although the landscape of new york city’s central park mimics that of an untouched nature, the monumental project was in fact the meticulous result of an 1858 design competition. the winning plan by olmsted and vaux was selected above 32 other entries — only one of which survives today. this nearly forgotten proposal by park engineer john j. rink reveals a philosophy toward landscape that contrasts the naturalist views of olmsted expressed in the park today. from documentation preserved by the new york historical society, neomam studios offers a contemporary portrayal of rink’s original vision for central park.



images courtesy of budget direct

olmstead’s views on landscape were influenced by naturalists of 18th century england. these ideals favored the picturesque wilderness of an untouched nature over the formal qualities of a manicured garden. this view is born of the romantic idea that only true nature offers a reprieve from the unsanitary qualities of large cities. olmstead intended for central park to serve as ‘an orchard garden in a steel mill’ that embraced the rocky geography of the site. these convictions are clearly expressed in the park still today with moments of rugged, exposed bedrock and rambling footpaths.

some opposed olmstead, favoring rather an idealized nature characterised by symmetry and controlled smoothness. this idealization was an antithesis to the ‘terror, solitude and vastness of nature’ described by 18th century theorist edmund burke. these ideals were adopted most famously in french gardens which exhibited a high degree of control over the landscape by organizing it into figural geometric plans. the new series of imagery of the runner-up proposal — produced by neomam studios for budget direct — demonstrates rink’s tendencies toward these principles with sinuously curving tree-lined promenades navigating between axial garden pavilions.

there had been number of speculations regarding the rejection of rink’s proposal, both geographical and political. before central park was designed, the area was a rocky, treeless wasteland. while olmsted and vaux embraced the wilderness characteristics of the site, rink sought to control it. ultimately it would have been a tremendous undertaking to both rationalize the landscape to such an extent and maintain it over time. politically, the theoretical principles behind the more idealist approach to fine gardening suggest that such a park would be welcome only to the upper-class new yorker who sought an escape from the unsafe and unsanitary city. while olmsted himself admitted to the ignorance of a large part of the population, his intention was to offer a bucolic retreat for the impoverished and encourage a polite sociability which might extend well beyond the edges of the park.