PART III

IMPROVEMENTS CONSTITUTING NEW DEPARTURES AND SUBSTANTIALLY INDEPENDENT

OF PARTS IV AND V

1. _Rhododendron Glade._ One of the most beautiful, striking and

completely self-contained and independent new features which could be

added to the Botanical Garden is that which has been for some time

under favorable consideration by the Director-in-Chief in the so-called

“Lake Valley”--a great naturalistic exhibition of rhododendrons

(including azaleas) and of plants suitable for association therewith,

in such a manner as to make a notably impressive landscape unit, a

valley of rich foliage and brilliant bloom enclosed by wooded rocky

hills. The natural enframement of this valley is almost perfect except

on the southeast, where the frame must be completed by adequate grading

and massive border planting. As a scenic and topographic unit the

valley begins in a rocky wooded defile just east of the Lorillard

Mansion, whence it descends, widening slightly but still almost

overarched by trees, to the point where the earth-fill of the road now

under construction traverses and blocks the valley. South of this it

widens out into a broader sunlit valley flanked by pleasantly wooded

hills, the site of a former artificial lake abandoned because of the

intercepting of much of its natural water supply.

The embankment of the new road is in itself an ugly interruption of the

valley, but it can and should be pierced by an ample archway through

which the narrow sylvan portion of the valley and a pathway traversing

it would debouch at the head of the broader glade, the embankment of

the roadway being heavily embowered in trees. Such an arrangement

would afford sweeping views of the open part of the valley from the

road without letting the automobiles spoil the charm of the valley

as enjoyed from the foot-paths within it or seriously impairing the

intimacy of its connection with the narrow sylvan upper portion. The

situation lends itself admirably to providing both the scenic and the

cultural variety of conditions desirable for such an exhibition of

rhododendrons and related plants.

An unfortunate obtrusion at present into this valley are the stables of

the Park Department. It is of vital importance that these be removed

from the scene, preferably to the undeveloped park lands just across

Pelham Parkway. A portion, at least, of the site of these buildings

would be included in the scheme, in order to reclaim the complete form

of the valley and to complete the essential enclosing plantations.

In Appendix B we have developed somewhat more in detail, in a tentative

way, the ideas which have occurred to us for the treatment of this

Rhododendron Glade; and we believe it would be the best large new

feature on which to concentrate first, after assuring increased funds

for general maintenance and for the detailed improvement of existing

features.

It must of course be borne in mind that the proper maintenance of such

a Rhododendron Glade will cost much more per acre than the old lake

with its borders of unsophisticated woodland, or than a simple meadow;

and that such an improvement, however desirable from every point of

view, ought not to be undertaken without seeing the way perfectly

clear to obtaining the necessary _additional_ maintenance funds. The

principle, of course, is the same as that which has very properly led

various institutions to refuse gifts of very much desired new buildings

in the absence of endowment for their operation and maintenance.

2. A group or series of desirable new undertakings is that referred to

in your report of April, 1923, under the heading “Model Gardens.” Some

of the most valuable of these from the point of view of the general

public, such as city back-yard gardens and typical good treatments for

small suburban homes, present peculiar difficulties in that they would

be rather lacking in realism and effectiveness unless associated with

buildings which would be in themselves inharmonious with the general

informal park-like landscape of the tract as a whole, and that most of

them would need almost complete isolation from each other and from the

general landscape.

There are along the Pelham Parkway frontage some rather isolated areas

of moderate width, as yet undeveloped and cut off by rocky hills from

the rest of the Botanical Garden which can be devoted in whole or in

part to small detached Model Gardens.

But one of the assets of these sites is the fact that they _do_ front

on the Pelham Parkway and can be seen by the large numbers of motorists

who use that route without ordinarily entering the Botanical Garden

enclosure. So far as practicable, therefore, it would seem advantageous

to use these sites for exhibits somewhat of the nature of “show-window

displays”--bold, striking, adequate to arrest the attention and

pleasantly arouse the interest of people going by at the rate of twenty

miles an hour or more, despite the interposition of the enclosing fence

and the trees of the Parkway itself. There seems no sufficient reason

why this part of the grounds should not be thus thrown visually open

to the outside, because the logical line of scenic enclosure for the

main body of the ground lies for the most part on the height of land

just north of this bordering strip. We are not prepared as yet to offer

definite and well-considered suggestions for the kinds of Model Gardens

most suitable to these sites, but it would seem that they might well

include some of the more bold and striking types of display offering

a succession of colorful effects through each season. On the other

hand, it would be a pity to put only such exhibits in these “show

windows.” Some other equally striking but perhaps more refined and

quasi-naturalistic exhibits should be provided for, such, perhaps, as a

show of lilacs and one of Crataegus and crab-apples and other so-called

“flowering” trees.

For small special domestic gardens of urban and suburban types, places

might be found, preferably in direct connection with small houses

occupied by Garden employees or adapted to necessary uses other

than residential which are capable of fitting into a dwelling-house

structure, in accessible locations near the entrance closest to rapid

transit stations but completely isolated from the general landscape by

screen planting.

3. _Iris Garden Region._ What seems on preliminary inspection like an

opportunity for an essentially new feature of much beauty and interest,

if dealt with boldly and skilfully in a large way, is presented in the

vicinity of the present Iris Garden and Horticultural Garden. Here is

an open hillside sloping irregularly to the eastward from a bench at

about elevation 90 near the Southern Boulevard, to a hollow at about

elevation 60 near the interior road, and flanked on either side by bold

well-wooded hills. Its landscape unit, however, is disturbed by the

bulge of the rounding ridge occupied by the Horticultural Garden and

by the fact that the open space, once quiet meadow or lawn, is cut up

and spotted with paths and flower beds which are yet not sufficiently

continuous to produce a unified texture of a richer sort.

Directly opposite to the east is the one important gap in the rocky

ridges which border the Bronx River on the west for three quarters

of a mile, and in and beyond this gap the natural woods are thin or

altogether lacking, giving opportunity, at the sacrifice of a few

trees, for a very lovely natural-seeming transverse vista extending to

the ridge just west of the Rose Garden.

The vista is well worth getting in itself, because one of the defects

of the Botanical Garden today is its deficiency in landscape reaches

and views of sufficient length to give the sense of spaciousness and

the mystery of distance. Moreover there is an unpleasantly complete

landscape separation of all the land to the east of the river from that

to the west.

But the special opportunity which the situation of the Iris and

Horticultural Gardens seems to present lies, in connection with opening

the vista, in the bold regrading of portions of the non-conforming

hillside above mentioned, and the extension of the mainly herbaceous

planting of these gardens so as to produce a continuous and unified,

though rich and varied, texture throughout the space within the framing

trees and hills.

Within the limits of this general conception the garden might

successfully be given any one of an infinitude of local expressions,

from that of a naturalistic hillside rich in flowers, like some alpine

glades, to that of an intricately terraced hillside where the flower

beds and paths would be made flatter in cross-section for the practical

convenience of intensive use and be supported by low walls. Such a

terraced treatment might, on the one hand, be highly architectural

in its general structure, or, on the other hand, it might be rather

casual and unobtrusively irregular and picturesque like many of the

hillsides so pleasantly and richly terraced into vineyards and gardens

by the peasants of Italy, of Switzerland, of the Rhine and of Japan.

Considering the practical necessities of exhibiting many kinds of

plants of horticultural interest, of making them closely accessible to

large numbers of people, of cultivating the beds and of avoiding the

waste of rain water on steeply sloping cultivated ground, we should be

inclined to favor the latter type, frankly man-handled in its general

scheme but rather free and picturesque in its detail, its terraces

supported in the main by uncemented walls suitable for treatment as

wall gardens. The lower slopes and terraced benches could well be used

in large part for a great collection of the upland irises, perhaps

in conjunction with peonies; the hollow at the base might be devoted

largely to the moisture-loving Japanese irises; while the outer and

upper portions could be used for other horticultural exhibits of the

type represented by the now isolated and unrelated beds of beautiful

chrysanthemums, of narcissus, and (this spring) of tulips.

4. If and when the Park Department greenhouses and work yards can be

removed from the old Lorillard Mansion gardens, as they certainly ought

to be for the proper development of the Botanical Garden (preferably,

as in the case of the Park stables, to the undeveloped park lands just

across Pelham Parkway) a peculiarly valuable area in the very heart of

the Garden’s most precious landscape will be freed and will offer a

very notable opportunity for a new feature.

To begin with, the opportunity here exists to create a long north and

south view, wholly self-contained, beautifully enclosed, and nicely

fitted to as interesting a piece of topography as is to be found

anywhere within the limits of the Botanical Garden. And, as already

stated, there is a serious deficiency in such long inviting views.

In the second place, within the land thus freed from obstructive

utilitarian structures, and without impairing the long views thus

obtained but enhancing their charm and interest, there could be

developed, under the most favorable conditions, an admirable example

of a sort of thing of which there certainly ought to be a first-rate

example somewhere on the tract. The sort of thing we mean is a type

of what is sometimes called a landscape garden, the heart of which is

a beautifully modelled lawn, enframed by beautifully composed trees

irregularly disposed, under which the lawn here and there loses itself

in shadowy mystery, while elsewhere its irregular margin is formed by

masses of flowering shrubs and flowering herbaceous plants, providing,

as an incident of the landscape, an informal or naturalistic herbaceous

garden designed predominantly or almost exclusively for esthetic

effect.

The suggestion in your report of April, 1923, at first appealed to

us strongly, namely, that this area, if and when freed from the

Park Department greenhouses, work yards, etc., be used for a really

first-rate Formal Garden in connection with the reconstruction of

the Lorillard Mansion, which you proposed should serve as a place

for exhibitions, for the meetings of garden clubs and for kindred

activities. Unquestionably it is a very desirable thing to provide, in

the most perfect possible way, somewhere in the Botanical Garden area,

for the grouping of such functions in a beautiful building, domestic

in scale but considerable in size, intimately related to a beautiful

garden of a suitable kind. The most suitable kind of garden for such a

purpose would be, in an agreeable sense of the word, “formal;” that is

to say emphatically not “naturalistic.”

This is not the place to attempt a thorough clearing up of the

confusions of meaning which have caused for many years so much

misunderstanding over this word “formal” as applied to gardens and

gardening. Most of the misunderstanding is due to unexpressed mental

reservations as to what is meant by the word, or to differences of

emphasis on various phases of formality. To some the word suggests

mainly certain kinds of formality which are unattractive or even

distressing to them; associated with stiffness, rigidity, bald

precision of detail, or such complete dominance of architectural

elements as to make the term “garden” almost a misnomer. To others

the word suggests merely a pleasantly obvious orderliness in the

general disposition of the major parts of a garden, frankly expressing

deliberate human design and control; as by symmetry of certain forms

about a straight axis, or the disposition of paths and masses of

vegetation in such a way as to suggest to the eye easily recognized

simple shapes of agreeable proportions, rectangular and otherwise;

all of which is consistent with great exuberance and freedom and

spontaneity of detail, especially in the growth of plants and in the

composition of plants within the orderly and formal framework of the

general plan. If so conceived, “formal” is applicable alike to a garden

made up wholly of flower beds and turf and to one largely characterized

by paved walks and steps and walls and fountains and sculptural and

architectural elements, provided the latter be enriched by sufficient

vegetation to entitle it to the name of garden at all.

Obviously a botanic garden is hardly a legitimate place to devote much

space or money to the creation, for its own sake, of any formal design

so predominantly architectural or sculptural in its interest that the

vegetation plays a wholly secondary rôle--such a thing as might be

more properly called a court-yard or a plaza than a garden. But it is

equally obvious that it is legitimate and desirable to provide, for

the benefit of that great part of the public which is interested in

plants mainly for their usefulness in pleasure gardens, one or more

excellent examples of a sort of garden which countless generations

of mankind have delighted to have in association with dwellings--a

frankly man-made thing, expressing man’s skillful artistry and the

completeness of his command over his surroundings: formal in the sense

that the dominant form of the thing as a whole and the form of the more

conspicuous relationships between its several parts are not merely

beautiful but unmistakably intentional and deliberate.

We do not question that such a formal garden could be done beautifully

in the locality now in question.

On further study, however, two considerations have led us to believe

that this is not the best place for such a thing. One is that a center

for meetings and exhibitions, both indoor and outdoor, other things

being approximately equal, ought to be more conveniently and quickly

accessible from rapid transit stations than is the neighborhood of the

Lorillard Mansion, and also should have space in its vicinity for small

special exhibition gardens and preferably also for special exhibitions

under glass, which could be introduced near the Lorillard Mansion only

by sacrifice of existing and potential values of another sort of great

importance to the Botanical Garden.

The most notable natural feature of the Botanical Garden, perhaps as a

matter of botany and certainly as a matter of landscape, is the gorge

of the Bronx River with its wild growth of hemlocks and associated

plants, its picturesque precipitous slopes and ledges, its sense

of remoteness and seclusion from the city and most of the works of

man. The Lorillard Mansion and its appendages conspicuously intrude

upon this landscape unit in a manner contradictory to its essential

character. From the point of view of botanical consistency no less than

landscape value these contradictory elements ought to be removed and

the entire landscape unit of the gorge, on both sides of the river,

gradually restored as nearly to the conditions characteristic of such a

gorge in a state of nature as is consistent with making it accessible

to and enjoyable by large numbers of people. No artificial structures

except such as are necessary to that end should be maintained here and

these should be made as inconspicuous as is consistent with efficiency

in operation and maintenance. The precise limits of this gorge unit we

are not prepared to define positively as yet; but plainly they should

include the site of the Mansion itself, the slopes to the north of it

(where the small stone stable occurs) up to the height of land on the

east, and in the region further south at least far enough eastward from

the river to include the whole of the narrow ridge that lies between

the river and the Park Department greenhouses.

We believe this consideration alone precludes the rebuilding of any

garden house or other such structure on the site of the Lorillard

Mansion, whether the matter is looked at from the point of view of a

Botanical Garden or that of a public park.

The land which lies to the south of a line drawn through the existing

foot-bridge across the gorge and to the east of the service road

that hugs the west side of the greenhouse is not quite so intimately

associated with the gorge; and, if the natural forest border on the

low intervening ridge were restored and widened and made more dense,

the outlying area beyond the limits above defined might perhaps have

a landscape character quite dissimilar to that of the gorge without

impairing the perfection of the latter. But to introduce even in this

area a highly elaborate and sophisticated formal development with a

garden house of considerable size, would bring two contrasting kinds

of things in such close juxtaposition as to make the plan questionably

wise.

The second consideration, closely related to the point just made,

is that we have found no place on the whole Botanical Garden lands

nearly as well adapted as this swale (where the greenhouses are)

for the development of such a naturalistic Landscape Garden as we

have attempted to describe above; for the development of a landscape

characterized by a long stretch of beautifully modelled lawn in

association with free-growing trees, flowering shrubs and herbaceous

flowering plants; or indeed for the development of an equally long,

restful, completely unified and self-contained view of any sort. These

also are elements of which there should be at least one admirable

example within the Botanical Garden.

Therefore we have sought for other possible sites for a first-rate

formal garden in conjunction with a building for exhibitions, meetings

and social activities and with other features desirable to associate

with such a center. We believe that these things can be provided for

in another locality, which upon the whole would be more advantageous

for such purposes, and we will discuss it in Part V. For this reason we

do not hesitate to recommend the assignment of the Lorillard Mansion

area and the area embracing the Park Department greenhouses and the

swale south of them nearly to the picnic grove for the purposes of the

Landscape Garden above outlined.

Report on the New York Botanical Garden · 第 3 / 5 章