Re: OT: Rare plants
- To: iris-talk@onelist.com
- Subject: Re: [iris-talk] OT: Rare plants
- From: H*@aol.com
- Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 18:17:53 EDT
From: HIPSource@aol.com
In a message dated 7/15/99 5:18:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
glsimmon@swbell.net writes:
<< Anner, I always considered "rare" to be cooked just a little less than I
prefer! >>
Tee hee, darling boy.
Seriously, I do wonder what people mean by this sometimes. A catalog with a
mailing list of four thousand comes in containing a "rare" plant. How many
you figure they got? Three, twenty, coupla hundred? A cutting edge new
nursery pops up with stuff hitherto unheard of and that in itself is
riveting.One of the pundits raves about some weed that has sported and
creates instant demand beyond all measure of the plant's intrinsic worth. An
insider slips one a piece of something that is making the elite rounds with
the whispered instructions not to give it to just everyone, and two years
later it is in the corner plant shops with the F1 pansies. The rare gets dug
up because it is no longer sufficiently rare, or because something rarer
becomes available. It rarely--no pun intended--seems to have much to do with
conservation, which you would think it might. We all get sick of seeing the
same stuff at the local nurseries, and in our gardens, and we want to grow
interesting things, certainly, but I do wonder what group of factors plays
into our desire to have plants seem to be defined first as hard to come by.
Just a rhetorical question.
Anner Whitehead
HIPSource@aol.com
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
Books, music, auctions, and more. Amazon.com!
<a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/Amazon6 ">Click Here</a>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
