THE GREBBEBERG

A CRITICAL VIEW ON THE AESTHETICS OF THE LANDSCAPE

anne erven
1020230
blp
07-05-2021
(2198 words)
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Three values ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Functionality ........................................................................................................................................ 3
Sustainability ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Beauty.................................................................................................................................................. 4
The sublime ..................................................................................................................................... 4
The.beautiful ................................................................................................................................... 5
The.picturesque............................................................................................................................... 5
Evaluation of the design .......................................................................................................................... 6
Design intentions ................................................................................................................................. 6
Judgement ........................................................................................................................................... 6
Positive.points ................................................................................................................................. 6
Negative.points ............................................................................................................................... 7
Improvements ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Bibliography........................................................................................................................................... 10
Introduction
Close to the place where the borders of the provinces
Utrecht and Gelderland meet, lays a grand hill, known as
the Grebbeberg [Figure 1]. This hill is the southern part of
the moraine that is positioned in an arch, reaching from
Amersfoort to Rhenen. Around 150 000 years ago, this
moraine was formed by a hundred meters thick sheet of ice
slowly moving from Scandinavia to the Netherlands.
Through time, the southern part of the moraine has slowly
being destroyed by the wild waters of the Rhine, leaving a
steep slope behind (Geopark Heuvelrug Gooi en Vecht,
2020). Figure 1
The end of the moraine
Within this paper, a critical view on the aesthetics of the
design of Michael van Gessel (2003-2005) at the Grebbeberg is provided. The aesthetics of a landscape
are a set of multiple principles that are related with the origin and the appreciation of beauty (Murray,
1986). But, what is beauty one might ask. First, this definition of a currently vague concept is elaborated
on with the use of the trivalent design values formulated by Ian Thompson. According to these values,
the aesthetics of the Grebbeberg will be judged in a critical manner. The critique also takes into account
the design intentions and comments upon whether the intentions have been achieved and how certain
negative points could be improved, followed by a brief conclusion.
Three values
The trivalent design values help in understanding what makes a landscape aesthetically pleasing. These
values are described as the functionality, the sustainability, and the beauty of a landscape.

Functionality
Functionalism is a value driven by the social concern for the usefulness of a designed landscape. Beauty
within this value is either irrelevant, or a direct consequence of the design being functional (Thompson,
2002). In the case for the Grebbeberg design, the forest in which the design lays is easily accessible with
a parking lot at the other side of the road, where the pedestrian crossing provides a safe crossing to the
entrance of the forest. When entering the forest at the small gate [Figure 2], one is enveloped by the
enclosed environment. Multiple routes can be taken, some more hidden than others, creating a
landscape where one is completely on his/her own in choosing which route to walk [Figure 3]. An
atmosphere is created that adds to the idea of escaping from reality, giving the forest a function of
relaxation from everyday life. It is not only accessible for hikers, but also for runners, bird spotters, and
more.

Figure 2 Figure 1
The entrance of the forest Choosing the more hidden route

This part of the Grebbeberg symbolises many parts of history. The stronghold
dates back to the Merovingian Period (481 – 751) and the King’s Table [Figure
4] dates back to the 17th century. More recently, the Second World War has
also influenced the area. During this period, the stronghold was used as a
place for defence and was part of the Grebbelinie. This linie served as a pre-
defense of the Dutch Waterlinie, originally built in 1744, but put back into
action in 1939 to protect the area against the looming war that was on its
way. Such historic activities have formed the landscape through time. With
this design, this history is brought back, providing the visitor with a glance at
the past.
Figure 4 The King's Table
Sustainability
Sustainable development is defined as the ‘development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ (Thompson, 2002). This
emphasises the importance to keep a focus on the essential aspect of sustainability within a design,
where a profit of the landscape is generated without damaging the needs of future generations. The
design should be meant to continue forever. A landscape that is designed according to ecological
appreciation will be likely to satisfy on an aesthetic level (van Etteger, 2021a). For that reason, the
Grebbeberg adds to the sustainability. The design is not harming nature in any way, providing a place
for nature development and for it to grow relatively freely. The high grounds of the hill itself prevent
the high area from flooding. The lower floodplains are designed to deal with the flooding of the area. In
that way, two completely different scenes occur next to each other, adding to the biodiversity and thus
the sustainability of the area.
Beauty
Considering the beauty of a landscape, one should look at the pleasures of imagination; the sublime, the
beautiful, and the picturesque. These theories, created by Edmund Burke, are used to define the
interaction between human emotions and categories of sensory impression.

The sublime
‘Sublimity lay in those scenes that, because of their awesome size, sharp
colours, loud sound, association with the unknown, and often abrupt
irregularity, caused sensations best described as a kind of admiring terror or
fearful wonder.’ (Rogers, 2001, p. 138). Whilst walking through the forest,
entering the stronghold of the Grebbeberg, one is confronted with a
relatively open flat space contrasting greatly to the forest circling around
the design itself. At the edge of the hill, more trees shield what is behind. A
space has been left empty at the centre, creating a view across the
floodplains, the Rhine, and the horizon. Without really noticing at first, due
to the mesmerisation of the view, there is a steep edge [Figure 5]. The
sudden irregularity of the top of the hill is the sublime aspect of this
landscape, due to the contemplation of the terror that could occur when
falling down the edge. Figure 5
Contemplating the possible terror
This feeling of terror can also be experienced, though on a lower level, when
walking up the metal stairs leading to the top of the stronghold. Climbing higher [Figure 6], the visitor
has no idea of what comes after the final step. It seems almost as if, when coming closer to that last
step, one could fall of the small ridge [Figure 7], on to the other side, not knowing there is another pair
of stairs leading a safe way down. The curiosity of what is on the top, whilst feeling that terror, is what
makes this a sublime experience as well.

Figure 6 Figure 7
Climbing up the stairs Fear of falling down the ridge
The.beautiful
‘Beauty, on the other hand, excited “the passion of love, or some correspondent affection” and could
be found in such qualities as smallness, smoothness, delicacy, soft hues, melodious music, gently
undulating surfaces, and curving lines.’ (Rogers, 2001, p. 138). In landscape one can enjoy the melodies
of the birds and the breezing wind whaling through the trees. Sightlines are created from the highlighted
parts on the stronghold by the placement of stairs and the trees [Figure 8], drawing attention to the
open area and emphasizing views on the horizon, adding to the beauty of the landscape. Besides that,
the curving paths in the design meeting one another subtly and flowing across the area add to the
beauty as described by Rogers [Figure 9].

Figure 8 Figure 9
Created sightline Curvy paths flowing across the ground
The.picturesque
An intermediate style was defined; the picturesque (Rogers, 2001, p. 251). This concept focusses on the
world as a picture where irregularities of nature inspirational. It is an aesthetic ideal when looking at
nature from one specific point in the garden, as if looking at a painting. When nature can then be
admired in its totality, one speaks of picturesque. On top of the hill, when overlooking the floodplains
and the waters of the Lower Rhine through the trees, one can see the irregularities of nature from this
specific point, emphasized by the placement of the wooden object to take all in [Figure 10], and the
observation deck [Figure 11]. This deck also adds to the sublimity, as it feels counterintuitive to walk
further than the edge with no safe ground beneath anymore. Furthermore, the meandering Lower
Rhine, the curvy trees bending over the edge of the moraine and the far-reaching sightlines [Figure 12]
create an aesthetically pleasing looks, therefore adding to the picturesque image of the design of the
Grebbeberg.

Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12

Wooden object to take the views in The observation deck A picturesque image across the landscape
Evaluation of the design
Design intentions
Described as a functional aspect of the landscape, this part of the Grebbeberg has endured a lot in the
past and is thus full of history. And that is exactly what Michael van Gessel had in mind wanting to bring
forward when creating this design. He wanted the archaeological past of this part of the hill to be
resurrected and to show the remains of history, as if it had not changed over time at all (Michael van
Gessel, z.d.). The art he has created by doing this, is a form of imitation. Within this form of art, it is not
about the artist himself or what he feels, but the importance lays within the art and the subject. The art
object is supposed to look like another object, that is linked to the subject. In this case, the ‘other object’
is the landscape of the past, at this specific place, and the subject is bringing back the past. This means
that what one sees in the object, is there to remind us of the real / original object. In order to make this
type of art possible in the design, Van Gessel has done his research on this specific place, and has
implemented what he found out and what he has seen from the past, in the design. The better the
imitation of the past in this case, the better the design. In case of imitation, originality is not of great
importance [van Etteger, 2021b], as it imitates the original landscape.

Judgement
Positive.points
The centre of the stronghold, where the majority of the ground is plain grass, is a relatively empty space
with several trees planted, whilst surrounded by a forest. Van Gessel did a good job by looking at what
has been there before, and adapted the old forms accordingly [Figure 13]. Even though culture and
materials have changed over time, he has not given into exaggerating the design. He has kept it simple,
as if straight out of the past, where things were still ‘simple’. Almost nothing in the design has been
invented, because it is a revival of what has already been there.

Figure 13
Bringing back the landscape of the past
On top of the stronghold, at the centre, one can walk down the stairs, entering the clear-out, being
lured to the sublime viewpoint whilst slowly but surely moving out of the forestry area. This smooth
transition created by Van Gessel works out perfectly [Figure 14], since one does not necessarily realise
moving away from the safe and enclosed environment to a more open and dangerous point of the
design; the sublime edge.

Figure 14
Smooth transition

Negative.points
Even though the transition from the central stair case works out well, the visitor should first be able to
easily get to this point of the stronghold. Contradictory to the other stairs in the design, this one is only
accessible via the stronghold itself, but not from the outside, even though it seems to be the central
stair case in the design [Figure 15]. One first has to be in the design by walking on the stronghold, losing
the mysterious atmosphere of what lays behind, to get to this central staircase. Therefore it lacks the
element of surprise, which can be viewed as a negative point of the design.

Figure 15 Figure 16
Central staircase only accessible via the design itself Locked away design, not pulling attention

Furthermore, the road(s) leading to the design are not too clear. When one enters the forest near the
military graveyard, one could get lost easily, possibly not even being able to reach the design. It feels as
if it has been locked away somewhere in the forest [figure 16], therefore lacking in functionality. This
could also be viewed as a positive aspect of the design, as the area is still ‘simple’, not exaggerating the
place but keeping it close to history. However, it would be a shame for visitors to miss out on this part
of the landscape.

Lastly, it feels as if the Kings Table is not getting the attention it would have received in the past. It seems
as though it has been forgotten about within the design, stashed away on the side, not being as
impressive as could have been. Even though it is of great historic importance in the area.
Improvements
When wanting to improve a design, one should look at the negative points to be bettered. In this case,
these concern the entrance of the design, the route(s) to the design itself, and the hidden Kings Table
as mentioned beneath the negative points. With regards to the entrance of the design, stairs could be
added on the other side of the stronghold to bring more focus to this central part of the design, making
the walk towards the viewpoint more impressive as well, bringing together the sublimity, the beauty,
and the picturesque of the place within one clear route. Adding to this, the routes to the design itself
should also be improved. This could be done by creating bigger (but still subtle) road leading the way to
this part of the hill, pulling the visitors to the right place. Lastly, the Kings Table should receive more
attention than it is receiving now. This could be achieved by creating clearer paths in the plain grass,
adding small bushes or ferns to build up the route towards the building, pulling some of the attention
away from the mesmerising views on the look-out towards the Kings Table.
Conclusion
Within the design of the Grebbeberg, the three values of functionality, beauty and sustainability come
forward and therefore add to the pleasant aesthetics of the place. Looking more closely at the value of
beauty, involving the pleasures of imagination; the sublime, beauty and picturesque, they add greatly
to this as well. The design is an artwork in the form of imitation, as it tries to bring back the history of
this specific area. It has been kept simple, without exaggerating the design, and keeping true to the past.
Even though there are some improvements to be made to get the design to a higher aesthetic level,
creating an even better experience for the visitor, Van Gessel has gotten very close to creating the past
landscape on a high aesthetic level. Since making designs is making something that has the potential of
being beautiful, you can never be too sure that it will actually be beautiful in the visitors’ eye. That is the
risk one has to take as a landscape architect.

Disclaimer: assumptions about the three values and the designers intentions have been made
Bibliography
Geopark Heuvelrug Gooi en Vecht. (2020, 29 juni). De Grebbeberg | Geopark Heuvelrug Gooi en
Vecht. Geopark Heuvelrug Gooi en Vecht | verrassend veelzijdig, een aardkundig, ecologisch en
cultureel juweel. https://www.geopark-heuvelrug.nl/geo-locaties/aardkundige-monumenten/de-
grebbeberg/

Michael van Gessel. (z.d.). http://www.michaelvangessel.com/. Geraadpleegd op 7 mei 2021, van

http://www.michaelvangessel.com/

Murray, J. (1986). Aesthetics. In Oxford Dictionary (17de ed.). Lexico. https://languages.oup.com/

Rogers, E. B. (2001). Landscape Design: A Cultural and Architectural History (1st Edition). Harry N.
Abrams, inc.

Thompson, I. H. (2002). Ecology, community and delight: a trivalent approach to landscape education.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 60(2), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-2046(02)00061-0

van Etteger, R. (2021a, maart 23). College 2: Trivalent Design [Presentatieslides]. MS Teams.
https://brightspace.wur.nl/d2l/le/content/78278/viewContent/453611/View

van Etteger, R. (2021b, maart 30). College 7: Theories of art [Presentatieslides]. MS Teams.
https://brightspace.wur.nl/d2l/le/content/78278/viewContent/453611/View