local – a sensuous modernist building floated above a
man-made curvilinear pond connecting with the local khlong
(canal) network and was clad with glowing golden ochre tiles.
The building and pond were sited to retain, quite contrary to
local practice at that time, an enveloping canopy of the foliage
of enormous existing figs and rain trees. These were
underplanted with a minimalist palette of dark-green foliaged
white flowers, the planting design again eschewing local
practice, which mixed complex plantings of multicoloured
foliage and floral tropical species. As befitted the overriding
modernist approach, the landscape design referenced its local
context and culture selectively, using the ever-present urban
waterway and massive tropical trees as inspiration but
resisting the fussier (and pervasive) traditions of local garden
design. As with all the Australian Embassy projects of the
period, a complex mix of contextualism and restrained
modernism ruled, interpreted and modified by Australian
firms and the particular project design team. Perry Lethlean,
of Taylor Cullity Lethlean (TCL) in his later work on the
Australian Consul General’s residence in Japan (1999), applied
this approach in his own way, combining the locally
recognizable geometry of the typical Japanese lunch box as a
structure to frame and present a precisely conceived and
executed viewing garden, a landscape with a tempting “filling”
of Australian and local plants.
In the later 1980s and early 1990s Australian firms built on
their initial experiences of these projects in the Asian region
to explore other, more commercial, opportunities. From
Melbourne, at the well-established planning and architectural
firm Yuncken Freeman, Robin Edmond (by this time a
landscape architect and architect with a real capacity for
project initiation and coordination) teamed up with Noel
Corkery (now in Sydney) and eventually me, to take advantage
of the large-scale public and private works underway in rapidly
urbanizing Hong Kong, before the territory was returned from
Britain to China at the end of that decade. The local
professional competition was primarily from well-established
clients and consultants from the United Kingdom. This set up
an interesting tension in the emerging postcolonial period as
Australian engineers, planners, architects and landscape
architects aggressively took on the established professional
networks in open and sometimes fierce competition. Not only
did they bring new energy, but they also brought new
approaches to the challenges that resulted from rapid mass
urbanization in tropical and monsoonal climates. They
imported supporting specialist expertise from Australia and
the USA (including Steve Calhoun and Rodney Wulff from
Tract Consultants, and Geoff Sanderson, then from Gurner
Sanderson). Their work created the basis for local landscape
architectural and architectural professions that continued
their work into China as it opened up, as well as other regions.
Review of these Hong Kong projects some decades later reveals
a bold approach to urban structure and landscape that
included moves toward what would now be characterized as
urban design, including integration of “liveable” streets and
squares along with the full range of recreational opportunities
in landscape design at a neighbourhood scale. The scale
of infrastructure, the steep, unstable topography and high-
density rapid development meant that landscape architects
and architects were involved in the full range of projects
underway and were able to pioneer many new siting and
stabilization techniques that have since become ubiquitous.
Power-line corridors, tunnels, garbage tips, fun parks, high-
density residential towns in the New Territories, full-scale
urban parks, inner-city squares – the full gamut. Such
experiences in planning, site planning, design and delivery
of diverse and complex projects increased the capacity of
Aust ra lia n la ndscape a rchitect s to work across complex
domains, cultural, ethnic and professional. They formed
working associations with diverse mixes of planners,
engineers, architects and clients and to do the work more
effectively, employed professionals from across the globe
and from local universities and firms.From these early forays, the Australian landscape architectural
profession developed and diversified, with many more than a
few pioneers now working across the region. In addition to
larger firms such as Hassell, Tract Consultants, McGregor
Coxall and Aspect Studios, individual landscape architects are
also sourced to contribute their particular specializations in
habitat planning and restoration for endangered species,
advanced horticultural and cultural knowledge. They work
at every level.In education, Australian graduate programs in landscape
a rchitect ure – at ma ster a nd doctora l levels in pa r t icu la r –
are in constant demand from across the entire Asian region,
including Indonesia, India, Malaysia, Korea, Singapore and
China, often outweighing domestic demand. Pursuing studies
at the advanced levels, students want more than basic
knowledge; as a result, graduate programs typically include
international field trips and studios to expose students to
cross-cultural working conditions like those they will
experience in practice. Given the challenges that these
young professionals will face in their work, through them
our responsibilities to the Asian region continue.
Internationalization poses particular challenges for
landscape architectural educators, who must on a daily basis
position their teaching for a diverse student cohort and reach
beyond the profession’s roots in the Western traditions of
science, design, construction and practice. To be prepared
for a complex inter-cultural future, skilled practitioners in
landscape architecture, wherever they are, now need to be
prepared both culturally and socially and our educators are
there to lay that foundation. The Australian profession of
landscape architecture has always been tested beyond its
shores. Hopefully this process will continue, in all
its dimensions.