مجله منظر
پیاپی 13 (اسفند 1389)

The Persian garden is known as one of the most significant styles of gardening and landscape architecture in the world. Persian gardens, also known as Mongolian Gardens, conveyed the methods of instant settlement in a region used by Indian emperors (1526-1707, Babur, Humayun, Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan).The same method was used by Timor in Samarkand and Heart (14th-century) as the new conversion of lifestyle from nomadic life to permanent settlement in the capital. Climatic and cultural Differences in India and Iran lead to the emergence of a new branch of Persian Gardens, i.e. “Water Garden” and “Tomb Garden” -defined by the author- which was mostly appreciated by Mongolian countries. Therefore, the designs of Indian gardens during the mentioned era were directly under the influence of Persian Garden. This research has a historical comparative methodology with the emphasis on the effective factors such as the typology of gardens and socio cultural, political and architectural similarities as a common language between the two countries.

Now a day, the relationships between economic values & mainstream urban landscape patterns is an important role of landscape architects & urban designers. From what the most popular cities in the world with their unique townscapes are related to the economic aspects, this mission is very necessary. Besides them, the development of tourism industry is related to forming economic-based urban landscapes. The goal of this paper is an investigation to the impact of economic patterns on globalized urban landscape in a case of ‘Saray-E-Moshir’ Shiraz. Research method of this paper is a qualitative content analysis of texts and case study. The results of this study show that the Saray-e-moshir with the whole economic urban landscape pattern in Shiraz has a unique case in traditional urban open spaces.

Due to rapid urban development following the rapid economical, political and social transformation of societies, physical expansion of cities occurs beyond the scope of the surrounding lands to the adjacent habitats that had formed as self-sufficient villages throughout history. Mentioned Villages changed first to the marginal habitats of the city and then to regions within cities because of continuous urban development.Current neighborhoods like Jamaran, Deh Vanak, Evin, Imamzade Qasem and etc are regions of Tehran that are located in current range of the city and had been independent villages with relationships with each other not long ago. Complexity of social, economical, cultural, physical and traffic in the region of Jamaran as a mountainous village in Shemiran in the past and combination of rural and urban features in different aspects causes the region not having complete specifications of a village, nor qualities of an urban society. Also relation of this region with the political revolution of Iran makes it more important to recognize this urban texture much better to plan deliberately and this complex relationship leads to inefficiency and insufficiency of subjective and local plans. Current paper includes four parts that investigates planning strategies of urban landscape in Jamaran urban-village in contemporary Tehran: First part is about generalities of research. In the next part location and specifications have been studied. Third part includes site analysis and historical and subjective city framework and structure of Jamaran. At the end organization Strategies of Urban Landscape in Jamaran Urban-Village are offered.

The sense of place means particular experience and perception of a special setting specifying the personal orientation to a place and emerging a feeling of spatial differentiation, orientation and perception. In this paper, different aspects of the sense of place have been considered as a theoretical basis. The goal of this paper is to determine these aspects and their applications in the context of architecture and urbanization. Research methodology in this article is based on the concepts of relationship between human and place and consideration of the integration of human and place in different views. Finally the sense of place will be represented in architectural sense and the elements effective on the sense of place in architecture will be discussed. The main contribution of this paper is that an environment with physically distinctive character is more successful in creating the sense of place. Defining the space is effective element in making architecture distinctive from environment which is in turn related to the quality of edge and boundary, enclosure, contrast and variety, views, landscaping, and naming. H: Since the space is a significant element in making the environment different from the architecture physically, a special and a specified character based environment can be successful in creating the sense of place.

Architects try to show the concept of their design (the space) in different ways, such as direct visualization, using symbols, metaphors and using sensory characteristics of the space. This manuscript evaluates different approaches to the designing of the conceptual garden which based on "the style of concept transfer". It demonstrates that responding to the user’s senses for understanding the concept of the space and landscape garden is the appropriate approach. This method can be used alone or alongside other methods to transfer meanings. Hypothesis: There is no way but using Symbol and metaphor for creating space and concept perception. It seems that the most stable way for space creation in the landscape, is using direct sensory of human to percept certain concept.

This collaborative essay grows out of a debate about the relationship between aesthetics and ecology and the possibility of an ‘‘ecological aesthetic’’ that affects landscape planning, design, and management. We describe our common understandings and unresolved questions about this relationship, including the importance of aesthetics in understanding and affecting landscape change and the ways in which aesthetics and ecology may have either complementary or contradictory implications for a landscape. To help understand these issues, we first outline a conceptual model of the aesthetics– ecology relationship. We posit that: 1. While human and environmental phenomena occur at widely varying scales, humans engage with environmental phenomena at a particular scale: that of human experience of our landscape surroundings. That is the human ‘‘perceptible realm.’’ 2. Interactions within this realm give rise to aesthetic experiences, which can lead to changes affecting humans and the landscape, and thus ecosystems. 3. Context affects aesthetic experience of landscapes. Context includes both effects of different landscape types (wild, agricultural, cultural, and metropolitan landscapes) and effects of different personal–social situational activities or concerns. We argue that some contexts elicit aesthetic experiences that have traditionally been called ‘‘scenic beauty,’’ while other contexts elicit different aesthetic experiences, such as perceived care, attachment, and identity. Last, we discuss how interventions through landscape planning, design, and management; or through enhanced knowledge might establish desirable relationships between aesthetics and ecology, and we examine the controversial characteristics of such ecological aesthetics. While these interventions may help sustain beneficial landscape patterns and practices, they are inherently normative, and we consider their ethical implications.