On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:39:45 GMT, "Vox Humana"
wrote:

Thank God! Most of the "gardening" shows on HGTV send in a crew that slaps
together a very crude garden that has little appeal to me and one that I
can't image lasting more than a couple of weeks. The "Landscaper's
Challenge" show is interesting, but I agree that they only do projects in
southern California and the budgets are enormous - not a situations that
most of us can relate to or learn from.

I suppose like many media enterprises, both gardening magazines and TV
shows are directed toward select audiences. Some of the fancy-shmancy
displays may be just the 'blueprint' one person needs to hire a
landscaping firm and say "I want it to look like this." For others, it
might be inspiration to try something on a smaller scale -- maybe just
an introduction to a new tree, bush, or flower. My (rich)
sister-in-law said she'd planted 300 spring bulbs one day last fall.
Well, not exactly. She'd hired a garden center to plant 300 spring
bulbs. She's probably not interested in the details of how deep to
plant, and when/how to fertilize. She just wanted some spring flowers
around the place -- perhaps the way she'd seen in a magazine or on a
TV show.

In my mind, there's also a distinction between landscaping and
gardening. 'Landscaping' is an architectural enterprise that assumes
successful growing; 'gardening' is much more down-in-the-dirt.

It's always (well, usually) at least entertaining to see a tatty bare
lawn and 2 bushes transformed into an attractive vision of flowers,
shrubs, paths, and arbors, whether or not one can afford such a
transformation. I enjoy looking at (not buying!) 'decorating'
magazines which feature $5,000 chairs and $100/yd drapery fabric, as
well as DIY instructions on making a kitchen light fixture out of a
collander and $4 of electrical parts. I'm never going to have a $5,000
chair, but it's interesting to know what one looks like. :-)

Frogleg wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:39:45 GMT, "Vox Humana"
wrote:

Thank God! Most of the "gardening" shows on HGTV send in a crew that slaps
together a very crude garden that has little appeal to me and one that I
can't image lasting more than a couple of weeks. The "Landscaper's
Challenge" show is interesting, but I agree that they only do projects in
southern California and the budgets are enormous - not a situations that
most of us can relate to or learn from.

I suppose like many media enterprises, both gardening magazines and TV
shows are directed toward select audiences. Some of the fancy-shmancy
displays may be just the 'blueprint' one person needs to hire a
landscaping firm and say "I want it to look like this." For others, it
might be inspiration to try something on a smaller scale -- maybe just
an introduction to a new tree, bush, or flower. My (rich)
sister-in-law said she'd planted 300 spring bulbs one day last fall.
Well, not exactly. She'd hired a garden center to plant 300 spring
bulbs. She's probably not interested in the details of how deep to
plant, and when/how to fertilize. She just wanted some spring flowers
around the place -- perhaps the way she'd seen in a magazine or on a
TV show.

In my mind, there's also a distinction between landscaping and
gardening. 'Landscaping' is an architectural enterprise that assumes
successful growing; 'gardening' is much more down-in-the-dirt.

It's always (well, usually) at least entertaining to see a tatty bare
lawn and 2 bushes transformed into an attractive vision of flowers,
shrubs, paths, and arbors, whether or not one can afford such a
transformation. I enjoy looking at (not buying!) 'decorating'
magazines which feature $5,000 chairs and $100/yd drapery fabric, as
well as DIY instructions on making a kitchen light fixture out of a
collander and $4 of electrical parts. I'm never going to have a $5,000
chair, but it's interesting to know what one looks like. :-)

This has been a pretty darn interesting thread - I am surprised to see how many
folks are not knocked over by ether the "big" gardening mags nor the TV
gardening shows.

I am a professional in this business - I make my living doing landscape design
and horticultural consultations and I have to say that I like 'em both. I do
subscribe to Fine Gardening, Horticulture and Sunset and pick up Garden Design
and The English Garden from time to time and some of the BHG special interest
publications. Yes, there are lots of ads, but that is a fact of life for any
periodical to stay in business. There are also wonderful articles that increase
my knowledge about specific plant groups ( Dan Hinkley of Heronswood has a very
good article on the 'other' Asian maples in the most recent issue of
Horticulture), short articles on plants newly introduced in to trade and always
photos of great plant combinations and design solutions which I file away in my
memory banks for future possible use. And it is always good to see articles
written by or featuring other designers whom I know personally or by reputation.
One recent BHG article featured an entry courtyard and water feature designed
and built by the owners of a local design-build company that I have worked
with several times in the past - it was for their own residence and the design
and application of the water feature was stunning. Someday, I hope my work will
appear in one of these mags. :-))

As to the gardening shows........I tend to be a bit more opinionated about them.
But I do watch as many as I can. "Gardening by the Yard" offers excellent,
accurate and appropriate gardening information for both the new gardener and the
more experienced. 'Landscape Solutions' and another whose name escapes me at the
moment present smaller, do-it-yourself projects that anyone, regardless of their
budget, can replicate. 'Groundbreakers' and 'Landscapers' Challenge' do feature
major installations with significant budgets, but they also offer an opportunity
to see how various landscaping obstacles are handled by various professional
designers - some more successfully than others. All these shows offer some
opportunity to increase one's knowledge base - it just depends on what you find
significant in each.

For professional designs and installations, none of the budgets are out of line.
In fact, I think they are pretty reasonable given the amount of work that is
done. If nothing else, they serve to open some folks eyes as to the cost of a
professionally designed and installed landscape and the time and effort
involved. Not exactly everyone's cup of tea, specially with this type of
newsgroup with a high population of do it yourself gardeners, but valuable
nonetheless. Not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to do it all
themselves.

The one thing I find uniformly missing in the majority of these programs is a
focus on plant material. Hardscaping seems to take a front seat - perhaps
because it is the most visually obvious change in a landscape renovation, as
well as taking up the majority of the cost. But it is unfortunate that a better
discussion of the plant selection is not presented - why specific plants were
chosen and what they based their criteria on and what may be a more suitable
alternative for other parts of the country with different climate concerns. And
also a problem is the lack of clear identification of the plants used - often
they are misidentified or mislabled on screen, not to mention mispronounced. If
I hear the same guy bungling "liriope' again, I swear I'll scream!

I think one has to look at TV gardening shows as just another form of
entertainment - that one may actually learn something useful from them is
accidental at best but always a possibility. And if you already have cable, they
are free. OTOH, I find the gardening mags to be consistantly informative and
helpful and I consider them to be just another tool used to increase my
knowledge, in the same manner as investing in yet another gardening book or
attending another class or gardening seminar. You are never going to gain all
the knowledge you need from any of them, but any increase in knowledge is a good
thing.

BTW Vic, Gardener's Diary is still offered on HGTV on Saturday afternoons. Just
saw a drop-dead gorgeous lacecap hydrangea featured on that show a couple of
weeks ago - a Japanese cultivar called 'Jogasaki' with double sterile flowers. I
am off to Heronswood in another week to pick one up :-))

pam, gardengal

On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 10:23:34 GMT, Frogleg wrote:

It's always (well, usually) at least entertaining to see a tatty bare
lawn and 2 bushes transformed into an attractive vision of flowers,
shrubs, paths, and arbors, whether or not one can afford such a
transformation

I think those shows should come back a year later, and then see what
the place looks like. That way the plants would fill in a little
more, and there would be less emphasis on putting in plants that are
already blooming.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:38:32 GMT, Paul Below
wrote:

On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 10:23:34 GMT, Frogleg wrote:

It's always (well, usually) at least entertaining to see a tatty bare
lawn and 2 bushes transformed into an attractive vision of flowers,
shrubs, paths, and arbors, whether or not one can afford such a
transformation

I think those shows should come back a year later, and then see what
the place looks like. That way the plants would fill in a little
more, and there would be less emphasis on putting in plants that are
already blooming.

Oh, absolutely! I wish 'Ground Force' (or other TV transformation
shows) would do a '1 yr later' special. The stuff that died; the stuff
that thrived. Was a non-gardener inspired to spend some time keeping
up the new look, or did he/she/they just watch it get completely out
of hand? My pessimistic bet is that most will have deteriorated at
least somewhat. But what a treat it'd be to see some further
improvements! I wonder and wonder...

I think those shows should come back a year later, and then see what
the place looks like. That way the plants would fill in a little
more, and there would be less emphasis on putting in plants that are
already blooming.

Heh -- more like see what plants actually survived. :P

James