My purpose with this thesis has been to study the intersection between Landscape architecture and Land Art. They both relate to the landscape in some way whether it is to the urban landscape or the natural landscape. What tangent points are there between these two subjects, and can you learn something of the artists approach to the landscape? Land Art is an art movement that began in the late 60’s, what links are there to the current landscape? Last summer, I travelled around the U.S. for a month and visited the three classic Land Art projects. Lightning Field in New Mexico, by Walter De Maria, Sun Tunnels in Utah, by Nancy Holt and the Spiral Jetty, also in Utah, by Robert Smithson. The sites where visited from half a day up to 24 hours and was described and analyzed with text and photographs. To visit these sites has been crucial for my thesis and will affect my future work as a landscape architect. The use of the method has been a thought of mine for a long time, particularly to analyze or describe a landscape with images. But it is only in this work that I started to test it for real. I use photography as a way to describe or analyze the landscape and it’s in one way it’s my Claude glass, my way to catch the essence of the landscape in images. Photography is interesting because we are used to read pictures in our daily lives and work. My texts are written in a simple way but somehow they have been an important tool as they have preserved things that are otherwise easy to forget. Colour, sound, smell, time and temperature, but above all, my impressions are important. It is also a way to remember and reflect of ones experience months later when you read the text. They feel even more relevant when I later read De Maria, Holt and Smithsons texts. They are linking the landscape and sculpture together in their texts and make the experience for the spectator stronger with that knowledge. The interviews with Jonas, Anders, Thorbjörn and Cecilia has been very interesting and opened for other inputs to the subject than I originally thought. It was important for me to be able to land an art movement from the late 60’s in my landscape architecture world 2009 and to see that it is still important now in many ways. We are still people who experience the landscapes. In some way landscape and Land Art has the same basic elements, but does not relate to the landscape in the same way. I think there are things to learn from Land Art. How the artists expanded their own discipline and found a personal input in how to relate to the landscape and also a curiosity and presence in the landscape. To create a tension between the subtle, time-bound and the large-scale landscape. A Tension between the city and the isolated landscape. Landscape architecture has often a social aspect to the landscape, interactions between people. By creating a relationship and presence to the surrounding landscape, you make the landscape more colourful. There is always a landscape to relate to whether it’s a cityscape or landscape. We need a landscapearchitecture that creates presence, experiences with our body’s senses. Too much of the city is calling for our attention, which affects our presence in a negative way. It is an even greater challenge to create presence in the city.