“机构”与“日常”景观在观点和实践中是相互冲突的概念。意大利东北部案例研究的反思与展望

B. Castiglioni
{"title":"“机构”与“日常”景观在观点和实践中是相互冲突的概念。意大利东北部案例研究的反思与展望","authors":"B. Castiglioni","doi":"10.4458/6964-03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper originates from a contribution to the Conference “Crisi dei paesaggi, paesaggi della crisi. Quali vie d’uscita?” [Crisis of landscapes, landscapes of crisis. Which ways out?] held in Cagliari (Italy) in December, 2014. It focuses on the distance that exists today among the different approaches used to address the issue of landscape and the different ideas connected to the landscape concept. Starting from a model that schematises this distance in its different facets, the paper focuses on two of them, the “spatial” and the “social” dimensions, and outlines two landscape concepts, provocatively in opposition. On the one hand it identifies the “institutional landscape”, explicitly recognised but of limited spatial extension and ruled by an elite; on the other hand the “everyday landscape”, of which there is often little awareness, that encompasses the whole territory and is managed by the whole community. The European Landscape Convention, which refers explicitly to the landscape as “an essential component of people’s surroundings!” does not definitely solve this antithesis and bridge the gap between the two approaches. The results of research activity in a case study in North-eastern Italy confirmed the co-existence of these two opposite concepts in the relationships local people build with their place of life. Perceived landscape values and opinions of laypeople can be referred to the problematic practices and approaches that have intensely changed the landscape in that area and used to interpret them. An increase of awareness of different sets of values existing in a landscape seems the most appropriate strategy to overcome the opposition between the two landscape ideas and the questions of landscape change, through a wide process of “landscape literacy”, focused to the acquisition of a way to “look at” the landscape and to act responsibly on it.","PeriodicalId":299934,"journal":{"name":"J-Reading - Journal of Research and Didactics in Geography","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Institutional\\\" vs \\\"everyday\\\" landscape as conflicting concepts in opinions and practices. Reflections and perspectives from a case study in Northeastern Italy\",\"authors\":\"B. Castiglioni\",\"doi\":\"10.4458/6964-03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper originates from a contribution to the Conference “Crisi dei paesaggi, paesaggi della crisi. Quali vie d’uscita?” [Crisis of landscapes, landscapes of crisis. Which ways out?] held in Cagliari (Italy) in December, 2014. It focuses on the distance that exists today among the different approaches used to address the issue of landscape and the different ideas connected to the landscape concept. Starting from a model that schematises this distance in its different facets, the paper focuses on two of them, the “spatial” and the “social” dimensions, and outlines two landscape concepts, provocatively in opposition. On the one hand it identifies the “institutional landscape”, explicitly recognised but of limited spatial extension and ruled by an elite; on the other hand the “everyday landscape”, of which there is often little awareness, that encompasses the whole territory and is managed by the whole community. The European Landscape Convention, which refers explicitly to the landscape as “an essential component of people’s surroundings!” does not definitely solve this antithesis and bridge the gap between the two approaches. The results of research activity in a case study in North-eastern Italy confirmed the co-existence of these two opposite concepts in the relationships local people build with their place of life. Perceived landscape values and opinions of laypeople can be referred to the problematic practices and approaches that have intensely changed the landscape in that area and used to interpret them. An increase of awareness of different sets of values existing in a landscape seems the most appropriate strategy to overcome the opposition between the two landscape ideas and the questions of landscape change, through a wide process of “landscape literacy”, focused to the acquisition of a way to “look at” the landscape and to act responsibly on it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":299934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"J-Reading - Journal of Research and Didactics in Geography\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"J-Reading - Journal of Research and Didactics in Geography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4458/6964-03\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J-Reading - Journal of Research and Didactics in Geography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4458/6964-03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

这篇论文来源于一篇对“国家危机,国家危机”会议的投稿。Quali vie d 'uscita ?“景观危机,景观危机。哪条路出去?]于2014年12月在意大利卡利亚里举行。它关注的是当今用于解决景观问题的不同方法之间存在的距离,以及与景观概念相关的不同想法。本文从一个从不同方面描绘这种距离的模型开始,重点关注其中的两个方面,即“空间”和“社会”维度,并概述了两个对立的景观概念。一方面,它确定了“制度景观”,明确承认但空间扩展有限,由精英统治;另一方面,“日常景观”通常很少被人意识到,它涵盖了整个领土,并由整个社区管理。《欧洲景观公约》明确指出,景观是“人类周围环境的重要组成部分!”并不能完全解决这一对立,也不能弥合两种方法之间的差距。在意大利东北部的一个案例研究中,研究活动的结果证实了这两个相反的概念在当地人与他们的生活场所建立的关系中共存。外行人感知到的景观价值和观点可以参考有问题的实践和方法,这些实践和方法强烈地改变了该地区的景观,并用于解释它们。通过广泛的“景观素养”过程,提高对景观中存在的不同价值观的认识,似乎是克服两种景观观念和景观变化问题之间对立的最合适的策略,重点是获得一种“看待”景观并对其采取负责任的行动的方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
"Institutional" vs "everyday" landscape as conflicting concepts in opinions and practices. Reflections and perspectives from a case study in Northeastern Italy
This paper originates from a contribution to the Conference “Crisi dei paesaggi, paesaggi della crisi. Quali vie d’uscita?” [Crisis of landscapes, landscapes of crisis. Which ways out?] held in Cagliari (Italy) in December, 2014. It focuses on the distance that exists today among the different approaches used to address the issue of landscape and the different ideas connected to the landscape concept. Starting from a model that schematises this distance in its different facets, the paper focuses on two of them, the “spatial” and the “social” dimensions, and outlines two landscape concepts, provocatively in opposition. On the one hand it identifies the “institutional landscape”, explicitly recognised but of limited spatial extension and ruled by an elite; on the other hand the “everyday landscape”, of which there is often little awareness, that encompasses the whole territory and is managed by the whole community. The European Landscape Convention, which refers explicitly to the landscape as “an essential component of people’s surroundings!” does not definitely solve this antithesis and bridge the gap between the two approaches. The results of research activity in a case study in North-eastern Italy confirmed the co-existence of these two opposite concepts in the relationships local people build with their place of life. Perceived landscape values and opinions of laypeople can be referred to the problematic practices and approaches that have intensely changed the landscape in that area and used to interpret them. An increase of awareness of different sets of values existing in a landscape seems the most appropriate strategy to overcome the opposition between the two landscape ideas and the questions of landscape change, through a wide process of “landscape literacy”, focused to the acquisition of a way to “look at” the landscape and to act responsibly on it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信