FASLANYC writes about the possibility of re-thinking the constitution, role, and importance of the maintenance manual, an idea which seems to me to be wholly appropriate to the practice of landscape architecture.  Surely the languid pace at which the commands contained within a maintenance manual are executed (as FASLANYC suggests, “manual” need not be read literally, but might, for example, refer to a forking, non-linear “computer program… incorporat[ing] data from the sentient-cyborg landscape and [its] socially-networked [users]”) aligns more closely with the pace at which change in a landscape actually unfolds than the traditional model for capital-intensive landscape architecture (roughly, conceptual design through construction administration, hand off to the client, and perhaps occasionally show up to take pictures for the office portfolio).  The possibilities implied by such a re-thought maintenance manual — for instance, as a model for the sort of slow cultivation of a fluctuating landscape which landscape urbanists have theorized about but struggled to implement — are quite exciting.