Skip to content

The Art of Gardens in Maurice Scève’s Microcosme

 

Contrasts

The segment on gardens presents half-a-dozen pairs of opposites. 19Sillons, i.e., furrows contrast with the adjective, recouverts, covered up. This first oxymoron comes from the realm of agriculture. A second, semantically related to the first, such pair pits promenoirs, alleys in the open, and the tree-covered alleys conveyed by berceaux voutoyés: it refers to garden architecture with its geometrical design, since the two types of alleys cross one another. The third set of contrasting terms occurs with the two adjectives denoting plants belonging either to the native (endogenous) variety, communes, or to the imported (exogenous) type, satives. It is intermingled with the contrast between grasses (herbes) and flowers (fleurs), an opposition between wild and domesticated types, both bringing in botany.   Hydraulics come in with water either coming down under gravity (conduire en pente) or being pumped upwards (remonter). The final contrast I wish to underline is the complementarity, in the typical Renaissance garden, between the decorative elements (parterres for instance) and the plot for growing vegetables, alluded to by the terms plaisance (agreement) and service (utility).

Each such pair thus refers to a distinct component of the Renaissance garden, in its make-up. I will proceed with sensory perceptions of the various types, an investigation congenial to Scève’s priorities in his art.20

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Published inMy reviews