Re: Re: TB: old-fashioned but not historical
- To: i*@egroups.com
- Subject: Re: [iris-talk] Re: TB: old-fashioned but not historical
- From: D* K*
- Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 21:32:56 -0400
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates
of 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Ongoing APR* and no annual fee!
Apply NOW!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9146/0/_/486170/_/968376827/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
>> Is anyone breeding for this
>> combination of traits, which is what I'd most like to see in a
>> garden plant?
>
>Not on purpose <g>. There are probably a lot of nice irises with these
>traits that wind up in the compost heap every year, commonly referred to
>as dogs or throwbacks. You are not alone in liking traditional form on
>irises, & because there is quite a bit of interest, I wouldn't be
>surprised if some day some talented back-yard hybridizer starts
>intentionally producing 'modern' traditionals. Somebody like ..<memory
>lapse> who is the person who sent me the email photo of their new
>old-fashioned TB that was sort of like SHAH JEHAN? Dennis Kramb?
Sorry, no, that was not me!
>Because they will LOOK so much like granny irises, new introductions
>will probably sell for about $2 each <g>
>
>And then one day there will be a Modern Traditional Tall Bearded Iris
>Society making waves, established specifically to provide recognition,
>awards etc for these under'dogs'. I can just IMAGINE the fights over
>standards - should the form be most like species, or which decade? My
>own preference seems to be for the forms of the 40s thru the 60s, &
>pallida, but not some of the other species. I guess there would have to
>be classes.
>
>Linda Mann east Tennessee USA zone 7/8
