The message
from "RichardS" noaccess@invalid contains these words:


I was kind of cautious about including the 'real' gardeners thing - I
realise that there are many, many very keen & able recreational gardeners
and professionals alike that go to Chelsea and find it a thoroughly
worthwhile visit, so not having been I'd certainly not have the cheek to
knock it. I think that what I was enquiring about is the sentiment that
appears to have been implied that "Chelsea may be the premier show, but the
cognescenti reckon HC has the edge"... I'll stop here in case I'm digging a
hole for myself that I really didn't intend to dig!

Chelsea is wonderful, but the site is so small that the crowd pressure
nowadays makes it intolerable imho. I've stopped going to it because of
that. Hampton Court is a far larger, more gracious, beautiful and
practical venue. I've attended both in the company of an elderly aunt;
the last time I took her to Chelsea it was just too much for her, it was
very difficult to find her somewhere quiet to sit down (other than on
the ground, and it's even hard to find space for that) and getting a
drink means long queues. Hampton was much more relaxed, spacious, plenty
of pleasant R and R areas and more convenient catering outlets. She
enjoyed it far more.

Chelsea possibly has the edge horticulturally in tems of show gardens
(except these days you can barely see them through the jam-packed
hordes), but virtually all the trade exhibitors also go to HC so you'll
see all the best plants, garden gizmos, show gardens, AND be able to
choose from a zillion plants to buy on the spot,park in a plant creche
then take home that day. No plants for sale on the spot at Chelsea
(except at the last day last hour closing scrum; only suitable for the
fit and hardy :-)

Janet

The message
from Paul Corfield contains these words:

can someone tell me what a real gardener is?

I'm still developing my interest in gardening so don't understand the
distinction that seems so apparent to the group regulars.

Okay. Imho. on TV, examples of real gardeners are Geoff Hamilton
(deceased) and Percy Thrower (?); people who are connected on the
deepest personal level to the earth and life-force. They garden because
it's the breath of life to them. They are easily distinguished from
those poseurs whose focus is furthering their own wordly "success", and
constructing a meeja career out of physical attributes, "being a meeja
personality", or other superficial triviality.

On urg, examples of real gardeners are rife. People with dirt under
their fingernails who frequently disagree but are intrinsically bonded
by their connectedness to the life-force, love of plants, of growing
things, of their gardens or plantpots, and of communicating their
genuine enthusiasm to others. Those qualities transcend age, experience,
and just about every social marker you care to imagine.

I strongly recommend that you get hold of "The Yellow Book" of gardens
open for charity..available in most garden centres and bookshops. It's
published annually for about a fiver. Wherever you live, it will list
large and tiny private gardens near you to visit; a great source of
pleasure, inspiration, cheap plants, wonderful teas, and meeting real
gardeners :-)

Janet.

On 29/5/04 11:00 pm, in article ,
"Paul Corfield" wrote:

snip

I'm just trying to understand why opinions divide so sharply over things
that, to me, are not *that* important.

I think you may well remain puzzled but I'll take the plunge and say that I
think most 'real gardeners' as defined by urg, are more interested in plants
FIRST, rather than in decking, stainless steel fins, or coloured balls,
patios, drinks trolleys, lights or barbecues, bits of rope, worter feechas,
stone paving and so on - and on.
For me, at least, 'real gardening' is the planting of plants in appropriate
places and some major gambles; blocks of colour or no definition at all,
just happy or unhappy accidents etc.
Perhaps it's summed up by plants first, hard landscaping second. E.g. "I
want to grow x, y and z which like to trail down a wall and have sharply
drained ground", so the plants create the need for the wall or others need a
bog garden, or fence or trellis or pergola.
Plants first. Not the other way round - perhaps?
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds after garden to email me)

"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in message
...
The message
from Joe contains these words:


snip

I was gobsmacked that the BBC permitted Alan Titchmarsh and Diarmuid
Decongestant, to blatantly advertise their respective tailors. That kind
of prime-time, fame-associated TV exposure is worth a fortune to
brandnames. It's a far cry from the days when the BBC blanked out the
brand-name on the detergent bottle or yoghurt pot the Blue Peter
presenters were making into a birdfeeder or space rocket.


Actually, I think that one clip spoke volumes about the gulf between AT and
DG - the Gardener and the Designer.

Not too sure that there'll be a rush on Gucci or Next (I think it was)
suits - anyone spending (?) £700, £1k plus on a suit would possibly have
Gucci in their sights (if not wardrobe) anyway, and Next is just, well,
Next.


--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in message
...
The message
from "RichardS" noaccess@invalid contains these words:


I was kind of cautious about including the 'real' gardeners thing - I
realise that there are many, many very keen & able recreational
gardeners
and professionals alike that go to Chelsea and find it a thoroughly
worthwhile visit, so not having been I'd certainly not have the cheek to
knock it. I think that what I was enquiring about is the sentiment that
appears to have been implied that "Chelsea may be the premier show, but
the
cognescenti reckon HC has the edge"... I'll stop here in case I'm
digging a
hole for myself that I really didn't intend to dig!

Chelsea is wonderful, but the site is so small that the crowd pressure
nowadays makes it intolerable imho. I've stopped going to it because of
that. Hampton Court is a far larger, more gracious, beautiful and
practical venue. I've attended both in the company of an elderly aunt;
the last time I took her to Chelsea it was just too much for her, it was
very difficult to find her somewhere quiet to sit down (other than on
the ground, and it's even hard to find space for that) and getting a
drink means long queues. Hampton was much more relaxed, spacious, plenty
of pleasant R and R areas and more convenient catering outlets. She
enjoyed it far more.

Chelsea possibly has the edge horticulturally in tems of show gardens
(except these days you can barely see them through the jam-packed
hordes), but virtually all the trade exhibitors also go to HC so you'll
see all the best plants, garden gizmos, show gardens, AND be able to
choose from a zillion plants to buy on the spot,park in a plant creche
then take home that day. No plants for sale on the spot at Chelsea
(except at the last day last hour closing scrum; only suitable for the
fit and hardy :-)

Janet


well, I've just checked Fernatix' website (www.fernatix..co.uk), and they
say they'll be at HC. We've been so impressed with what we've seen from
their tv interviews and coverage thay we just have to see their stand in the
flesh (so to speak). We'll definitely be going. Whether I can persuade my
parents or not is another matter, but if it gets too much for them then it's
only a short distance to return them to base.

thanks, all.


--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

In article , Sacha
writes
On 29/5/04 11:00 pm, in article ,
"Paul Corfield" wrote:

snip

I'm just trying to understand why opinions divide so sharply over things
that, to me, are not *that* important.

I think you may well remain puzzled but I'll take the plunge and say that I
think most 'real gardeners' as defined by urg, are more interested in plants
FIRST, rather than in decking, stainless steel fins, or coloured balls,
patios, drinks trolleys, lights or barbecues, bits of rope, worter feechas,
stone paving and so on - and on.
For me, at least, 'real gardening' is the planting of plants in appropriate
places and some major gambles; blocks of colour or no definition at all,
just happy or unhappy accidents etc.
Perhaps it's summed up by plants first, hard landscaping second. E.g. "I
want to grow x, y and z which like to trail down a wall and have sharply
drained ground", so the plants create the need for the wall or others need a
bog garden, or fence or trellis or pergola.
Plants first. Not the other way round - perhaps?

For me, I think it has something to do with plants being living
organisms, which *grow*. So a garden makeover which looks good because
all the plants look just right isn't a real garden unless it is still
going to look good in a year's time when the plants have spread. And a
gardener wants to continue to be involved in that garden - not just to
sit back and look at it, but to continue to add plants and develop it.
--
Kay Easton

Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm

Kay Easton wrote:
: In article , Sacha
: writes
:: On 29/5/04 11:00 pm, in article
:: , "Paul Corfield"
:: wrote:
::
:: snip
:::
::: I'm just trying to understand why opinions divide so sharply over
::: things that, to me, are not *that* important.
::
:: I think you may well remain puzzled but I'll take the plunge and say
:: that I think most 'real gardeners' as defined by urg, are more
:: interested in plants FIRST, rather than in decking, stainless steel
:: fins, or coloured balls, patios, drinks trolleys, lights or
:: barbecues, bits of rope, worter feechas, stone paving and so on -
:: and on.
:: For me, at least, 'real gardening' is the planting of plants in
:: appropriate places and some major gambles; blocks of colour or no
:: definition at all, just happy or unhappy accidents etc.
:: Perhaps it's summed up by plants first, hard landscaping second.
:: E.g. "I want to grow x, y and z which like to trail down a wall and
:: have sharply drained ground", so the plants create the need for the
:: wall or others need a bog garden, or fence or trellis or pergola.
:: Plants first. Not the other way round - perhaps?
:
: For me, I think it has something to do with plants being living
: organisms, which *grow*. So a garden makeover which looks good because
: all the plants look just right isn't a real garden unless it is still
: going to look good in a year's time when the plants have spread. And a
: gardener wants to continue to be involved in that garden - not just to
: sit back and look at it, but to continue to add plants and develop it.

And also for me it is not this person who was on GQT last week talking about
the people in the suberbs being prepared to spend enormous amouts of money
on something that someone else has done or grown, and then to 'plop' it in
your garden

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de bRfWjvs5F0GYvwt+ySSAzgJ5GdzccKP+Ghxxo2S0ja/g/ltPg=
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
X-No-Archive: yes
Path: kermit!newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!news2.euro.net! newsfeed.vmunix.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
Xref: kermit uk.rec.gardening:207219

On Sat, 29 May 2004 23:33:39 +0100, Sacha
wrote:

On 29/5/04 11:00 pm, in article ,
"Paul Corfield" wrote:

snip

I'm just trying to understand why opinions divide so sharply over things
that, to me, are not *that* important.

I think you may well remain puzzled but I'll take the plunge and say that I
think most 'real gardeners' as defined by urg, are more interested in plants
FIRST, rather than in decking, stainless steel fins, or coloured balls,
patios, drinks trolleys, lights or barbecues, bits of rope, worter feechas,
stone paving and so on - and on.

Yes!

For me, at least, 'real gardening' is the planting of plants in appropriate
places and some major gambles; blocks of colour or no definition at all,
just happy or unhappy accidents etc.

Yes!

Perhaps it's summed up by plants first, hard landscaping second. E.g. "I
want to grow x, y and z which like to trail down a wall and have sharply
drained ground", so the plants create the need for the wall or others need a
bog garden, or fence or trellis or pergola.
Plants first. Not the other way round - perhaps?

Yes!

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 May 2004 22:18:12 +0100, "tuin man"
wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
news
can someone tell me what a real gardener is?

You for a start!

you haven't seen the dreadful lawn and overgrown borders that I am
slowly trying to tackle.

That actually *is* what real gardening is about. Have you ever
stopped at one of the Chelsea gardens and said to yourself "I wonder
what that one would look like six months (or indeed 2 years) from
now?"

Franz

"Kay Easton" wrote in message
...
In article , Sacha

[snip]

For me, I think it has something to do with plants being living
organisms, which *grow*. So a garden makeover which looks good
because
all the plants look just right isn't a real garden unless it is
still
going to look good in a year's time when the plants have spread.

You have hit the nail on the head. Of how many of the Chelsea gardens,
and indeed the Beeb "madeover" gardens, would this be true?

And a
gardener wants to continue to be involved in that garden - not just
to
sit back and look at it, but to continue to add plants and develop
it.

The evolution of the garden is of the essence.

Franz

On 30/5/04 8:21 am, in article , "Robert"
wrote:

Kay Easton wrote:
snip
:
: For me, I think it has something to do with plants being living
: organisms, which *grow*. So a garden makeover which looks good because
: all the plants look just right isn't a real garden unless it is still
: going to look good in a year's time when the plants have spread. And a
: gardener wants to continue to be involved in that garden - not just to
: sit back and look at it, but to continue to add plants and develop it.

And also for me it is not this person who was on GQT last week talking about
the people in the suberbs being prepared to spend enormous amouts of money
on something that someone else has done or grown, and then to 'plop' it in
your garden


I don't mind people having others to work in their garden but those who
simply hand over a cheque and say "furnish that" are no more gardeners than
those who do the same to interior designers are er, "interior designers."
;-) As Kay has said plants are living things and the joy of gardening to a
gardener, IMO, is that you work with them and around them - you don't think
of them as a finished article once they're in the soil.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds after garden to email me)

On Sun, 30 May 2004 09:00:40 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 29 May 2004 22:18:12 +0100, "tuin man"
wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
news can someone tell me what a real gardener is?

You for a start!

you haven't seen the dreadful lawn and overgrown borders that I am
slowly trying to tackle.

That actually *is* what real gardening is about. Have you ever
stopped at one of the Chelsea gardens and said to yourself "I wonder
what that one would look like six months (or indeed 2 years) from
now?"

I've never been to the Chelsea Flower Show so I can't have posed that
question to myself.
--
Paul C

"tuin man" wrote
"Paul Corfield" wrote
can someone tell me what a real gardener is?

You for a start!

Well now, had you asked for *who* is a real gardener, then contrary to the
awful "Mr Smugmarsh" reference I would say Alan Titchmarsh is a very real
gardener.
Perhaps it's his common sense touch and the earthy logical plainness of
how he seems to be expressing a deliberate simplicity of unmysterious
presentations that might irk some eonough to seeth.
If he seems a tad too smug...folly though that may be... well he has dam
well earned the right to lean out of his trolly so we can also plainly
see, someone who has done much, so very very much for this garden
industry.

That was my reference and I stand by it. He -does- come over these days as
insufferably smug and self-centred. And no I wasn't disputing his gardening
credentials in the least. I'm well aware of how he did his time as an
apprentice and learned his craft the hands-on way from experts. I was
talking about garden prog presenting skills and for me someone like Monty
Don wins hands down every time.

When AT first took over on GW from the wonderful down-to-earth Geoff
Hamilton, he did in fact start off quite well and for about one season I
thought he'd make a decent replacement, but thereafter his manner seemed to
me to get more and more arrogant and, yes, smug!

Nowadays every time he's interviewing someone or exchanging his
excruciatingly unfunny 'jolly banter' with other presenters he manages to
turn it back every time to a comment or joke about himself. Whatever he's
done for the gardening industry is laudable but beside the point; as a tv
gardening frontman his manner simply sets my teeth on edge, that's all.

On Paul's question about the definition of a real gardener I think an
'unreal' one for me would be someone who just wants their garden to be a
pleasantly decorated or fashionable backdrop, either for a bit of outdoor
living or, if you go by recent tv progs, possibly just to improve the price
of their home.

I don't like the term but a 'real' gardener would be someone who finds
pleasure in the experience of growing and tending plants, feels soothed and
energised by getting their hands in the soil, and uses their garden (or
window box, or pots on the sill) as a place to be able to arrange them in a
way that seems pleasing. I don't believe someone needs to be hugely
experienced or knowledgeable to be in the 'real' camp. The enjoyment of
growing things and urge to learn more about them all is the important bit
imo.

--
Sue

In message , Janet
Baraclough.. writes
The message
from Joe contains these words:


This happens year after year, too consistently to be accidental. Also,


Janet. (Married to ex-BBC broadcast engineer)

I *am* an ex-BBC broadcast engineer. Possibly a bit ex-er, about 25
years ago.
--
Joe

On Sun, 30 May 2004 13:41:46 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote:

On Sun, 30 May 2004 09:00:40 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 29 May 2004 22:18:12 +0100, "tuin man"
wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
news can someone tell me what a real gardener is?

You for a start!

you haven't seen the dreadful lawn and overgrown borders that I am
slowly trying to tackle.

That actually *is* what real gardening is about. Have you ever
stopped at one of the Chelsea gardens and said to yourself "I wonder
what that one would look like six months (or indeed 2 years) from
now?"

I've never been to the Chelsea Flower Show so I can't have posed that
question to myself.

or because Franz posed it?