Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
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.........! -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
looked interesting, anyone know if its open the public like on national garden scheme for example? The lenin statue certainly made me chuckle
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
"Sacha" wrote in message .uk... Did anyone see the programme on the Heseltine's arboretum? An upstart, who not only had to buy all his own furniture*, but also had to plant all his own trees. michael adams *a remark made by Michael Jopling in respect of Heseltine, quoted in Alan Clark's Diaries and often misattributed to Clarke himself. Clark's grandfather was in fact a Glasgow Cotton maunufacturer who founded the family fortune. While his father Sir Kenneth "Civilisation" Clark had to buy his own Castle, Saltwood in Kent, from Bill Deede's family who lost all their money in the Wall St Crash, -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
On 29/12/05 4:10 pm, in article , "michael
adams" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message .uk... Did anyone see the programme on the Heseltine's arboretum? An upstart, who not only had to buy all his own furniture*, but also had to plant all his own trees. But good heavens above, so were many of those who employed Capability Brown or Adam, for example! Where would gardens in this country be now if the rich, landed, nouveau riche etc. etc. hadn't sent plant hunters abroad on their behalf and funded entirely by their own fortunes? You don't have to LIKE someone to admire the work they do, the legacy they leave, do you? Or do you? michael adams *a remark made by Michael Jopling in respect of Heseltine, quoted in Alan Clark's Diaries and often misattributed to Clarke himself. Clark's grandfather was in fact a Glasgow Cotton maunufacturer who founded the family fortune. While his father Sir Kenneth "Civilisation" Clark had to buy his own Castle, Saltwood in Kent, from Bill Deede's family who lost all their money in the Wall St Crash, Tsk. Imagine being successful.......... The whole of English history is full of such stories and incidents. I think it's wonderful - makes it all the richer. Upstart to Duke in two generations - three if they're a bit slow with the hooks and eyes. Remember that old saying about rags to riches to rags in three generations? -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
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) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
"Sacha" wrote in message .uk... On 29/12/05 4:10 pm, in article , "michael adams" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message .uk... Did anyone see the programme on the Heseltine's arboretum? An upstart, who not only had to buy all his own furniture*, but also had to plant all his own trees. But good heavens above, so were many of those who employed Capability Brown or Adam, for example! Where would gardens in this country be now if the rich, landed, nouveau riche etc. etc. hadn't sent plant hunters abroad on their behalf and funded entirely by their own fortunes? You don't have to LIKE someone to admire the work they do, the legacy they leave, do you? Or do you? .... Yes but that was 200 years ago. Those people were true innovators at the time. Nobody objects to that. The point is that by their very nature, trees take time to mature. And so any such scheme will probably need at least 50 years before it will look anything like at its best. It will probably take at least 20 years even, before anyone is any position to decide whether particular plantings or groupings are a success or not. Regardless of who was responsible. Or to put it another way - "Arboretums can make a poor choice for short-term self-aggrandisement" michael adams .... *a remark made by Michael Jopling in respect of Heseltine, quoted in Alan Clark's Diaries and often misattributed to Clarke himself. Clark's grandfather was in fact a Glasgow Cotton maunufacturer who founded the family fortune. While his father Sir Kenneth "Civilisation" Clark had to buy his own Castle, Saltwood in Kent, from Bill Deede's family who lost all their money in the Wall St Crash, Tsk. Imagine being successful.......... The whole of English history is full of such stories and incidents. I think it's wonderful - makes it all the richer. Upstart to Duke in two generations - three if they're a bit slow with the hooks and eyes. Remember that old saying about rags to riches to rags in three generations? -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
Sacha wrote:
On 29/12/05 4:39 pm, in article , "Janet Baraclough" wrote: [...] 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. I'm still not entirely clear what I thought about the prog. It left me with an an uncomfortable feeling, and I'm still not sure why. Yes, I did want to see the trees, not the people (I can get people any day, and I can get politicians simply by switching on the telly or going into the tired old journalist mode). But I did get a strong sense that he was thinking of having produced something beautiful which would last far longer than anything he might have produced if he'd ever been Prime Minister: I respect that unreservedly -- we gardeners, however small, are like that, I hope. For a veteran politician, he seemed surprisingly stiff, to the point of haughtiness, before the camera. I wonder if it was simply that he knew his family were going to be involved, breaking a tabu we should all subscribe to: nobody's children and grandchildren deserve that. Or were we seeing something about the man himself? And, yes, Tiger, I admired the Lenin sculpture too: totalitarian art has an energy we ignore at our peril -- it's seductively scary, and we'd better understand it or we could be swept up by it. -- Mike. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
On 29/12/05 8:04 pm, in article , "michael
adams" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message .uk... On 29/12/05 4:10 pm, in article , "michael adams" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message .uk... Did anyone see the programme on the Heseltine's arboretum? An upstart, who not only had to buy all his own furniture*, but also had to plant all his own trees. But good heavens above, so were many of those who employed Capability Brown or Adam, for example! Where would gardens in this country be now if the rich, landed, nouveau riche etc. etc. hadn't sent plant hunters abroad on their behalf and funded entirely by their own fortunes? You don't have to LIKE someone to admire the work they do, the legacy they leave, do you? Or do you? ... Yes but that was 200 years ago. Those people were true innovators at the time. Nobody objects to that. I bet they did at the time. "Bringing in nasty foreign plants; taking the native apples and fruits out of the mouths of locals........" etc. etc. The point is that by their very nature, trees take time to mature. And so any such scheme will probably need at least 50 years before it will look anything like at its best. And? Don't you plant trees for future generations to enjoy? We do. You seem to be saying that nobody over 20 or 30 at the most, should be planting trees that take any time to mature. I simply cannot grasp that nor do I want to. It will probably take at least 20 years even, before anyone is any position to decide whether particular plantings or groupings are a success or not. Regardless of who was responsible. Or to put it another way - "Arboretums can make a poor choice for short-term self-aggrandisement" But why do you *assume* that planting an arboretum by an intelligent man and his wife are 'short-term self-aggrandisement'? I might not care much for M. Heseltine but I don't think him to be stupid! And why would you assume he will not have 20 years in which to see his arboretum come to fruition? It seems to me that your pov is negative in the extreme. Planting trees for the future to enjoy is why many plant them. We planted a mulberry 4 years ago to commemorate the birth of Ray's grand daughter. We will never see that tree in its wonderful maturity but it appealed rather more than a leylandii, frankly! We are currently planning the planting of some silver birches and starting to think about what might take over from the Cedrus atlanticus when it turns its toes up - and it's at least 150 years old and we are getting the benefit of it, so it seems only fair to try to plant its successor for whoever is here in another 150 years time. That's what planting trees, as opposed to a garden, is about. I don't know if you saw it but there was a programme about Althorp in which Lord Spencer showed a wood of oak trees his xxxtimes grandfather had planted in a patriotic gesture to provide masts for the Royal Naval ships. By the time the trees matured to that point, technology had moved on somewhat but there was this *wonderful* stand of oaks for this generation to enjoy. Talk about thinking ahead, however! -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
On 30/12/05 12:42 am, in article ,
"Janet Baraclough" wrote: snip I can think of several youngish woodland gardens, of similar size and age, planted from scratch by their current owner with no paid help at all, which demonstrate a lot more taste, knowledge and care for trees. Where 25 yr old plantings already look wonderful , and have the proper space, and surroundings, to achieve their full potential at 50. It's only an idle thought and may be quite wrong but when they started, I don't think they, personally, were any sort of experts. In fact, didn't Heseltine come perilously close to going entirely broke and then recovered by going into publishing - not sure. But what I'm thinking is if they *weren't* experts when they started, maybe they did not, in fact, get what was the good advice they thought and perhaps they were 'over sold' deliberately. -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
"Sacha" wrote in message .uk... On 29/12/05 8:04 pm, in article , "michael adams" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message .uk... On 29/12/05 4:10 pm, in article , "michael adams" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message .uk... Did anyone see the programme on the Heseltine's arboretum? An upstart, who not only had to buy all his own furniture*, but also had to plant all his own trees. But good heavens above, so were many of those who employed Capability Brown or Adam, for example! Where would gardens in this country be now if the rich, landed, nouveau riche etc. etc. hadn't sent plant hunters abroad on their behalf and funded entirely by their own fortunes? You don't have to LIKE someone to admire the work they do, the legacy they leave, do you? Or do you? ... Yes but that was 200 years ago. Those people were true innovators at the time. Nobody objects to that. I bet they did at the time. "Bringing in nasty foreign plants; taking the native apples and fruits out of the mouths of locals........" etc. etc. The point is that by their very nature, trees take time to mature. And so any such scheme will probably need at least 50 years before it will look anything like at its best. And? Don't you plant trees for future generations to enjoy? We do. You seem to be saying that nobody over 20 or 30 at the most, should be planting trees that take any time to mature. I simply cannot grasp that nor do I want to. .... I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that if you plant an arboretum now which you expect to look at its best in 20 or 50 years time, you don't invite vistors around in the meantime, in the expectation of recieving plaudits. It will probably take at least 20 years even, before anyone is any position to decide whether particular plantings or groupings are a success or not. Regardless of who was responsible. Or to put it another way - "Arboretums can make a poor choice for short-term self-aggrandisement" But why do you *assume* that planting an arboretum by an intelligent man and his wife are 'short-term self-aggrandisement'? .... Why else would he invite in a television crew to make a one hour programme around 20 years too soon ? Heseltines aroboretum has featured in numerous newspaper articles since it was first mooted around 20 years ago in any case. His whole political career has been an exercise in self-aggrandisement, which is why he always aroused suspicions among the Tory Grandees - he not only tried too hard, but far, far worse, was seen to be be trying too hard. Unlike say the likes of the similarly middle class Heath, Thatcher, or John Major who simply blended in. .... I might not care much for M. Heseltine but I don't think him to be stupid! And why would you assume he will not have 20 years in which to see his arboretum come to fruition? .... Which is the time to invite in the television crew. Not now. That's my point. It's like having cosmetic surgery and expecting everyone to admire the surgeon's handiwork on the day after the operation when your face is maybe swollen to the size of a football and is bright purple in colour. Which somewhat misses the point. Which is what leads one to question the motives of the person having the operation. If Hezza had already been beavering away in secret at his arboretum for the past 50 years without telling anyone about it, and it was now coming to glorious fruition, then if he invited the TV crew in to show off his handiwork and good taste, then good for him. But he didn't. (Not that I actually saw the programme, but when has that ever stopped anyone?) As I understand it, what we got instead was something out of "World of Arboretums" or "Aroboretums R Us". .... It seems to me that your pov is negative in the extreme. Planting trees for the future to enjoy is why many plant them. We planted a mulberry 4 years ago to commemorate the birth of Ray's grand daughter. We will never see that tree in its wonderful maturity but it appealed rather more than a leylandii, frankly! We are currently planning the planting of some silver birches and starting to think about what might take over from the Cedrus atlanticus when it turns its toes up - and it's at least 150 years old and we are getting the benefit of it, so it seems only fair to try to plant its successor for whoever is here in another 150 years time. That's what planting trees, as opposed to a garden, is about. I don't know if you saw it but there was a programme about Althorp in which Lord Spencer showed a wood of oak trees his xxxtimes grandfather had planted in a patriotic gesture to provide masts for the Royal Naval ships. By the time the trees matured to that point, technology had moved on somewhat but there was this *wonderful* stand of oaks for this generation to enjoy. Talk about thinking ahead, however! .... Which makes fitting subject matter for TV programes in 20, 50, or even 200 years time, in other words. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that the Spencers expected to turn a good profit on those oak trees, at the time they planted them either. Despite appearences to the contrary nowadays,(leaking roofs, servant problems, woe is them) magnanimity never came easily to such people at the time, otherwise they would never have amassed the wealth they did. michael adams .... -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
For a veteran politician, he seemed surprisingly stiff, to the point of haughtiness, before the camera. I wonder if it was simply that he knew his family were going to be involved, breaking a tabu we should all subscribe to: nobody's children and grandchildren deserve that. But that was his (very experienced) choice. His extended family were featured on TV, not by accident or chance, but because he chose to parade them, their ponies, their homes provided by him, and an entire stable of garden machinery, like stage props. Similarly, he could have declined the inclusion of any political questions, and didn't. It wasn't live or impromptu or real time, we were being shown what MH chose to reveal. Self-styled emperors often fail to appreciate that public exposure reveals the nakedness of their vanity :-) Earlier in your post you said I'm still not entirely clear what I thought about the prog. It left me with an an uncomfortable feeling, and I'm still not sure why. I agree. I think it's because the programme (supposedly about an arboretum) was being used as vehicles for two quite different agendas by Heseltine and the director. Janet mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeooooooooooooooooooo owwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
Mike Lyle wrote: For a veteran politician, he seemed surprisingly stiff, to the point of haughtiness, before the camera. (snip) That's the way he is. I've met him three times, though never in his garden, and in three different location, situation and circumstance he was as stiff as an ironing board. The last time I saw him was during a rally we had organised in his honnour years after I had met him at the bbc. I was then a very anxious fighting housing activist during the Shity, sorry, City Challenge 'competition' Heseltine had set up for the undesirable communities in his dearest country. He recognised me from somewhere then and I thought he would perhaps then descend from his high and mighty horse and talk to me as a human being. But sadly no. However, I felt I could talk to him and I could see he knew me and that was enough to shut him up. The local paper felt that there was something there too as they took a picture of me carrying my baby, standing in front of Heseltine pointing a finger at me, with the caption "Fighting Maureen tells the Minister the grim reality". I'm not called Maureen though ;o) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
On 30/12/05 10:59 am, in article , "michael
adams" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message .uk... snip And? Don't you plant trees for future generations to enjoy? We do. You seem to be saying that nobody over 20 or 30 at the most, should be planting trees that take any time to mature. I simply cannot grasp that nor do I want to. ... I'm not saying that at all. Then I'm sorry I misunderstood you. What I'm saying is that if you plant an arboretum now which you expect to look at its best in 20 or 50 years time, you don't invite vistors around in the meantime, in the expectation of recieving plaudits. But he didn't. Expect to receive plaudits, I mean. To me, the programme conveyed that - whatever one may think of the man or his methods - we were looking at a work very much in progress. It will probably take at least 20 years even, before anyone is any position to decide whether particular plantings or groupings are a success or not. Regardless of who was responsible. Or to put it another way - "Arboretums can make a poor choice for short-term self-aggrandisement" But why do you *assume* that planting an arboretum by an intelligent man and his wife are 'short-term self-aggrandisement'? ... Why else would he invite in a television crew to make a one hour programme around 20 years too soon ? As I've said - to see a work in progress. To be honest, anyone can go to e.g. Westonbirt and film mature trees. IMO, to see what is happening and how it is happening is more interesting and as we see here, does spark interest and debate, even if it's of the "I wouldn't do it that way myself" type. Heseltines aroboretum has featured in numerous newspaper articles since it was first mooted around 20 years ago in any case. His whole political career has been an exercise in self-aggrandisement, which is why he always aroused suspicions among the Tory Grandees - he not only tried too hard, but far, far worse, was seen to be be trying too hard. Unlike say the likes of the similarly middle class Heath, Thatcher, or John Major who simply blended in. But this was not about his political career and AFAIK, he hasn't got one any more! Surely he's allowed a private life and interest, even if one doesn't like the man himself? And to be fair, he absolutely refused to discuss his political life, even though the interviewer tried to trip him into doing so. ... I might not care much for M. Heseltine but I don't think him to be stupid! And why would you assume he will not have 20 years in which to see his arboretum come to fruition? ... Which is the time to invite in the television crew. Not now. That's my point. It's like having cosmetic surgery and expecting everyone to admire the surgeon's handiwork on the day after the operation when your face is maybe swollen to the size of a football and is bright purple in colour. Which somewhat misses the point. Which is what leads one to question the motives of the person having the operation. If Hezza had already been beavering away in secret at his arboretum for the past 50 years without telling anyone about it, and it was now coming to glorious fruition, then if he invited the TV crew in to show off his handiwork and good taste, then good for him. But he didn't. (Not that I actually saw the programme, but when has that ever stopped anyone?) As I understand it, what we got instead was something out of "World of Arboretums" or "Aroboretums R Us". Well, honestly - if you didn't even see the programme and are now criticising his arboretum for being immature............! It does strike me, perhaps wrongly, that you're going for Heseltine because he's Heseltine the politician-you-don't-like, rather than Heseltine who is creating an arboretum! And the whole *point*, IMO is that it is NOT a mature, finished product. If *I* had to wait another 20 years or whatever to see it, I might not see it at all because I shall be 60 next month! I fully intend to be a blasted nuisance for another thirty years, but who knows........... ... It seems to me that your pov is negative in the extreme. Planting trees for the future to enjoy is why many plant them. We planted a mulberry 4 years ago to commemorate the birth of Ray's grand daughter. We will never see that tree in its wonderful maturity but it appealed rather more than a leylandii, frankly! We are currently planning the planting of some silver birches and starting to think about what might take over from the Cedrus atlanticus when it turns its toes up - and it's at least 150 years old and we are getting the benefit of it, so it seems only fair to try to plant its successor for whoever is here in another 150 years time. That's what planting trees, as opposed to a garden, is about. I don't know if you saw it but there was a programme about Althorp in which Lord Spencer showed a wood of oak trees his xxxtimes grandfather had planted in a patriotic gesture to provide masts for the Royal Naval ships. By the time the trees matured to that point, technology had moved on somewhat but there was this *wonderful* stand of oaks for this generation to enjoy. Talk about thinking ahead, however! ... Which makes fitting subject matter for TV programes in 20, 50, or even 200 years time, in other words. See above. Not everyone on this group is 20 or 30 or even 40 years old. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that the Spencers expected to turn a good profit on those oak trees, at the time they planted them either. Despite appearences to the contrary nowadays,(leaking roofs, servant problems, woe is them) magnanimity never came easily to such people at the time, otherwise they would never have amassed the wealth they did. We will never know, will we? And contrary to your clear prejudice, some of 'such people' were indeed very magnanimous in all sorts of ways and are still. Unlike many celebs however, they don't advertise their good works or generosity quite so openly so perhaps you don't hear about them. It does sound to me as if your pretty vehement criticism of a programme you didn't see and your contempt for the subject itself, even though you haven't seen the arboretum, is a matter of class prejudice and perhaps political, too. I can respect your point of view but I don't agree with it and I think it's moving away from the matter of 'did anyone see/enjoy/dislike the TV PROGRAMME' (which you didn't watch) and into the realms of politics and personal beliefs, so I hope you will excuse me from discussing it with you any further. -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Heseltine arboretum
On 30/12/05 11:16 am, in article ,
"Janet Baraclough" wrote: The message k from Sacha contains these words: On 30/12/05 12:42 am, in article , "Janet Baraclough" wrote: snip I can think of several youngish woodland gardens, of similar size and age, planted from scratch by their current owner with no paid help at all, which demonstrate a lot more taste, knowledge and care for trees. Where 25 yr old plantings already look wonderful , and have the proper space, and surroundings, to achieve their full potential at 50. It's only an idle thought and may be quite wrong but when they started, I don't think they, personally, were any sort of experts. In fact, didn't Heseltine come perilously close to going entirely broke and then recovered by going into publishing - not sure. He's certainly self-made, but my understanding is that he made his publishing fortune before buying that place. He mentioned on the prog, several property steps along the way. When he started the arboretum, he "only" employed one fulltime gardener (which might be "close to broke" in his terms, but not in most peoples :-)) I've never followed British politics very closely in the past - and not the individuals much either, because in Jersey where I lived most of my adult life, we are autonomous and have a totally different system of government. I'm starting to take a bit more interest now and am not impressed with what I see from any quarter. However, Ray, returning to our moutons, seemed to think Heseltine had not been wealthy until fairly recently. I can't now remember but did he say he'd been there for thirty years or so? If so, it would seem his fortunes have increased to enable them to employ a lot more people and to clear and plant a lot more of the land. IOW, they didn't go in there with nine gardeners and a fat chequebook and do the whole thing in one fell swoop. And I do take your point about being relatively broke! I don't know anything at all about his background but if Heseltine has made his own fortune, good for him. -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon (remove the weeds to email me) |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
[IBC] My visit to the national Arboretum in DC | Bonsai | |||
Roses at the National Arboretum | Roses | |||
Arboretum Plant Sale 12-13 April | North Carolina | |||
Arboretum Plant Sale 12-13 April | North Carolina | |||
ANN: Plan Sale May 3 Frelinghuysen Arboretum Morristown NJ | Gardening |