On 23/5/07 09:32, in article , "Broadback"
wrote:

Stan The Man wrote:
In article , Sacha
wrote:

On 22/5/07 20:46, in article
, "Kate Morgan"
wrote:


The program didn't do it for me but maybe it will be better tonight,
cannot
quite put my finger on the reason, have to admit to falling asleep in the
middle and missing some, shouldn't blame the prog. for that I suppose. I
did
see some brilliant iris but did not catch the name of them, must look
more
carefully tonight.

kate

I regret to say that we both nodded off for a few minutes at some point.
I
don't know what it was about the programme - it was just rather flat and
seemed to be to be rather choppy in its format.

--
Sacha

I am so glad that I was not alone in sleeping :-)

kate

Happened again this evening.... Somehow, this year's coverage just isn't
grabbing our attention. I awoke to Chris Beardshaw waxing eloquent and
enthusiastic about grasses and gave up!
I wish I knew enough to figure out what's happening. Is it the presenters -
doubt it because not many changes there - is it the format?

I think it's the script. A bit too contrived, too banal and a bit too
"humorous". Presenters are spending too much time "laughing" at each
other's wisecracks. There is also too much forced/false "excitement".

I wonder if any of the presenters will admit on air to be being
mystified about the RHS' choice for Best Garden... Huge areas without
any plants and totally irrelevant to anyone imho. And sponsored by one
of the main competitors to the overall Chelsea sponsor -- made me
wonder if the RHS had had a falling out with Marshalls and wanted to
give them a smack around the ear.
We have to accept that most gardening programmes, certainly Chelsea, are
not aimed a US (bit boastful that!) but at a mass audience, hence there
is little about gardening. The average TV watcher will barely get their
hands dirty, if they even have a garden, certainly will not want lists
of unpronounceable Latin names. To be fair it is not only gardeners who
pay a TV licence.

I don't see that there's much point in having hours of coverage of THE
showcase for gardeners, plantsmen, growers, nurserymen and designers and not
acknowledging they'd like to know something about the things being
showcased. Those not interested can switch over, switch off or perhaps just
tolerate the few minutes it would take.
The winner of the Best Garden is not of much interest to me because I think
that sort of thing is very subjective. Apparently the Linnaeus garden didn't
win because the trees were in bud, not full flower but that's ow the
designer wanted them. However, I *think* the rules state that if you're
going to show flowering plants they must be in flower.


--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
(remove weeds from address)