On 29/12/05 4:39 pm, in article ,
"Janet Baraclough" wrote:

The message k
from Sacha contains these words:

On 29/12/05 2:13 pm, in article ,
"Janet Baraclough" wrote:

The message k
from Sacha contains these words:

Did anyone see the programme on the Heseltine's arboretum? I thought it
very good because I love seeing what inspires people and how they
make their
gardens. But nine gardeners.........!

Yes I did, I thought he was insufferable, and the soul-less "garden"
deeply disappointing (considering what a fortune in money, labour and
equipment had been put into creating it). Not so much a garden, more of
a s******y.

It IS meant to be an arboretum more than a garden, though! Their passion
seems to be for trees, rather than perennials etc., so I didn't see it as
swanking because the passion seemed genuine. This doesn't mean that I don't
think he gets a helluva kick out of showing it off, either!

Ha, if I'd seen more of the trees (or better grown trees), I might
have enjoyed it more. I didn't think it did come across as "passion for
trees", so much as "passion for one-upmanship". He seemed much more
interested in boasting repeatedly that he had the most important
arboretum (questionable!) ; more (or rarer) varieties of oak (etc etc)
than anyone else, than in actually showing the trees he was boasting
about, and frankly I didn't think the planting was designed to show each
tree to its best advantage either. It was like a tree-zoo, or tree
circus, with sad captive inmates.

I don't think I can agree with that. I didn't think the camera work was
good or sympathetic and I wonder why. Or perhaps I don't. My feeling at
the end of it all was that they, the Heseltines, had a real interest and
belief in what they were doing but that it had not been shown to its best
advantage and that there might have been some hidden agenda, related to the
interviewer's needling, that would explain that. I could be wrong but I'm
not at all sure that I am.

When it came to the sculpture, both H's were more interested in
reminding us "It's a Frink", than in showing off the piece itself, and
the main thing he wanted to mention about the (awful) waterfeecher, was
the high cost.

Yes, I do agree about the Frink thing - I thought that rather awful but then
I don't like that sort of thing so perhaps that makes me less sympathetic.
I'd forgotten that bit - must have blocked it out!

However, I thought he dealt rather well with the slight
and occasional pushiness of his interviewer who tried to solicit his views
on politics and Mrs Thatcher etc. It was, after all, meant to be about his
planting and not his political life so I thought her questions in that
regard rather cheeky.

I had the distinct impression that the presenter found him
insufferable too, and couldn't resist the temptation to prick the
inflated balloon with one or two reminiscent put-downs.

That might well be so but it was unprofessional of her, and was not her job,
IMO and he handled it well, also IMO. I would not have expected him to do
so, frankly. If someone comes to interview you about your arboretum or your
garden or your window box, it is not unreasonable to suppose that they will
stick to that subject and not try to make themselves a reputation as a 'hard
nosed interviewer' on the back of a soft subject. I thought her behaviour
was cheap.

--

Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)