In regard to Mike Steven's work with Max-Neef's system of interrelated human needs and satisfiers, I was surprised by one of my reactions in particular. I hope that when Mike writes up his work, or speaks on it, he continues to introduce it from the starting point of the garden. Mike provides an important connection between what so many landscape architects see as their professional roots and what so many wish they could find as the profession's theoretical building blocks.
Gardens are neat things.
They do provide for stress release in the work they require and in the pleasures they give, but I have, for too long now, had the feeling landscape architects are working against themselves as they tout and toot and peacock about their work with gardens. I'll say it again, if we are to ever take on the leadership role the profession has the potential of taking on, if we are ever going to live up to the definition of landscape architecture, we need to admit the garden is a stepping stone, not a destination. Mike's starting with the garden, and, I am assuming, then using it as a metaphor to guide his more substantive work with Max-Neef's system is extremely important to us as designers who influence the worlds people live and mature in and to the future of the profession. Simply, by people helping people. I know that sounds foolishly simple, and old fashioned.