It's been a busy week around here, so I don't have much garden-related news to report. So, I figured I would chime in on the "plants I hate" debate - what the heck. This will be the first in a series, I would assume, and I reserve the right to change my mind at any time, just like any good gardener. And, of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder,
Have you ever noticed that tulips are always photographed in such a way so that you don't really see the entire plant? Or if you do, the area has been so carefully mulched that you know it's not a home garden. The reason is, a tulip - in its entirety - is an unattractive plant. The foliage always looks ratty and sparse. The flower itself reaches its peak and then the petals all start falling off - one by one. Or, more likely, a spring thunderstorm either knocks off half the petals or batters the entire stem down to the ground.
Part of the problem is that most gardeners don't plant tulips correctly (i.e., in a way that hides their shortcomings). The first big mistake people make is to plant them alone - without something pretty and leafy to cover their "legs." Plant them with some early-spring wildflowers or ferns - anything to hide the hideous foliage.
The second mistake people make is that they plant them singly, or in groups of no more than five. If you have to have tulips, then by all means plant tulips - lots and lots of them, all massed together for maximum impact. If they're not in great big masses, they just look like left-over lollipops that some neighborhood kid stuck in the garden.
To me, there is also a big difference between species tulips and cultivated tulips. Species tulips look like the spring wildflowers they are. Cultivated tulips look like an experiment in gigantism gone bad - a wildly unproportionate cup of petals sitting on top of a spindly stem with two lonely leaves. They just don't look like they belong anywhere in nature. Oddly, I like tulips in a vase, but that's probably for the same reason: They have been taken out of a natural setting and isolated in a vase, inside the house.
The wonderful thing about gardening for yourself, though, is that you can do whatever you damn well please. So, if you like to plant tulips, one by one, in a bed with no groundcover - well, then, do it. It's your garden!
I'm guilty of tulipmania. I hate the ratty leaves, but planted along the very sunny back border of my house, my long-lived Darwin tulips reliably bloom in mid-April every year. They even bloom before my naturalized daffodils and boy, in mid-April, I am SO ready for a flower.
As for plants I hate.... My number one is a blooming smokebush, Cotinus coggygria, YUCK! I love the beautiful foliage and yummy purple color, but cannot stand the blossoms. If I could find a non-flowering variety, I'd be thrilled.
Posted by: Ali | June 19, 2006 at 08:12 AM
Ali: That's what's so great about gardening - you can plant what you like and leave out the rest. And I agree that it's nice to see that color in the spring - I just make do with daffodils and squill (everything else gets eaten up by the squirrels.
And just to prove the point - I really like smokebush and that feathery, ethereal look that the flowers give it. To each her own!
Posted by: Talbin | June 19, 2006 at 01:31 PM
I agree with you about tulips--they are way over-rated, both in the garden and as a cut flower. There is only one exception for me, and that is parrot tulips. I haven't tried to grow them (yet) but I love the crazy look of them.
Posted by: Claire | June 25, 2006 at 03:25 PM
Thank for the affirmation, Claire! I don't think there are many gardeners out there who don't like tulips, so it's good to know I'm not alone.
Posted by: Talbin | June 26, 2006 at 09:51 AM