On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 15:35:30 GMT, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from Flower Bobdew contains these words:

Janet Baraclough writes

He's making the students think for themselves, which frankly GW does not.

But at least they tell us how to put a lawn to bed for the
winter...*every* year.

That demonstrates the problem I have with GW. It's a constant drip of
"this is the right way and the right place and the right time", the
outdoor equivalent of painting by numbers :-(.

Surely though you recognise that it is helpful to people who are not
horticultural experts? While I recognise that you appear to be
criticising its "there is one correct way" stance it would be very
confusing if they said "you can it this way, but this other way can also
work and in 10% of cases method three will work." From what I can see
they do make appropriate distinctions where climatic or soil conditions
may make a particular plant a waste of time or at least very hard work.
We all have to start somewhere and learn from experience - GW wouldn't
work if it tried to pass on huge amounts of knowledge in 30 minutes.

Looking at the lawn issue I have yet to read a gardening book that does
not say Autumn is a good time to tend to your lawn in terms of improving
its drainage and top dressing it. What's the harm in giving an
audience, that I am sure changes over the years, a repeat of the advice?

There is endless criticism of all gardening programmes on this group but
I've yet to see anyone define what would make a good gardening
programme. Perhaps I've missed the thread that did?
--
Paul C