RE: TB:old-fashioned but not historical
- To: "'i*@egroups.com'"
- Subject: RE: [iris-talk] TB:old-fashioned but not historical
- From: M* M*
- Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 13:00:00 -0400
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
FREE HILARIOUS AND ENTERTAINING NEWSLETTERS FROM SHAGMAIL.COM
Subscribe to any of Shagmail's 70 newsletters FREE and get fun and
amusements in your inbox! Satisfaction Guaranteed!
http://click.egroups.com/1/8922/0/_/486170/_/968173432/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
The Europeans prefer the old-fashioned look still. Sutton's introduces some
of Cy Bartlett's stuff (from England). While his introduction pictured in
this year's catalogue from Sutton's has ruffles, I've seen some of his past
stuff which has really clean lines.
Maureen Mark
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (zone 4)
> Hi all,
>
> Are there any TBs that combine old-fashioned flower form (no
> ruffling, falls that hang down rather than sticking out horizontally)
> with traits (like rebloom or better branching and bud count) not
> found in historical cultivars? Is anyone breeding for this
> combination of traits, which is what I'd most like to see in a
> garden plant? I'm afraid that when it comes to bearded irises,
> I'm naive enough about judging criteria not to know if such plants
> could pass muster in a show, but, to use a welI-worn phrase, I
> know what I like. I'm a garden designer who's not especially
> knowledgeable about irises, but with a taste in flowers that
> generally runs to the more "natural," species-like look (for
> example, I generally prefer the look of siberians to the TBs). Am I
> alone in this, or does everyone else who likes TBs also go in for
> flounces and ruffles?
>
> Don Galbreath, Boston, Ma. (Z6)
>
>
>
>
