Toss the Trends, Keep the D.I.R.T.

It is interesting that in each of these case studies, Bargmann stands in the shadows of the “famed” architects and designers. Even though early in her career, she had significant contributions to every one of them. She often talks about her ability to rub people the wrong way (Bargmann, 2021), but that cannot be grounds alone to leave someone out of being credited for the work they do. Are these male architects so wrapped up in gaining stardom that they do not mind leaving out the smaller players? Maybe so. Today, when introduced in talks, people credit Bargmann as being “modest”, but it is unclear whether she is given that title because she is modest or has been painted as modest because no one has credited her work. The term modest could also be a way to describe her style of landscape design. She is not the designer who will add flashy decorations and perfectly pruned plants to a space. She is going to use the site materials and not over-design.

However she is described, she is finally being recognized for the work she has contributed to the field of landscape architecture in a big way. The Cultural Landscape Foundation recently awarded Bargmann the Cornelia Hahn Oberlander International Landscape Architecture Award. The award is given to designers that are “exceptionally talented, creative, courageous, and visionary, with a significant body of built work that exemplifies the art of landscape architecture.”

(Stouhi, 2021)

Maybe modesty is the way forward. As “starchitects” focus on creating iconic spaces (Kingsland, 2018), designers that focus on collaboration could create spaces that have depth and catalyze change. If it were up to Julie, designers would develop a drive for restraint instead of a drive for recognition. By looking through the Bargmann lens, designers could use the imperfections of their sites to create unique experiences rather than trying to fix them by overprescribing design solutions. In Julie’s case, the design solution is digging and rearranging what is already there and giving it a pathway for growth. Going back to Tuner’s notion about breaking shackles, when approaching broken or forgotten sites, how might we allow the site’s history to inform the future rather than listening to trends of the present?