Edith Wolford
- To: Multiple recipients of list <i*@rt66.com>
- Subject: Edith Wolford
- From: s*@aristotle.net (J. Michael, Celia or Ben Storey)
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 12:23:13 -0700 (MST)
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
