Use of language in Landscape Urbanism and New Urbanism

As I've been looking to learn about Landscape Urbanism, one of the things which has struck me is the generally poor quality of its writing. It seems to me that one of the signs of intellectual weakness in LU is that its language is opaque, turgid and pseudo-intellectual. NU, by contrast, is generally simple, direct, clear. Even if one disagrees with NU — and it's fair that some assert that there is plenty to disagree with —  the issues are easily understood. I think that differing use of language offers an extremely telling comparison and to LU's detriment.

So I am going to try to somewhat formally compare Use of language in Landscape Urbanism and New Urbanism. I would like to illustrate the differences. I've never done anything like this before so I'll have to develop a  somewhat formal checklist of characteristics.

I'm using James Corner's "Terra Fluxus" essay since it is, I gather, as close as ground zero exists in LU literature. 

What would be a parallel, brief essay for NU? The Charter is a different form and I am trying to be even-handed. (Yes, I can be.)

Any suggestions? Five - ten pages? About NU? Thx.

And if you think that there is a better sample for LU than "Terra Fluxus," please let me know of that, too.

 

Comments

[Stu]

What about the Introduction to Suburban Nation (5.5 pages)?

[David Sucher]

Thx.
I will refresh my memory.

[Charlie]

Andres Duany also had a lengthier essay in the early 90s -- "The Second Coming of the American Small Town" -- that introduced and set forth New Urbanist principles (though without explicitly calling itself "New Urbanism").

[David Sucher]

Thanks, I will try to find it.

[Daniel Ashworth, Jr.]

A Corner suggestion, the introduction to the book "Recovering Landscape".