would be a shame to see these beautiful historic sites go unappreciated.

But this blog question is tough, because the situation depends so heavily on the ownership of the grounds. Egeskov is an example of proper management, but I can think of all sorts of ways that a private owner could let a place like this go to waste. If owners are not entrepreneurial in their approach, these old buildings and gardens are impossible to maintain without a fortune.

The benefits of private ownership seem to outweigh the costs, though. Each site gets its own flavor from its historic ownership, and does not have to comply with national regulations and standards for public parks. In addition, a model like Egeskov can motivate and inspire other families to turn their expensive properties into public amenities that can actually pay out.

Cheers,

Robin

exploring the grounds

part of the famous fuchsia collection

the 16th century renaissance castle

the inside is filled with exhibits from the family

structure inside a turret

National Parks

Contrast today’s experiences of a Danish National Park with America’s National Parks in general, or specifically with one that you have visited.

As a student in Montana, I am quite familiar with the national parks of the United States – specifically Yellowstone. This vast expanse of land in Montana and Wyoming encompasses mountains, roaring rivers and waterfalls, dense forests, hot springs and geysers, and wildlife like grizzly bears, bison, elk and wolves. Yellowstone has been preserved as pristine, old-growth wilderness with tight restrictions on activities and use. The main activity in the park today is tourism – Yellowstone is a wildly popular attraction in the summer months, drawing crowds from across the globe. The park is a great source of national pride, and stands as a symbol of the vast wilderness that once dominated our continent.

a picture I took at yellowstone national park
june 8, 2014

Today we visited Kongernes Nordsjælland National Park, one of four total Danish national parks, and the only one on the same island as Copenhagen (Sjælland / Zealland). The character of this place is totally different from the national parks I am used to. None of the forests in Denmark are virgin wilderness, almost every last hectare having been thinned or burned or drained or landscaped at some point in history. This region was drained of most of its marshes for farming and military purposes, something the Nature Agency is slowly working to reverse. The character of the forest today is quite varied, some parts appearing more wild and others quite thin and young. The woods are managed carefully and closely, with trees constantly being planted and cut to maintain a balance. The biggest difference I noticed in the woods was the lack of dead plant material and of undergrowth – something our tour guide explained as being due to the historic harvesting of wood and the mass planting of trees which then mature all at once.

our guide at Kongernes Nordsjælland

I was also struck by the diverse uses and stakeholders involved in national forest land. There are many privately owned chunks that are technically part of the national forest, that go about their business as usual. Farming especially was interesting to me, as there are no restrictions in place about fertilizers or organic practices. Larger, more traditional farms, however, are often skeptical of the National Parks system and do not want to be a part of that designation for fear of future sanctions. 

This national park is an amazing indicator of the Danish relationship between man and landscape. The cycles of tree growth are long enough that Danes have not yet been able to recreate a "wild" wooded area. The country is too small to set aside enormous portions of wilderness purely for tourism. But just like yellowstone, Kongernes Nordsjælland captures the essence of its country's landscape and human-environment relationship.

Forests in an Urban Context

Why has so much valuable land close to Copenhagen been given over to forest?

I've spent a few recent posts talking about Danish Greenspace as it relates to the Danish state of mind. I've found there is a connection to landscape engrained in the mindset of Copenhageners that makes amazing things possible.

I bring this up again because I think it has everything to do with today's blog question. The immediate cost of devoting enormous chunks of prime real estate to forest seems unfathomable. In the United States, our traditional model is to build out from a city center, densely at first, then slightly more spread as one approaches the suburbs. The rationale with this model of concentric circles is that being closer to an urban center is better – and that's it. It's a one-track philosophy that doesn't prove out. In reality, most of those cities don't have adequate public transport, and if you're more than two miles from town you won't end up walking anywhere, making your distance from the urban center irrelevant. So everyone needs a car. And because there's no room for public greenspace, everyone needs their own yard – which is treated with weed killers and mowed weekly and almost never taken advantage of.

Rant over. My point is that the United States has been extremely short-sighted in its building of cities, with no thought given to residents' ability to access wilderness. The US is so vast, so seemingly untamed, that we take for granted our mountains and rivers and forests. Though I oversimplify and leave out exceptions, I think it's safe to say that as a nation, we simply do not understand the value of smart urban planning.

Danes have it figured out. Bringing us now back to that unique Danish perspective on land, we see that Copenhagen has done a real cost-benefit analysis. This is a city that understands the traditional city model and why it doesn't work; a city that has rethought urban planning and design, coming up with a new way to integrate urban centers into a small and densely populated country – namely the five finger plan. Danes understand that by setting aside forested land, the more densely populated spaces are healthier, happier and more valuable. Folks, that is a solution that satisfies environmental, economic and social values.

So this blog question has more specific and granular answers – such as the readings we did on the National Forest Program – but I think this blog should be about reflection and critical thinking. And to me, it is all coming back to a national state of mind. So cheers, Denmark! You're a role model to the rest of the world.

Thanks, as always, for reading. Here are some pictures of semi-urban forests I've experienced in class. Amazing what a twenty minute train ride will get you here.

Robin

click to enlarge! gotta love iphone panoramas.

Landscape Painting in the Golden Age

Describe the Danish Golden Age of painting and explain how the artists and their work helped shape the perception of the Danish landscape.

There is an incredible depth to the history of landscape painting which I must say I have never before understood. Qualities of light, depth of field, angle of the viewer, brush strokes – they all tell us something about the painter, their agenda, and the social and political context of the work in history. Yesterday our class was lucky enough to visit the Hirschsprung Collection, a museum of 19th-century Danish painting and sculpture in Copenhagen. As a precursor to our visit, Toby brought in a guest lecture from an art professor at DIS – a smart move, as I would have been totally lost without it.

image of the Hirschsprung Collection's home. from Google.

We first discussed the definition of a landscape – space, topography, nature, culture, something we've been experiencing first-hand over the last two weeks of our course – and how that landscape might be represented in art. This representation and manipulation changed drastically between the 1800s and today, in style, medium and agenda/attitude.

The Danish Golden Age was a period of artistic production in the early to mid 19th century, concurrent with many unfortunate events in Denmark's political and social history. Between 1807 and 1814, Denmark faced attacks from the British on Copenhagen, a state of bankruptcy, and the ceding of an enormous piece of land, now Norway.

Danish landscape painters clearly had political motivation for their works. Early golden age works show the landscape as being impressive, almost daunting, a characteristic that is almost hilariously untrue. Seaside cliffs were exaggerated in size, skies showed impressive sunsets and dark clouds, and humans were dwarfed. These landscapes encouraged a pride in the land, for what was left after the political changes and tragedies. They encouraged people to appreciate the wildness of the sea and the countryside.

As we move forward, landscape paintings become more realistic in appearance but no less manipulated. Painters would go into the field and sketch, picking the most perfect elements of the landscapes they wished to represent, returning to their studio to put the piece together. People in these paintings always appear happy and prosperous, Danish flags would be flown, and skies show gorgeous soft light and fluffy clouds. This was an attempt to remind Danes of the beauty of their country and to encourage a national pride in their way of life.

by Christen Købke

Subject was also important. Spring and summer scenes were by far most popular, important in a country which has such long and desolate winters. As industrialization started to take hold in Copenhagen, many painters moved to Skagen at the northern tip of Jutland in order to capture an old way of life and the unique qualities of light to be found there. These images take peoples minds away from the dirty cities, and focus on the hard working fisherman, playing children and gorgeous coastscapes.

by P.S. Krøyer

The Golden Age of Danish art was highly political. These politics motivated some amazing artistic expression and development of technique. I think that because national pride is no longer such an issue, landscape art today has moved away from these pastoral visions. Artists have a wide variety of inspiration, but one might argue that environmental protection and conservation is being pushed more than ever. No matter the agenda, it's interesting to look at danish greenspace (and any other greenspace) as a muse for creative expression.

Copenhageners and the Character of Their Greenspace

Based on your experiences, describe the different identities of Copenhagen’s public and private greenspaces.

To begin, I think it is important to note that each specific greenspace we have visited had its own identity, so it is difficult to generalize into simply public versus private. But here is my analysis:

Private greenspace in Copenhagen is something I haven't yet spoken about in this blog, as most of the spaces we have visited have been public-oriented. Yesterday we took a coach bus out to a series of private gardens around Copenhagen called kolonihave. These gardens are rented from an organization which upkeeps the grounds and runs a central clubhouse. The gardens generally have a small structure (sort of a tea house with no overnight-use allowed), a bit of lawn, and some productive gardening space. It would seem from a distance that the kolonihave would have a rather bland and structured character, as there are rules in place about hedge types and aesthetic of structures, and the sizes and shapes of the gardens are all very similar. However, the Danes working this land have taken advantage of constraints and made beautiful and interesting greenspaces for themselves. Each oval-shaped plot is like a little gem, some of which are completely closed to passersby while others you can peek into. The spaces are the perfect summer havens, away from city life and cultivated and manicured to fit a variety of personalities. The character of these spaces depends on the owners' individual desires.

sneaking a peek into someone's Kolonihave

DIS students getting the hang of Danish lifestyles

vegetables

Copenhagen's public greenspaces are, similarly, shaped by the users. While they are built by the city or some governing body with certain intentions, I think that people are what give them character. Today was a holiday, and at the King's garden in central Copenhagen people filled the lawn – picnics, sunbathers, groups sipping Carlsberg at 10:30 am and playing lawn games. A place that was once the formal grounds and gardens for a royal palace now has a whimsical air and a feeling of basking in the light and heat of summer.

I didn't take this photo, but it has a similar feel to today's experience

Superkilen Park is also an interesting phenomenon. It was meant as a recreational and social melting pot of a culturally diverse neighborhood. It feels divided, though, due to the bicycle and pedestrian lane running down its center that has become a sort of thoroughfare for through-traffic, as well as the city street that cuts between the red and black portions of the area. Perhaps this could be changed or controlled by modifying the park's design, but I'm sure people would adapt to the changes in whatever way they pleased. 

It's tough to predict the character of space through design. Though I think smart design decisions can contribute, it ends up being about the users.

Signing off,

Robin

Coastal Denmark and the Danes

How has and does Denmark’s coastscape shaped life and identity in Denmark?

Identity of people is shaped by environment – contours, elevation, soils, vegetation, animals, climate, and water all play important roles in our lives. In Denmark, you cannot get more than about 32 miles from the ocean, and the coastline itself stretches about 4,544 miles. So, it would follow that the Danes are intrinsically connected to the coastline and the ocean.

Denmark's early civilizations adjusted to a changing climate as seas rose and fell. From hunter-gatherers to fishermen to farmers, they adapted their lives to the ocean's mighty rule. During the viking age, the Danes had the ability to travel and loot and pillage based on their knowledge of boatbuilding and weapons – stemming from this tight relationship between humans, land and sea. The craft of shipbuilding is one only possible with ample wood supply as well as access to open water.

I grew up on the east coast of North America, in the small town of Rockport, Maine. Maine's primary industries and livelihoods have historically been centered around the ocean and dense forests; lobstering and fishing are very important to our community, while boat building, shipping of goods, and paper milling are also historically common in the area. Today, many of Maine's coastal towns have shifted to an economy of tourism, making most of their profits in the summer when people come for the great weather, the seafood and the sailing, "where the mountains meet the sea." It appears that a similar phenomenon has occurred in Danish towns such as Gilleleje, which are today dominated by summer homes and tourist attractions, while still maintaining a modest fishing economy.

wandering the streets of Gilleleje

vernacular architecture... how quaint

Gilleleje's working harbor

Danes may be shaped by their coastline, but they have also done their fair share of shaping it in return. Much of Denmark's coast was at one time sandy and near uninhabitable due to the strong winds and creeping dunes. Danes have planted large swaths of the coastal zone, creating forests that are pleasant to inhabit and fields where pigs can be raised. This has provided an opportunity for more Danes to have woodland summer homes, and dramatically increased the the pork industry. By modifying the land, Danes actually opened up new resources and opportunities for themselves – perhaps stemming from the attitude that in such a small country, the land must be taken full advantage of.

a planted forest on the coast of Sjælland, sprinkled with summer homes

That's all I've got on coasts. Look out for my next post on the identities of public and private greenspace. And please feel free to leave comments on any of my writing, whether it inspires, horrifies or bores you.

Cheers,

Robin