A botanist friend and I were
corresponding about gardens, and we agreed that we both like free-form gardens,
with plants allowed to grow into the shapes they want—within reason, of course.
But we weren’t in favor of the sculpted, manicured look so favored today by
much of suburbia. What you like in a garden tells much about what you like in
life, just as do the foods you eat, the books you read, the things you choose
to surround yourself with.
At one time in British history, garden
were carefully delineated, neatly plotted and formed. Beyond their borders,
nature could grow wild, but the garden kept the wilderness at bay and gave man
a sense of control, creating order in an unruly universe. Sometimes during this
period, carefully manicured bushes and trees came into popularity. The topiary
tree and other shapes. While I wouldn’t have one in my garden, I have seen
recently beautifully sculpted topiaries of animals.
The Victorian era saw gardens as an
extension of the house, to be lavishly decorated as evidence of taste. Not only
were geegaws, from gazebos to benches, desired, flower displays were lavish and
colorful to fit the exterior of Queen Anne homes with their gingerbread trim. Today
most of us would call these gardens fussy and overdone.
In the early nineteenth century, the
Craftsman style became popular as a protest against mass production and the
standardization of parts. When houses all began to look alike, designers used
natural materials—wood, stone—to distinguish their houses and give them
individuality. Similarly, gardens around Craftsmen homes were allowed to grow
free rather than sculpted and carefully trimmed into an organized pattern. The
typical Craftsman home’s garden has the feel and appeal of an English garden.
Today in the United States garden take
many shapes and forms—we have tried to surround our homes with manicured and mowed
lawns, which proved to be a mistake in some parts of the country. In the desert
Southwest, for example, the cost of maintain a lawn, in water alone, is
astronomical and suggests we should think of a new way to garden. It’s not easy
for some—one of my sons routinely mowed down the evening pinks which sprouted
in my lawn. I loved them, but he said, “They’re weeds, Mom.” In our
neighborhood newsletter, a contributor complained about people who do not used
weed-and-feed regularly and thus provided a crop of dandelions for the whole
neighborhood. I wanted to tell him to make a salad out of the greens and enjoy.
But I like gardens with lots of native
plants—yarrow, cone flowers, coreopsis, Mexican hat flowers, oleander, rosemary,
mint, lantana and a long list of others. I don’t have much sun either on the
front or back of my house, so my choices are sort of limited.
Some of us do like to let nature take
its course. Granted, some plants need a little taming. Yaupon holly, for
instance, does not need to be painstakingly trimmed, it’s interior opened up as
one friend showed me years ago—talk about a time suck. But neither does it need
to grow out of control until it shouts neglect. What I ideally aim for is a moderate
course between two alternatives.
I have neighbors who have been growing
vegetables in their front yard. The result is plants of all sizes and shapes
with no discernible pattern—I find it distracting and think such gardens
should, like the traditional kitchen garden, be in the back of the house.
And much as I like free-form growing,
I don’t like when a jungle sprouts in the bushes to the west of my house, with
volunteer trees offering to get out of control. I guess maybe in gardens as in
politics, I’m a moderate liberal (no hooting, please, from friends and family).
How does your garden grow?
