Gardens
In the eye of the beholder
Ursula Buchan
Aa child I was thought to be deaf but, after tests, it was discovered that I suffered only from 'psychological deaf- ness', a condition brought on, I suppose, by a desire to be left in peace by my large family. Visitors to the Chelsea Flower Show exhibit symptoms of a similar condi- tion, 'psychological blindness', seeing onlY what they want to see. It can happen as 3 result of the size and complexity of the, show (Did you see the red delphiniums? 'Oh damn, I missed them, but what did you think of those auriculas?"What auricu- las?') but is as often the manifestation of a desire to leave one's brain uncluttered for the good bits. I spent nearly two and a half days at Chelsea but I confess, willinglY, that I never consciously took in a garden sprayer or hanging basket. At least this year one was not denied the opportunity of seeing everything, if one wanted, by the press of people (except perhaps in front of the display gardens outside the marquee in the middle of the day). We owe that vast improvement to the new entrance arrangements. A great argu- ment has raged this year (didn't y0.0 notice?) as to whether the Royal Horti- cultural Society was right to introduce the idea of an all-ticket show, thereby limiting the numbers by a third. There are some who complained loudly because they thought it unfair that people should have to decide in advance what day they would choose to go to Chelsea (not an argument which would find much favour with the management of the Royal Opera House or the All England Lawn Tennis Club). Others said that, without such a radical move, Chelsea would become quite un- bearable and, anyway, real enthusiasts plan ahead; the only discomfited people would be lounging young Londoners in search of an opening conversational gambit for the next Stockwell drinks party. My view is that we have long taken Chelsea too much for granted. We have paid lip-service to its uniqueness but treated it as if it were just an ordinary flower show. It is far more than that, for its appeal transcends most barriers of age, wealth, and class. It has been tempting to regard the ready accessibility, and relative Cheapness, of the show as a right, not a Privilege, forgetting how fragile is its charm, easily broken by crowds. If 'Chelsea' is to remain in London, so that it can continue to gum up the traffic and afford Londoners an opportunity for an Indulgent smile when they see hydrangeas swaying down the Underground escalators, then numbers must be limited.
The BBC television coverage of the show is now so extensive (three program- mes, not to mention news bulletins) that there may seem less point in making the annual pilgrimage on the train up to town, In cosy proximity to half a diocese of country parsons. However, although these programmes are comprehensive and in- formed, they are a little too respectful to be truly illuminating. What is not wonder- ful is marvellous. The commemorative Video will be even more deferential, if last Year's is anything to go by. The problem is that not everything is wonderfully marvellous: there is plenty of meretricious tat, cheap and expensive, on Show at Chelsea, and it would be naive to expect otherwise. This is a commercial event; the displays which take a year to Plan, and are on public view for four days, are not staged by exhibitors solely out of a desire to share their love of beauty with Other keen gardeners. That said, what is marvellously wonderful is how much there is of real worth.
I particularly feel this about the small specialist nurserymen with displays which do not depend on expensive fripperies like bubble fountains for their effect. Their efforts do not always win gold medals but they please ordinary gardeners. There is Richard Cawthorne, for example, whose stand of charming little violas and violettas Is always in a windswept corner outside the marquee, next to the trailed gang mowers and garden tractors. He will not show in the marquee because he says that his plants like sunshine (although, perhaps, not pet- rol fumes). Still the Chelsea visitors know of him and seek out his forsaken spot, thronging round his little stand of badly laid-out plants, with half-hidden labels, to order the new cultivars raised on his Swanley nursery.
Other small concerns which put on displays of interesting, well-grown plants this year were the Fortescue Garden Trust (hardy flowering and foliage plants), Gold- brook Plants (hostas), Four Seasons (trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants), Foxgrove Plants (herbaceous and rock plants), Pot- terton and Martin (bulbs) and Rupert Bowlby (bulbs). Most impressive was the stand of herbaceous plants, many of them rare or threatened, which was staged by the Cambridge group of the National Council for the Conservation of Plants and Gardens. This exhibit elicited a smug response from `plantsmen' if they found any plants on it which they grew, but it found less favour with those visitors who came to see very colourful displays. Which just goes to show that Chelsea is in the eye of the beholder.
Previous page
