This is a virus free zone. I am continuing the discussion I added here previously. I have added headings so if one heading bores you, scroll on to the next. I have to confess that this exercise has done my brain in and chaos may have crept in in places….. There will also be more to come in the next post, in case you have been left out so far.

Photographs are of the Piet Oudolf plantings at Hauser and Wirth, Somerset, UK, taken in September 2015. Thanks as ever to Charles Hawes for his.

Is the New Perennial movement changing how people see?

Whitney Ross-Barris Perception of and taste for/in art and architecture changes and evolves constantly and I think both art and architecture are quite present and elemental in garden design. I believe it’s just a matter of our being aware of that kind of structure within a wilder motif. Like people who were used to classic landscape painting seeing a Turner or a Cezanne or a Van Gogh for the first time.

I find myself – now really into this style of garden design – actually now seeing the art and architecture within the untouched countryside around where I live. It’s remarkable!

Anne Wareham to Whitney Ross-Barris That was certainly once true. Now the images are ubiquitous does that change its meaning?

Whitney Ross-Barris to Anne Wareham I suppose it depends on how WE change and how our perception has evolved.

Anne Wareham to Whitney Ross-Barris But these changes take place also in the wider world as part of our culture, don’t they? No-one (well, not many) responds to a Turner as his contemporaries did….

Whitney Ross-Barris to Anne Wareham I wouldn’t say no one. It’s also true that we evolve (or I suppose some don’t) at different paces and often according to our exposure to change.

And also, I don’t think you ‘seem stupid’ at all for not enjoying the look or feel of a certain garden or movement of design. (The ‘stupid’ was actually about whether a lack of structure is what characterises New Perennial. Editor.) Just as I wouldn’t admonish you for not connecting in the same way with a piece of art that I myself enjoy. We all have different tastes. Vive la flippin difference!

Personally, I’m very drawn to the New Perennial movement as I spent many of my formative years running around on a wild Saskatchewan prairie and through many Ontario meadows. It touches on a very deep longing for that time and place. And the way the movement is evolving to adapt to our changing environment (including native plants for restorative purposes as well as for local pollinators, for example) is something I hope to champion as well. But these things are also possible in a trillion forms of garden design.

Anne Wareham to Whitney Ross-Barris It was only Hermannshof that left us cold. I’ve loved Trentham and Hauser and Wirth for example. Interesting that Hermannshof is more of a usual garden than the other two.

But our reaction to Hermannshof left me with many questions – mostly because it’s very difficult to get beyond expressions of enthusiasm into critical discussion of any garden and thus our learning and understanding is always constrained. Interesting that there has been so much lively discussion on this topic but I think it would be impossible to get the same depth and breath of discussion about the merits of any particular garden/landscape/planting.

IS the New Perennial Movement about low maintenance and ‘naturalism’?

Anne Wareham to Whitney Ross-Barris Would you see the NP movement as defining the way ahead for design, or just as an aspect of contemporary design?

Whitney Ross-Barris to Anne Wareham Good question! I’m such a novice that I dare not predict that. But I do think there is a way of interpreting it to fit into many styles of garden design. My understanding is that it’s a more ecologically responsible way of growing and planting – making room for permaculture, restoration and reclamation of natural habitats and pollinator population – rather than traditional clearing and cutting and taming and hemming in. But who knows, perhaps it’s a trend? I hope not, but as I said, I’m just a rookie. With a lot of words! And I – personally – like the look and feel and aim of what I understand of the NP movement.

Anne Wareham Whitney to Ross-Barris It’s interesting that people see it as evolving that way, for sure. But I imagine that all aspects of garden design are heading that way? It seems necessary. (Though there may be some radicals out there somewhere with a totally different perspective!)

Vanessa Gardner Nagel to Anne Wareham Intriguing observation, Anne. I can’t speak for others, but personally I find that that the best versions of this garden style involve some kind of structure amidst all of the froth. That can be architecture, art, or structural plants. Plants could be bold, herbaceous foliage, dense deciduous shrubs, or evergreen columns, topiary or hedging. I believe that the maintenance regimen & budget drives the extent of perennials to some degree – especially for large public or botanic gardens.

In the gardens I design I like to establish ‘collections’ of perennials per area and establish a rhythm of evergreen structure that provides cohesion throughout the garden. I believe it’s crucial to the design of a garden to remember to use basic design principles to create the most enjoyable gardens.

Dilip Lakhani thx Anne, a fascinating thread. The classic principles of giving order and designing something that is readable still apply. Can’t get away from it – includes solids/voids – negative spaces/positive spaces – arrival/departure points – programmatic schema – setting the frame etc. ‘Naturalistic’ planting design still occupies this world and bounces off them.

Martin Owen I live on an island off an island. There is a diversity of biota and microbiota at my doorstep.I do not have to go far to see wilderness. However native flora is impoverished because it is an island. I believe gardens should have a narrative that the accidental ordering of flora by animal and human and climate dispersal over 10,000 yrs since the ice age does not create. An increased palette of exotic plants, ownership of shears, secateurs and a hoe enable me to explore different narratives. It is also my playground.

Anne Wareham It seems that some people might wish those tools away…

Mary Becker I think that there may be a preference for eliciting a general feeling of movement, within the garden, as opposed to a feeling of stasis. And that intent not only applies to spatial movement, but also movement within time. The “wild garden” flows. The “wild garden” evolves.

Anne Wareham to Mary Becker That’s an interesting perspective. Do you also see the ‘wild garden’ evolving on its own? Where is the hand of the maker for you?

Mary Becker to Anne Wareham I hesitate to reply, because I don’t fully understand your question. Do you mean the hand of the garden’s designer? If you mean the person who designed the garden, the designer’s hand should be invisible.

Or if you are asking whether or not the garden should be designed, or just scattered willy-nilly, I would say that the very best of these gardens have a deep sense of design beneath their appearance of a wild garden. But they are so skilfully designed, that the designer’s hand is nearly invisible to the average person.

Anne Wareham Mary Becker You see this invisibility as a mark of a good New Perennial garden? And the role of structure?

Mary Becker to Anne Wareham I am an artist, so in my view, the last thing that the viewer should think of, when they look at a “wild garden” is the hand of man. That is true of any work of art. Eventually the viewer will realise that there was a designer of the garden, but that should be the last impression the viewer has.

Anne Wareham Mary Becker Most works of art are naturally associated with their makers – no-one imagines that a painting by Turner painted itself. I suppose art can go to an extreme – you could sculpt a rock and leave it looking as if the result was created simply by natural process, but that’s unusual. So why would we want to imagine that a made landscape or garden had no designer?

Mary Becker to Anne Wareham Structure is necessary, but the designer’s ability to deflect attention away from recognising that structure is the measure of the designer’s skill level.

Art and design are all about directing the viewer’s attention. It is a lot like being a magician.

Beth Goodnight The thing I like about design is that it is always changing. Think of design for fashion. Fashion design changes. Art design changes. Engineering design changes. Stuff just evolves over time… like science and evolution.

Even if we have a landscape design, it changes with the seasons and over time. I welcome the change. And I particularly welcome the meadow movement. One thing I particularly love about the New Perennial movement is that it IS varied. Each designer puts their own spin on it depending on their taste and their location.

Anne Wareham to Beth Goodnight And NP will also keep changing… Yep, that’s life. When you say that about the NP movement, what are you comparing it with which you find more static?

Beth Goodnight to Anne Wareham I wasn’t singling out NP as being about change vs static. I don’t think design (any design) is static at all. That is my point. NP is a new(er) style of design. A ‘change’ from some previous styles. People who find it jarring just aren’t used to it yet. 🙂

But change is really not what I was referring to when I said I love NP because it is varied. By varied I mean, each installation is unique because of the owner’s choice of plants that suit their site, climate, soil, etc… AND how they integrate the NP section of their installation with the rest of their landscape. Hope that made sense. 🙂

Anne Wareham to Beth Goodnight It does, Beth. I guess it’s just hard to then distinguish anything particular about NP…

Elliott Forsyth

It’s based on values like sustainability, low maintenance, beauty, natural abstractions, habitat based, multi season performance, natural looking plants. When you make your choices with these type of criteria in mind it automatically gives it a certain character and makes it distinct. I agree with you, Anne, that I am being broad, but on purpose. I think it was the thinking and values that gave birth to the movement in the first place that help to define it.

As for Anne’s initial question/comment about “lack of structures”, in my view one of the key elements separating designed plant communities from wilderness (or semi-natural communities) is structure. Structure often takes the form of a strong frame provided by walls, paths, and the like. And plant selection and combination also create structure: a limited number of species coming to the visual fore at different times of the year that are harmoniously complementary or contrasting in form and colour.

Achieving good, effective plant combinations that work well as communities of living organisms, have compatible macro-environmental and management requirements, and provide more or less continuous visual, tactile and/or olfactory interest with a good sense of structure through the seasons is not easy: a lot of science, experience, and craft are required on the part of the designer.

Erik Fleischer Re. New Perennial movement/naturalistic planting design being low-maintenance, by Piet Oudolf’s own account, many (or most) of the plantings he’s designed are actually high-maintenance. James Hitchmough, Nigel Dunnett, Peter Korn, and others tend to design with low maintenance requirements in mind. So, I wouldn’t say that low-maintenance is inherent to naturalistic plantings.

However, I believe that the type of maintenance is something that most naturalistic plantings share. Plants are not treated as isolated units with individual management requirements, but as members of true communities that are managed as such. So, for instance, rather than having gardeners clipping a plant here and another one there, feeding some plants that are supposedly “heavy feeders”, or watering isolated plants that have different moisture requirements from their neighbours, not only are plants selected that have very similar macro-environmental requirements (since they will coexist in the same combination of soil and climate), but interventions are planned for the entire community – cutting or mowing or burning once a year, weeding during establishment, etc.

Taste?

Erik Fleischer to Anne Wareham Anne, I’d say that if the planting doesn’t ‘read’ as a garden, if it feels too messy to be aesthetically pleasing, then perhaps the garden is in need of an intervention (even the most harmonious designed plant communities require management), or the design wasn’t very successful (poor design or implementation).

Mind you, our sense of aesthetic is learned and socially influenced, if not determined. We develop and appreciation for wine and the various nuances in taste and aroma that influence our enjoyment – someone having wine for the first time is more likely to go “ugh” than “ahh”. We also learn to ‘read’ and appreciate art, music, cinema, etc. A great garden design may evoke a visceral response from someone experiencing it up close, but I’d say you’re more likely to enjoy a garden if you’ve learned to ‘read’ and appreciate the various elements and nuances that make it great.

I live in the Pacific Northwest, in a cool Mediterranean climate with extremely dry summers. Mediterranean gravel gardens make much more sense here than English-inspired gardens with lawns and rhododendrons and roses. Yet there are very few of the former and most people here still seem to react more positively to the latter, as it’s what they’ve grown up seeing – it’s what they’ve learned to ‘read’.

Anne Wareham to Erik Fleischer Yes, quite right. It’s the whole problem with people saying ‘it’s all a matter of taste’ – when taste has actually been educated. (Between you, me and the bloody rhododendron I believe it’s the ones who claim ‘it’s all a matter of taste’ who have none.) And yes too, tastes evolve. Strangely we tend to lose our ability to appreciate that which has just gone, until it becomes sufficiently historical, and then we can re-appreciate the best of whatever it was.

Anne Wareham to All – I’m open to making corrections and amendments if anyone feels misrepresented or that I’ve failed badly to make sense.