My Florida Trip, Part 1: Horticultural Beauty at Universal Studios Theme Park?

I'm just back from the trip to Central Florida that my husband, two children and I made last week (the last flight from Chicago was delayed by snow and we didn't get home until 4:00 am Sunday morning, which was somewhat tiring).

But the trip was lots of fun: we spent our first day in Florida at the Universal Studios "Islands of Adventure" theme park, then drove to the east coast of Florida, where we spent time on the beach and visited the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, and then we returned to Orlando for a day at Disney's Magic Kingdom. I also made my family spend a couple of hours at a botanical garden in Orlando.

After the long months of midwest winter, I was very happy to be able to see green grass and trees again, and as a gardener and garden blogger, I paid attention to (and took photos of) the plants that grow in Florida, many of which are very different from those I can grow here in Iowa.

I wasn't expecting much in the way of horticultural beauty at theme parks, but I was pleasantly surprised by Universal Studios. The level of thoughtful and creative planning of garden areas, as well as the excellence of their maintenance certainly contributed to my enjoyment of the day I spent there. And it turns out that Universal Studios has won an award for their efforts at sustainability as well.

The park is divided into different theme areas, which were marked by different horticultural styles. Let me share a few photos of outstanding areas:

Seuss Landing

The use of exaggerated topiary shapes goes well with the style of the Dr. Seuss books. This delightful creature looks right at home here.

The Truffula trees from "The Lorax" are enhanced
by clumps of ornamental grasses.

The lollipop topiaries in the background are suitably silly, as is this clever faux-topiary tree
that is actually a series of planters containing rainbow-hued annuals. Very creative.

These orange snapdragons (one of my favorite annual flowers) look stylistically right in this setting, and are blooming prolifically. Someone creative and competent is responsible for the plantings in the entire Seuss Landing area.

Harry Potter's Wizarding World

Hogwarts and Hogsmead are planted mainly with northern-looking conifers, which are appropriate to the Scottish setting of the Harry Potter books, but which do seem to be struggling a bit in the hot and humid Florida climate. 

More conifers.

A wholly artificial stage-set "shop" from Hogsmead: "Dogweed & Deathcap Exotic Plants and Flowers." The front windows of the shop, which cannot be entered, contain "plants" that can be used for spells and charms, and include a moving Mandrake Root (complete with grumpy little face) in the pot in the right window. (photo from Flickr,  sdettling)

A photo of the "Continental Divide" between the northern British conifer-filled world of Harry Potter on the left,
and the lush tropical foliage-filled Jurassic Park on the right. 

Jurassic Park

The Jurassic Park area contains what must be acres of lushly-foliaged scenes that are meant to evoke the ancient flora of prehistoric periods. Apparently, there actually were no palm trees during the Jurassic Period; ferns, ginkgoes, cycads and conifers flourished at that time (but one can hardly blame the designers of these gardens for including a few palm trees).

More Jurassic foliage. Very healthy looking plants. I can only imagine how much watering, cutting out of dead leaves and other horticultural maintenance must take place every morning before the park opens.

More exotic looking foliage, with an occasional flower.

An example of the attention to detail in Universal Studios park:
The concrete paths in Jurassic Park were impressed with palm frond
shapes while the concrete was still wet, to add a fossil-like look
to what otherwise would have been modern-looking concrete paths.

Other Areas

The Lost Continent area of the park is a vague mixture of middle-eastern Sinbad-inspired
areas and South American archaeological-looking areas.

Some xeriscape-looking plants in a gravel bed.

A tree with exotic-looking fluffy buds on it.
Someone obviously has taken time to think of unusual
plants to include in the park. Bravo for these unknown
horticultural planners, and for all the dedicated
and competent maintenance staff!

In my next post, I will share some photos of my trip to the botanical garden in Orlando that I managed to visit. Thanks for reading! -Beth

Book Review: "Refresh Your Garden Design with Color, Texture & Form" by Rebecca Sweet

"Refresh Your Garden Design with Color, Texture & Form" by Rebecca Sweet was published late in 2013, but my library didn't receive it until last month. It actually turned out to be good timing for me though, as winter is the best time to think about making changes in your garden, so there is plenty of time to think things through before spring comes.

And Sweet, a garden designer in Northern California, has many helpful suggestions for gardeners to think about:

Her first chapter deals with seeing what's in your garden, something that most gardeners might think they do already, but actually have trouble doing. It's hard for us to look at something we see every day and notice problem spots that could be improved. Things like gaps where plants have died (we may still think of a spot as "belonging" to the plant that died so we haven't planted something else there); eyesores such as utility boxes, garbage cans or an unattractive structure in our neighbor's yard; or clashing colors between neighboring plants.

The best way to really see our gardens, according to Sweet, is take photos of every area and study them dispassionately, like a disinterested outsider. It's amazing what we can see in photos that we can't see in person. Also, another trick is to use photo editing software to make our photos black and white, so that we aren't distracted by colors, and we can focus on shapes and textures in garden areas. And using a marker to draw on photos can help us visualize new plant shapes in place. This first chapter is probably the most useful in the whole book.

This series of photos from the book shows how black and white photos can reveal a lack of contrasting textures,
especially in the first pair of photos.

The second chapter focuses on color theory, covering adjacent, complementary, split-complementary and monochromatic color schemes in the garden, using a color wheel and garden photos for illustration.

The third chapter shows how different textures can be used to create interest in the garden. This is where the black and white photos really help, and the book shows examples of garden areas in which too many plants of the same texture used together can be boring, despite the differing colors of those plants or leaves. A helpful tip for me in this section was to use bright yellow and chartreuse leaf colors to lighten up shady areas, but to use a higher ratio of fine textures to bold to keep those darker areas looking open and airy. I think I will use this strategy when working on my border against the north side of my house, which is currently shady and formless. A bit of leaf sunshine might be just the answer for this spot.

An example of the textured garden that Sweet advocates.

The last instruction chapter covers form, showing how including different shapes can take a garden area from bland to interesting. Sweet includes photos that demonstrate how the addition of a few spiky-shaped or tall plants can add life to a monotonous garden bed. She also discusses how to balance the visual weight of plants, and how triangular placement of plants adds continuity and visual depth to the garden.

A final chapter provides an annotated and illustrated list of about 80 recommended annuals, perennials, trees and shrubs. 42 of the 71 perennials she suggests are hardy in my Zone 5 garden, which I suppose isn't terrible, considering that the author gardens in California. However, most of the plants lean toward being foliage plants, which this flower lover finds somewhat joyless.

All foliage and few flowers. I do like the bright golden color of the sedum in the bottom right corner, and there is a
rhododendron at top left, which is beautiful.

I understand that every garden needs what she calls "workhorse" plants, which serve as structural plants for most of the year. And the book is about adding color, texture and form to our gardens, not about flower gardening. But I still couldn't help feeling that there just weren't enough flowers in this book, either in her suggested plants or the garden photographs. The book had many hints that will help me in addressing my shady north-facing border, but in my sunnier areas I want more blooms. Perhaps one day when I'm a more mature gardener, I will value foliage over the fleeting loveliness of blossoms, but I haven't reached that stage yet.

Who's afraid of color and flowers? Perhaps what I love is simply out of style these days. This is one of only a couple of photos shown in the book that really wowed me. (And it was given only as an example of complementary colors.)

But this is simply a matter of my personal taste in gardens, not a reflection on the effectiveness of this book. All in all, it's a very helpful book. Gardeners who feel a nagging dissatisfaction with their gardens but can't quite figure out what can be done to improve them should start by reading "Refresh Your Garden Design." It will provide many answers.

(Please note: I am out of town this week and have pre-scheduled this post. I won't be able to respond to any comments until I return. Thanks for reading!)

Fertilizer Friday: February 21

It's again Fertilizer Friday at http://www.tootsietime.com, and although I've again been hard-pressed to find any flowers around my house this week, I'll do my best:

A strange hibiscus that I've had for some years now:
The flowers were all red at first, but then these yellow
and red ones started blooming after a few years.
They must be from the root stock, but I think
it makes the plant so much more interesting that I
haven't tried to remove the root growth.

Here's one of the red flowers, a couple days after the yellow one bloomed.
You can see the faded yellow one at top right still on the plant.

My husband's mother gave all the women in her
family paperwhite bulbs for Christmas. I'd read
that the smell was off-putting, but these actually
don't smell too strongly and I kind of like them.
This ends the real flowers section of this post.

Desperate for other flowers to include, I remembered the
pipe cleaner flowers that my daughter made last year.
Here's one bouquet...

...and here's another. They may not be real, but I've found that
they're actually a good enough substitute to get me through
the winter without buying cut flowers.

One more of real flowers, outside, so we'll remember how lovely
spring will be when it arrives. 

We'll be in Florida all next week, so I may not post again for a bit, but I'll try to have some good photos of Disneyworld flowers when I return. Happy Fertilizer Friday!

Are Gardens Art? (A Rambling Discourse on Philosophy of Gardens)

Chloris at "The Blooming Garden" asks a question that a number of other (mostly English) gardeners have asked in the past few years: Is Gardening an Art Form?

My immediate answer was: of course! At their highest level, gardens certainly must be art. What gardener hasn't stood in a beautifully composed garden and marveled at the skill and artistic vision of the gardener who made it?

But it's true that gardening is different than the traditional arts recognized by philosophers: Architecture, Sculpture, Painting, Music and Poetry; as Chloris mentions.

Google tells me that art is:   

"the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power" (my bold)

Some gardens might indeed meet this definition. But perhaps "primarily for their beauty or emotional power" is not often met, since most gardens have a practical design purpose.

Wikipedia says:

"in modern usage the fine arts, where aesthetic considerations are paramount, are distinguished from acquired skills in general, such as the decorative or applied arts." which are: "industrial design, graphic design, fashion design, interior design and the decorative arts ... (and) architecture and photography."

Perhaps gardening is a decorative or applied art? Architecture, interior design and garden design all try to solve problems of space, making a place both more functional and more beautiful.

A few thoughts:

Some reasons that gardening should NOT be considered an art:

1. Gardening is usually not intended as an artistic expression. In order for something to be art, it must be intended as such. Most people garden for other reasons: to grow vegetables, to collect rare species, to beautify our surroundings, to solve design problems with our yards, to have flowers for our tables and our souls, to mimic the gardens of people we admire so as to mimic their "lifestyle".
2. Gardens are temporary and rarely outlast the gardener.
3. Gardens are always changing and don't look the same from one day to the next. How can they be art if they're never the same, or what was intended?
4. Gardening is a skill, like architecture is a skill. Although some architecture might be considered art, architecture is a licensed profession that serves a practical purpose (can architecture be art if the roof leaks or the building collapses, killing people?). Most architecture results in office buildings and big-box stores, not great artistic statements.
5. Gardens provide a use: they are usually a setting for something, such as a house or public building, or they provide a pleasant space for a homeowner or public garden/park visitor.
6. Plants do not always (or even often) cooperate with the gardener, growing in the ways intended by the gardener. Plants grow of their own accord, not because we make them (although we have improved many plants to be more floriferous, hardier and more disease-resistant). But if we don't control our medium, how can we be artists?
7. Art should be recognized as art apart from any knowledge of the artist. But would we admire Sissinghurst so greatly if we didn't know the romantic story of Vita Sackville-West? What about Pearl Fryar's topiary garden in South Carolina -- how can we fully appreciate his fantastic and improbable garden without understanding his humble life?
   
   

   

   Pearl Fryar's topiary garden in Bishopville, SC (wikipedia)

8. Gardening, like interior design, is subject to trends and fashions, and many gardeners simply want to have a fashionable garden surrounding their fashionable house, so that others will admire their taste.
9. Most gardens of merit are "inspired by" (or have set pieces directly copied from) other gardens. Many beautiful gardens have White Gardens (including mine), double herbaceous borders and formal boxwood-edged beds. Are these arrangements simply standard "materials" of gardens, or are they derivative design? And does art need to be original for it to be art?
10. Many gardens are meant to mimic nature, and nature is not art, because it is not designed and executed by the human hand.
11. Yet other gardens are made to show that we can conquer nature. Is this "reactionary art," or are we simply improving our surroundings?
12. Just because something is beautiful or inspiring, doesn't mean it is art.
13. Do gardens inspire real feelings like art, or simply admiration of skill or joy at the beauty of living plants?
14. Do gardens express and widely communicate the ideas or feelings of the gardener? Or are they simply beautiful plant-filled places that we enjoy?

Reasons that gardening SHOULD be considered an art form:

1. Gardening uses, as Chloris mentions, the same artistic principles of colour, shape, texture and form.
2. Just because something is just a hobby for most people doesn't mean it can't be art for some people.
3. Yes, gardens change over time, but so does much art: Paintings degrade and lose their color; so do sculptures -- ancient Greek sculptures were often brightly painted when they were made, but are they not considered art simply because their appearance has changed over time (a lot longer time)?

   

   Is this not art, even though it appears
   different to us today than it did when
   it was first created?
   Winged Victory of Samothrace
   (flickr, jay8085)

4. Gardens may not be permanent, but what art truly is? Ikebana (what we call "the Japanese art of flower arranging" but what apparently really means "flowers kept alive"), developed as a Buddhist expression of the beauty of nature and is clearly considered by many to be an art. And would a beautiful sculpture in ice be considered art, or would it have to be made of stone to count? What about paper mache or another more temporary medium? As long as a garden is documented in books and photos, the ideas and feelings behind it can still be accessed by others long after the garden and the gardener are gone.

   

   Is this art? Many think so. (wikipedia)

5. Few gardeners can make a great garden; it takes horticultural and artistic skill (and not a little money and time), just as few artists can make great art, which takes talent, technical skill and artistic vision (and time and money to develop skill).
6. Gardens, like art, have been used for sacred purpose, just as art has. An arrangement of trees or rocks was a sacred thing and meant something to pagans thousands of years ago, as well as in eastern art more recently.

   

   Ancient yew tree at St. George's Church,
   Wiltshire. (geograph.org.uk, Miss Steel)

7. We don't make gardens simply for their utility. Growing plants in a creative arrangement that expresses our idea of beauty is something more than simply growing vegetables to eat them or maintaining a lawn and plantings for the value of our houses. 
8. Other cultures have considered gardening to be the highest of arts: Japan and Islamic cultures, to name two.
9. So many artists have also been gardeners that the two must surely be related, at the very least.

   

   Great artists, great gardens.
   How could this be anything but art?
   Monet himself said: “My garden is
   my most beautiful masterpiece.”
   (Claude Monet in his garden, 1922.)
   (wikipedia)

10. There are certainly styles of gardens, just as there are styles of art, and both follow trends.
11. Art moves people to feel something, and great gardens do this too. They at least inspire feelings of what is good and noble in humanity and nature.



Does this not inspire us to nobler thoughts and deeds?
Nishat Bagh Mughal Gardens, India (wikipedia)





12. I would wager that the majority of humans, upon seeing a garden such as Giverny or Nishat Bagh, would recognize it as art, even if some philosophers don't. Doesn't that make it art?

In the end, does it matter if some philosophers don't consider gardens to be art? To what end would that help gardening or make gardeners feel more respected? If a number of influential gardeners decide that gardening is an art and develop standards with which to judge it artistically (as some are), then perhaps that means some gardens are art, albeit a distinctly different kind than painting or poetry. Perhaps the highest of the arts.

http://www.independent.co.uk/property/gardening/can-a-garden-be-a-work-of-art-2019127.html

Dreaming of Spring and the MOBOT

Hi-Ho, still February here in Iowa. But my thoughts are turning to the visits my husband and I take once or twice each year to visit friends in St. Louis, where, if the spring weather permits, we always try to see the incredibly beautiful gardens at the Missouri Botanical Gardens (the MOBOT). The first time we visited there was in spring 2010, and we were astounded at the magnificent Japanese garden and other garden areas.

Here are a few photos, so you too can enjoy their beauty:

Like I mentioned, the Japanese Garden, one of the the largest in the US,
is of such stunning beauty that even snapshots look like art.

My husband in the stripes, and our good friend, Eric, under a flowering cherry tree. The petals were wafting down like pink snow and it was truly magical.

Azaleas and water lilies.

Magnificent azaleas and rhododendrons (I can never tell them apart since I can hardly grow either very well here in Iowa). This photo doesn't do justice to the profusion of giant neon domes set in perfectly raked white gravel.

One of the more restrained garden areas. What a sunny spring day!

The Moorish walled garden inside the Temperate House, one of the MOBOT's three conservatories.

A lovely tulip display

Another spring annual display of purple tulips and pansies, backed by azaleas (I think).

I can't highly enough recommend driving down in mid-to-late April (depending on how early spring comes) to see these beautiful spring gardens. The MOBOT has numerous garden areas: Chinese, Ottoman, Bavarian and English woodland gardens; Iris, Hosta, Daylily and Rose gardens; Victorian and Maze gardens; and demonstration Vegetable, Fruit, Fragrance, Bird, Butterfly and Children's gardens.

Also known as Shaw's Garden, named after the merchant who established them in the 1850s, the gardens have an illustrious history (documented in this fascinating book), they maintain a great website that includes a plant information guide for cultivars that grow well in the Midwest, and are without doubt the most beautiful gardens within driving distance of Iowa. I can't wait to see them again this spring!

Fertilizer Friday: February 14

So, I'm joining the "Fertilizer Friday" group at http://www.tootsietime.com/ for their weekly sharing of flower photos (which has nothing directly to do with fertilizer, apparently, only flowers). But it looks like fun, so I'll give it a go.

Since it's February, I don't have anything flowering in my gardens, but I took look around my house and found some (almost) blooms:

My dill plant is just about blooming. Not very showy
flowers, to be sure, but they did smell pretty good!

I'm not even sure whether these are blooms or some other
part of the cactus (or whatever cactus-like plants these
were that Wal-Mart sold me for $1 each several years ago).
But they are colorful things on top of a green, stem-like part
of a plant, so perhaps they could count as "flowers"?

OK, so I'm getting a bit desperate here.
My 10-year-old daughter made this from
an origami kit she received for Christmas,
 and I thought it was quite pretty.

So I'll resort to last year's flower photos. I bought all
these snapdragons (4 flats) at an Amish flower auction
last spring. They were so beautiful and bloomed all over
my yard until several frosts shut them down in November.
They may reseed this spring, however. I'll keep my eyes out....

And one more: blue hyacinths from last April.
I can't wait for spring again!

Happy Fertilizer Friday!

Yep, still winter....

More snow the other day -- it is still February, after all; we're lucky it's not much worse. Here are a few white-on-white photos of our yard, which look interesting because of their graphic quality:

The garden shed and gazebo. The pond is actually
under the snow on the far left, not that you'd guess....

The herb garden, snowed under. The hedges outlining
the formal beds are completely hidden (which I hope
means the boxwoods will have enough snow cover
to survive our severe cold temperatures....

 White house, white snow, white sky.
(There's still a blue sky on our porch ceiling.)

The rainbow border, no rainbow colors today.

Brrr! Only a short "outside kitty adventure" this time.

I hope everyone is keeping warm inside, while reading garden catalogs and dreaming of spring -- only 34 days till March 21st!