{"id":4792,"date":"2021-05-12T16:21:26","date_gmt":"2021-05-12T14:21:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/gruenesblut.net\/?p=4792"},"modified":"2021-05-11T08:47:33","modified_gmt":"2021-05-11T06:47:33","slug":"care-today-is-much-more-than-topiary-and-weeding","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/gruenesblut.net\/en\/care-today-is-much-more-than-topiary-and-weeding\/","title":{"rendered":"“Care today is much more than topiary and weeding.”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Cassian Schmidt<\/a><\/span> may well be called the leader of the \u2018New German Style\u2019. The perennial gardener and landscape architect has been professor of planting design at Geisenheim University of Applied Sciences since 2010 and has been managing the highly regarded Hermannshof<\/a><\/span> perennial and display garden in Weinheim for 23 years. In December, I met Cassian Schmidt in his office in the Hermannshof gardener’s house for an interview.<\/h2>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

Reading time: 30 minutes<\/em><\/p>\n

Interview: Cassian Schmidt, Anke Schmitz \u2217 Text editing: Cassian Schmidt, Anke Schmitz \u2217 Photos: Sylvia Knittel<\/a><\/span> \u2217 Photogallery: Cassian Schmidt \u2217 Translation: Giacomo Guzzon<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Special thanks to James Golden<\/a><\/span> for his support!<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

GB: Dear Mr. Schmidt, I am pleased that you have time for me. Using nature as a model is a well-known motif in the history of garden art. How was this understood in the landscape garden in the past, and how do we understand it at present?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> In the landscape garden of the 18th century, the garden was less about the model of real nature and more about an idealized, scenically staged pictorial scene. The garden or landscape was highly influenced by landscape painting, whose motifs predominantly depicted cultivated landscapes based on an Arcadian ideal. From my point of view, these scenes are very reminiscent of open bucolic meadow landscapes with loose groups of trees. Plant sociological and ecological aspects, which had a major influence on design from the second half of the 19th century, did not play a major role at that time. From the present perspective, I understand the natural model as a scientifically based use of plants according to ecological and plant-sociological guidelines. Today’s plantings should be dynamically random, but at the same time competently controlled in terms of maintenance; aesthetically sensual, but at the same time rationally and scientifically composed.<\/p>\n

GB: Where does this type of gardening based on applied plant sociology come from?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> Reflections on a nature-oriented use of plants based on scientific knowledge can be found, for example, in the work of the English gardener and writer William Robinson. In his book \u2018The Wild Garden\u2019, published in 1870, Robinson describes how plants can be used \u2018according to nature\u2019 depending on the location, and how the character of a habitat can be represented aesthetically based on natural models. In addition to native perennials, Robinson deliberately integrated hardy exotics into his concepts, especially perennials with decorative foliage, which he believed could be used to create an even more attractive, picturesque effect.<\/p>\n

GB: Sounds a bit like a natural garden!<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> One should not confuse Robinson’s \u2018wild gardening\u2019 with the views of today’s nature garden, which, unlike Robinson’s, does not aim at artistic exaggeration, but calls for dynamic, native planting concepts oriented to plant sociology and nature conservation, with as little human influence as possible. The natural garden in Robinson’s sense must rather be seen as a reformist counter-movement to the absolutely artificial, ossified Victorian garden style. Robinson especially rejected the then popular but extremely elaborate flower beds with annuals and called for a naturalistic, uncontrived garden style.<\/p>\n

GB: What was the initial situation here in Germany?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> At the beginning of the 20th century, in Germany, Willy Lange, among others, was pursuing the idea of transferring \u2018vegetation-pictures\u2019 to the garden in an artistic way by assembling plants mainly according to physiognomic aspects, that is, according to their growth character. Lange himself was influenced by William Robinson’s theories, developed them further and made them popular in Germany. On the one hand, he attached importance to a visual credibility of his plantings; so that the corresponding characters of the plants should fit the respective habitat depicted\u2014for example, \u2018silvery shimmering plants of the steppe\u2019. On the other hand, Lange took the sociological aspects of plants and site-appropriate use into account. Here, parallels to Hansen’s later theory of habitats can be seen.<\/p>\n

GB: How did it go on then?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> Under the influence of Foerster’s student Prof. Richard Hansen, the horticultural adaptation of natural plant communities and, at the same time, applied plant sociology, began to play even more important roles for perennial use in Germany from the 1980s on. Hansen’s work was probably greatly influenced by the fact that, after his studies, he became a scientific assistant at the Central Office for Vegetation Mapping in Stolzenau\\Weser. There he worked for Reinhold T\u00fcxen, who, along with the German botanist Erich Oberdorfer, is considered the founder and major promoter of modern plant sociology in vegetation science in Germany. At the same time, the geo-botanist and landscape ecologist Heinz Ellenberg was also employed under T\u00fcxen at the Central Office for Vegetation Mapping. And so the principles of different distribution patterns and groupings of plants worked out by Hansen, the so-called \u2018sociability grades\u2019, were already found in Ellenberg’s work, where they find an equivalent term derived from geo-botany (phytogeography), as \u2018grades of species dominance\u2019. Furthermore, it was obvious that Hansen also used and adapted Ellenberg’s ecological indicators of plants for his classification according to habitats.<\/p>\n

I have had enough experience of my own and have seen many new things at natural sites.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

GB: In which tradition do you see yourself?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> On the one hand, I see myself as a botanical globetrotter who is significantly influenced by a plant-geographical design approach. On the other hand, I see myself in the tradition of Hansen\u2014rational, rather technical, and plant-sociologically based. Although I knew Richard Hansen personally in Weihenstephan, I was not his student, as was my predecessor at Hermannshof, Prof. Urs Walser. (Prof. Walser passed away on April 9 of this year.) Hansen’s groundbreaking book \u2018Die Stauden und ihre Lebensbereiche in G\u00e4rten und Gr\u00fcnanlagen\u2019 (\u2018Perennials and their habitats in gardens and green spaces\u2019) from 1981 is probably well known to most perennial enthusiasts. On the basis of his concept of habitats and his detailed lists of uses, he provides a plant sociology approach that can be applied in horticultural terms while at the same time meeting aesthetic requirements. Exactly this is my basis, even if I hardly use the lists today to design plantings. I include aspects of dynamics, coexistence, and random changes much more strongly in my considerations than Hansen did, and in the meantime I have had enough experience of my own and have seen many new things at natural sites.<\/p>\n

GB: Would you say that this turn to plant sociology is a German phenomenon?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> It certainly is. In fact, applied phytosociology as a basis for planting design was not known in this subtlety in other countries. But now this situation has changed. The principle of correct site-specific plant selection and interaction between plants (dynamics and temporal change) is being paid much more attention elsewhere. Even well-known British plant users and garden designers such as Tom-Stuart-Smith<\/a><\/span>, Sarah Price<\/a><\/span> and Dan Pearson<\/a><\/span> have long since adopted these principles.<\/p>\n

GB: Where does this inspiration for you as a designer come from to orient yourself to the sociology of plants and natural models? <\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> For me personally it is probably due to the fact that, during our studies at the Technical University Munich-Weihenstephan, we had excellent lectures and excursions dedicated to vegetation science, plant sociology and ecology with luminaries such as Prof. Dr. J\u00f6rg Pfadenhauer and Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Haber. This way of reading the landscapes is of great importance for my work and this is what I learned and understood with Haber. On the other hand, in my generation the subject of plant use was unfortunately neglected for many years in the course of landscape architecture studies, although it should actually be our most important tool of the trade. Several of my colleagues, like myself, are not students of anyone. We therefore had no direct role models whose style we could simply have adopted. That’s astonishing, but perhaps also good, because we’re probably freer in our approach. I’m aware that I influence my current students to a certain extent in terms of design and subject matter, or at least I steer them in a certain direction. Certain topics are more important to you than others. I always notice this when students come up with the theme of \u2018prairie\u2019 or \u2018steppe\u2019 in their projects. I guess you always get what you represent or what you are known for … In retrospect, anyway, it seems almost logical to me to use natural distribution patterns and ecological principles, thereby reducing design and maintenance requirements while creating naturalistic images. Moreover, this approach offers a great opportunity to increase biodiversity and the quality of experience in urban spaces.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/span><\/p>\n

GB: The English, with Nigel Dunett and James Hitchmough, share a similar design approach. Despite a different history, how did this turn to the \u2018New German Style\u2019 or \u2018New Perennial Movement\u2019 come about in England?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> With the traditional horticultural knowledge available, one could actually get away with almost anything in the UK. The balanced maritime British climate also helped. Today, however, these resources of manpower and knowledge are no longer available in this form. In addition, public green spaces in Great Britain have been neglected for decades. Therefore, in the mid-1990s, new approaches began to be sought. And so Stephen Lacy wrote an article<\/a><\/span> in 2002 that coined the term \u2018New German Style\u2019. He wrote the article in response to a trip he had made to Germany 10 years earlier with some colleagues, during which he found, among other things, in Hermannshof in Weinheim and in Westpark in Munich, a completely different use of plants to that which was common in England at the time.
\nThe original planting designs at Hermannshof were by Prof. Urs Walser (1981-1983) and the planting designs at Westpark were by Rosemarie Wei\u00dfe, Dr. Hans Simon and Prof. Urs Walser (1982-1983)\u2014these three were the most important early protagonists of this aesthetic and this naturalistic style. Rosemarie Wei\u00dfe\u2019s brother just recently offered me the original plans of her Westpark plantings.
\nLater, James Hitchmough<\/a> <\/span>and Nigel Dunnet<\/a><\/span>, in particular, both professors of planting design at Sheffield University, developed, in parallel and initially largely independent of the developments in Germany, a perhaps even more dynamic, nature-oriented approach, partly also based on seeding, which today is referred to as the \u2018Sheffield School\u2019. I was very surprised about 15 years ago, when I was invited to Sheffield for a lecture on naturalistic plant use, to find that the basic thinking behind it was much the same as my own.<\/p>\n

GB: What are the main differences between modern perennial gardening and traditional gardening? <\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> It always seems to me that in traditional textbooks there is this idea of producing, of \u2018getting as much out as possible\u2019, which is why the areas to be cultivated always had to be well fertilized and watered. Today, we do exactly the opposite: we try to reduce the level of fertility, which means avoiding fertilization and irrigation. We then speak of \u2018stress-tolerant planting system, this means we make it as difficult as possible for the plants. But in this way, we can use specialist species adapted to extreme locations and thus exclude troublesome weeds at the same time. Nowadays, for stressed plantings, we largely use mineral substrates that have only 10 or 15% organic content; all this saves labour on the one hand and reduces costs on the other. In summary, now we use a completely contrary method compared with the traditional ideal of Gertrude Jekyll’s border.<\/p>\n

My conviction is that the more naturally I work, that is, the closer I am to nature, the higher the maintenance competence must be.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

GB: What does the modern use of perennials do visually that traditional planting patterns cannot?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> It creates much more natural-looking, restrained and authentic planting patterns. Depending on the season, my plantings sometimes appear quite austere and achromatic, reduced to line, form and texture. In addition, the deliberately allowed dynamics in the planting play an essential role. This implies that the envisioned image (idea) is by no means intended to be static, but that change is part of the system. On the contrary, with traditional rather static planting patterns, use of similar large groups of plants (blocks)\u2014each consisting of one species, placed together in a puzzle-like manner\u2014quickly results in a relatively unnatural, artificial planting image. For me, these planting patterns include block plantings, drift plantings, or mosaic plantings. The theme of different sociability levels, horizontal or temporal layers with exciting intermingling or gentle gradients, as well as the allowance of dynamic changes, can hardly be taken into account and is not even desired in these kind of traditional plantings. This is a challenge even for a professional like Piet Oudolf. That’s why in his more recent designs he seeks a compromise in what I call a \u2018hybrid style\u2019 of abstract graphic modernism and informal naturalism. While these hybrid plantings look visually quite naturalistic and allow for some dynamism, they still clearly show the designer’s controlled-artistic intent. Oudolf proves that this can succeed very well even on the basis of quite traditional arrangement patterns such as the block plantings, by creating tension and rhythm through sophisticated species mixes in the block itself and additional overlays with purposefully accentuated \u2018scatter plants\u2019, \u2018individual plants\u2019 and outstanding \u2018emergent plants\u2019. The prerequisite, however, is that one knows from many years of experience how dynamically or un-dynamically the respective plants behave.<\/p>\n

GB: What are the differences in care-maintenance?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> Traditional care is probably easier to understand. But if you want to get involved in nature and help control the processes that take place, things are much more complex. My conviction is that the more naturally I work, that is, the closer I am to nature, the higher the maintenance competence must be. For this, I have to know and assess the processes that took place in a plant community in the past in order to be able to foresee and steer the future. So you first observe and then steer in a certain direction, knowing that there are certain strategies behind it. Sometimes I loosen the reins, sometimes I have to tighten them again when I notice that the balance is tipping. Then I know that I have to do something and actively counteract it with care measures.<\/p>\n

GB: You just said: the closer I am to nature, the higher the care-maintenance competence must be. Now I spontaneously think of the many nature gardens that are primarily managed by enthusiastic hobby gardeners … <\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> This really does require a lot of know-how and a lot is currently being demanded of local authorities and also private individuals. Everything should be as native and natural as possible, but many have no idea what that actually means. Contrary to what one might think, a dynamic planting of predominantly native wild perennials cannot be maintained in the same way as a traditional border. For this, the garden must be thought of in a radically different way, even in its basic approach. The same applies to the techniques used. Unfortunately, plants are all too often seen as isolated \u2018elements\u2019 that can be put together at will according to lists or\u2014even worse\u2014randomly and spontaneously \u2018composed\u2019 in the shopping trolley directly in the DIY store. But what is actually much more important is how these plants later interact with each other, that is, how they interact in time and space in the long run. If I use native (autochthonous) plant compositions, then this should at the same time imply a largely self-sustaining system. Because if I want to attract insects and wild bees, the planting must function as an overall ecological system; certainly, with targeted human support, because it is still a garden and not a wilderness. There is still a lot of room for improvement and we will also deal with these things in the future here at Hermannshof and in the working group on plant use.**<\/p>\n

GB: <\/strong>What is the importance of travelling and visiting nature sites for you?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> I have always travelled a lot and not being able to do that in the current pandemic situation is actually a bit painful for me. I’ve been lucky enough to be invited to many great lectures and thus have gotten to know vegetation types and gardens from all continents except Africa. This also includes areas that have little in common with the Central European climate, but that’s what makes it exciting. I am fascinated not only by the natural landscapes but also by the culture and architecture, for example in Iran, and of course by the people, and the problems they have to solve in horticulture, especially in extreme climates. It is inspiring to see what is possible under restricted conditions.<\/p>\n

I would never have had many insights and \u2018ah-ha\u2019 experiences about plants without my travels.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

GB: <\/strong>And in terms of your botanical studies?<\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> For my work, the study of wild plants and plant communities at the sites of origin is indeed essential. This also includes thinking about the conditions that presumably led to the respective patterns and combinations. Of course, I am also interested in whether the plants have aesthetic value and are potentially suitable for introduction into garden culture. Thus, over the past 20 years, in the course of my work at Hermannshof and through numerous articles, I have been able to bring many new design themes and plants with potential into focus (which no one had previously paid attention to or even used) and introduce them into garden culture. I would never have had many insights and \u2018ah-ha\u2019 experiences about plants without my travels.<\/p>\n

GB: <\/strong>There is the photo of Hansen at a natural site near Trieste, holding a piece of paper and pen in his hand. What exactly does one note there on the spot? <\/strong><\/p>\n

CS:<\/strong> Directly on site I note or memorise the essentials: quantities, dominances, leading species, stratifications, proportions and information about the location (exposition, altitude); what grows together? Where are the boundaries perhaps? Why is this combination found in one place and a completely different one two metres further on? Are there perhaps changes in humidity or light conditions? In 2016, for example, James Hitchmough and I were travelling in Kyrgyzstan. On his Instagram account, he has been analysing the individual natural scenes and making assumptions about which factors are decisive for the vegetation. Things like nitrogen content, nutrient levels, disturbances, stress, thin vegetation horizons and of course climatic conditions play a role. But we also ask ourselves what we can take away from this in terms of design and perhaps apply in projects. A situation with a thin soil horizon could perhaps provide an approach for planting on roof gardens. … and sometimes you find plants in places where you wouldn’t have expected them. You suddenly get ideas that you would never have thought of.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n