Re: AIS: HIST: REF: Early Checklists

I agree with you also. A new person coming to the 39
checklist is very put off by all the codes and
abbreviations. Actually a gardener with no exposure to
Iris can be put off by all the abbreviations we use
even in our modern checklists. It seems we don't
invite people into our universe but guard it with all
sorts of specialized jargon. Of course we compound
this by then abbreviating the jargon; ergo standards,
falls, Classes etc. etc. Just mastering the language
gives one the false opinion that they really know
something. I understand that the printed lists try to
conserve paper, but we do this on the internet also.

--- John I Jones <jijones@usjoneses.com> wrote:

> I don't disagree with Anner's description, nor was I
> trying to  
> disparage the information in the 1939 Check List.
> However, unless you  
> understand all the little keys on how to interpret
> the information,  
> it may as well be encrypted. Classically arcane - 
> known or knowable  
> only to one who has the key.
> 
> John
> 
> On Aug 1, 2007, at 11:10 AM, ChatOWhitehall@aol.com
> wrote:
> 
> > In a message dated 8/1/2007 1:25:40 PM Eastern
> Daylight Time,
> > jijones@usjoneses.com writes:
> >
> > The  way
> > information is interpreted in the 1939 Check List
> is really  arcane.
> >
> >
> >
> > I do not find it so.  Some of the small
> strangenesses in it bother me,
> > because I believe they are the result of someone
> fiddling around  
> > with the truth,
> > but I find the document worthy none the less, and
> absolutely  
> > indispensible to
> > one who will learn to use it, and remember to
> think for one's  self.
> >
> > The 1939 Check List is an intricate document. I
> find that using  it  
> > requires
> > that one give the question at hand one's full 
> attention. It is a  
> > tool, like
> > an atlas, or logrithmic tables. or any  other
> technical reference  
> > document of
> > its sort, and one must learn to  use it well and
> skillfully. I find  
> > this
> > requires patience, and a  good deal of practice.
> One must  
> > absolutely read the front
> > matter of  the book carefully, and reread it
> often. One must also  
> > respect the
> > tool's  limitations.
> >
> > One place people get in trouble, other than not
> getting familiar  
> > with the
> > material in the front which introduces the book
> and tells you how  
> > to use  it, is
> > in failing to remember that the book is really a
> taxonomic   
> > document: It is a
> > book of Iris names, not of irises as such. Like a
> phone book  is  
> > not really
> > about people. More expressly, it is a record of
> the first   
> > appearance, or
> > publication, of unique Iris names in relation to
> unique Iris   
> > cultivars. It is
> > about words, then, and about words as records  of
> acts of naming.
> >
> > People also often run aground because they don't
> understand that   
> > there may
> > be, and often are, relationships between entries. 
> Entries impact  
> > each other,
> > earlier determining later, and later impacting 
> earlier, so that  
> > the record
> > changes over time.
> >
> > It must be larned, and remembered that Early and
> Late, and   
> > Intermediate and
> > Dwarf, to cite but two instances, do not mean the
> same thing in   
> > the 1939
> > Check List as they mean today.
> >
> > As for the color chart, it was never supposed to
> do anything other   
> > than
> > indicate broad color patterns and I find it does
> that very well.  
> > Here  again, one
> > must learn to use it, and respect its limitations.
> >
> > For those needing more intricate descriptions, AIS
> published elaborate
> > descriptions written by Robert Sturtevant  in the
> Bulletin at  
> > several  intervals
> > through the 1920s and 1930s. These were the basis
> of the  
> > descriptions  in
> > Rainbow Fragments by Shull. Period catalog
> descriptions--and period
> > photographs--are a real trap, of course, because
> the description is  
> > unlikely to  mention less
> > agreeable features and it was hardly unusual for
> commercial  
> > sources  to use
> > the same photograph in several catalogs to
> represent different   
> > cultivars.
> > Caveat emptor holds for the responsible scholar,
> too.
> >
> > I have heard people vent frustration about these
> issues for  years.
> > Accordingly, as I said, I am working on a check
> list  of selected  
> > pre WWW2 bearded
> > cultivars having all the information you need, 
> and none of the  
> > stuff you don't
> > want, with full  descriptions,  where reliable
> information along  
> > that line is
> > available.
> >
> > Cordially,
> >
> > Anner Whitehead
> > Richmond VA USA
> >
> >
> >
> > ************************************** Get a sneak
> peek of the all- 
> > new AOL at
> > http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
> >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To sign-off this list, send email to
> majordomo@hort.net with the
> > message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to
> majordomo@hort.net with the
> message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index