hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: Edith Wolford

  • To: Multiple recipients of list <iris-l@rt66.com>
  • Subject: Re: Edith Wolford
  • From: Patricia Wenham <prw@televar.com>
  • Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 19:59:29 -0700 (MST)

J. Michael, Celia or Ben Storey wrote:
> 
> Clarence says:
> >Interestingly, in a recent article in The Garden magazine, Graham Stuart
> >Thomas cited EDITH WOLFORD as a prime example of "bad form" in modern irises,
> >and a picture of this iris accompanied the article.  My own prejudice against
> >this cultivar is motivated by its rather poor performance as a garden iris in
> >northern Virginia, notwithstanding its winning the Dykes Medal or its
> >excellent colors.  But when I look at its picture in comparison to an irises
> >such as POST TIME or OLA KALA, I do see Thomas's point about form.  This is
> >one of the reasons I am delighted that some distinguished iris breeders such
> >as Paul Black have begun concentrating on smaller flowers with good garden
> >qualities.  Clarence Mahan in VA
> 
> Oh, you've gone now and broken my heart. Even though I knew I knew nothing
> about irises, I thought I knew that EDITH WOLFORD was pretty. And now you
> tell me she's not pretty? She's an awkward shape, topheavy and besides she
> doesn't grow worth a toot?
> 
> Oh, dear. My life's ambition last summer was to make it to the CAIS rhizome
> sale early enough to grab a bit of EW, however tiny. But even though I woke
> up in time to arrive fifteen minutes early, she was all gone. Gone!
> Everyone else had already snatched her up. Everyone else agreed she was
> worth having. Everyone else wanted her, too.
> 
> But now you tell me I shouldn't have bothered? She's a snotty girl with
> weak ankles and shoulders too fat for her thighs?
> Alas!
> 
> celia
> storey@aristotle.net  USDA Zone 7b
> Little Rock, Arkansas

Edith Wolford is an expensive but appealing date, wearing our school 
colors of blue and gold (well, sort of) and in her best cheerleader 
manner urging us to buy her.  She is a one-season date in this area.  I 
have purchased her and purchased her--and purchased her.  She is one of 
the very few iris I am unable to keep alive in my garden.  She has never 
had more than one stem and never more than 3 blossoms on that stem.  She 
sings her siren song again this year and I am thinking about starting an 
Edith Wolford Anonomys group to get support that will keep me from 
throwing more good money after bad.

Patti Wenham <prw@televar.com>
USDA zone 5 in north central Washington State.
Alkaline sandy loam soil.  Very low rainfall.





 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index