It seems that in our everyday existence, we are bombarded with built in landscapes borne out of what has been referred to as “a functional and problem-solving ethic”. This trend in design has created many landscapes that might be socially beneficial to a point, but that generally lack inspiration. They are straightforward landscapes, neither requiring nor eliciting much interpretive effort. They are often lacking any sense of connection to the earth, to the community, to tradition, or to the individual. These landscapes are typically void of all but the most insincere and uninspired artistic gestures. Unfortunately, the problem-solving practitioner seems to eschew the more difficult issues that are raised if one aspires to practice at the level of art. The current challenge of landscape architecture, and its future obligation, is to create poetic landscapes that spark imagination and emotion; landscapes that possess and communicate meaning with a sensitivity to tradition and culture; landscapes that are undeniably artistic as well as functional.

But how do designers create artistic landscapes? What makes a landscape design poetic? Is there a theoretical framework that would help designers to understand how meaningful forms and experiences are created within built landscapes?

These questions are central to this thesis, which contends that the rhetorical devices of symbol and metaphor provide excellent vehicles for creating meaningful forms and experiences within the landscape. The intention of this thesis is to clarify the understanding of these two rhetorical devices. Much of this thesis will concentrate on metaphor, which is the most powerful of rhetorical devices. Symbol is discussed in order to clarify the use of metaphor.