A close examination of Cosgrove’s article reveals that landscape traces more of a social origin than a geographical origin. This hypothesis is supported by his elaborate explanation about the historical origin and the citations from other articles supporting the statement. In his explanation of how the landscape is rooted from the society, he defines landscape as seeing of a person about the landscape. Examining the content of the article, there is great connection between the social fabric and landscape. This is mainly because the social activities have a direct effect on the landscape. The end of social formation and symbolic landscape in modernism shows a transition from one perspective of viewing landscape to another. This new perspective is further elaborated by a practical example Los Angeles.
Turning to Mitchell’s article, the author defines several important words used in imperial landscape. The word imperial is commonly used to describe basic structure. Thus, in the context, it can be used to describe the basic structure of the landscape. By the definitions of the landscape and its connection with the society, the author calls for clarity ion understanding the landscape and social effects. This is a basic strength in the article that makes it ideal for learning the basic structure of the landscape. The article further elaborates on the various concepts that surround the empirical landscape. The most conspicuous aspect is the language of the landscape. This concept shows a very important aspect of landscape as a medium of all cultures and cultural activities. This concept forms a connecting statement of the article to the other articles. In this particular case, the article is portrayed as a direct evidence of how landscape is connected to the society of the inhabitants.
Lastly looking into Davis’ article, the true picture of modernism as a social drive towards transformation of the landscape is vividly described. The article depicts how even the public space is wasted by lack of proper organization and use. The article further highlights the different social factors in the urban area have negatively affected the landscape. It comes to point that even the writer says that the city is forbidden. This city is virtually forbidden since it violates some landscape appearance and organization.
Looking at the general structure of the articles and their outline, Davis, article is a continuation of Cosgrove’s article. Cosgrove’s article ends with modernism which results in development of urban centers. Mitchell’s article tries to elaborate the basic structure of the basic landscape. It appears to have a prior concept on which Cosgrove’s work is based. Therefore, the three articles are intertwined in a structure similar to that of a tree. Mitchell’s work forms the trunk on which all other articles are based. Cosgrove’s work comes in as branches and twigs. Davis’ article forms the leaves and fruits. As the fruits and leaves depend on the other two broader structures, so does Davis’ article depend on the other articles to have full meaning.
In conclusion, the three articles portray the landscape as a social phenomenon. It is deeply rooted in people’s minds thus inseparable from the community. It is also depicted as a perception that can be changed or improved. This is an indication that landscape traces origin as human culture traces.
