Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
psychology of flower show attraction.
I've been wondering about the considerable differences between the
flower shows in UK that I've been too (Chelsea and Hampton) and those I've now been to in Belgium (Beervelde, Tuin Expo and Gent's Floraline) I find the difference is as much psychological as anything in terms of the impact of the experience. I wonder why is that? Firstly, the Belgium shows, with the exception of Beervelde, which is more like a garden centre market-fest, (rather then show-gardens thing), do not emphasise individuality in the same way as British flower shows do and the impact /experience is notable different. By "not emphasise individuality" I mean for example, in the floraline experience, individual show gardens are not presented as entirely separate from the surrounding area. They are merged into and within the overall design of the exhibit. The other difference is, again, e.g. it was possible to see what looked like a patch of municipal planting, where, something like a roundabout was planted up. All plants looking like the came from the same supplier and planted within the one (unidentified) design (designer) by the same person or team ... and yet, dotted around were various individual official notices identifying an individual or firm, who were presumably involved with that bit. Another huge difference I noticed, apart from the entirely indoors (artificial lighting, pristine plants/flowers) aspect, was the sense of contentment rarely experienced at UK shows at feeling certain I had seen everything. That is because both the Floraline and Tuin Expo shows lay out a cordoned off route to follow and the merging style provides expanses of space from which to observe quite a lot. And yet, neither were Chelsea or Hampton and I can't quite put my finger on why. There wasn't the same Buzz. Might it be the lack of competitive emphasis with the Belgium shows? What curious psychological difference does the merging impact, as opposed to the London shows, where show gardens are definitely more individual? Why does that individuality impact so greatly? Is it the voyeuristic aspect? The competitive rush? The surprise? Or simply the impact of the distinctiveness, akin to separateness of experiences... flavours if you will? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
a.c. wrote:
[...] There wasn't the same Buzz. Might it be the lack of competitive emphasis with the Belgium shows? What curious psychological difference does the merging impact, as opposed to the London shows, where show gardens are definitely more individual? Why does that individuality impact so greatly? Is it the voyeuristic aspect? The competitive rush? The surprise? Or simply the impact of the distinctiveness, akin to separateness of experiences... flavours if you will? A bit unfair to suggest a _voyeuristic_ motive! I think keen gardeners just like seeing gardens: surely there's nothing perverse about that? But there is a strong tradition of confident individuality in British gardening, and I'm quite sure few would bother to cross the road to see a show where the keynote was conformity. I think that's even more important than the competitive aspect. After all, while it is competitive of course, it isn't really competitive in the ordinary way: it's quite possible for every exhibitor to be awarded a gold medal, so in a way the gardens are aiming for some sort of absolute standard more than trying to beat one another. -- Mike. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Lyle wrote: a.c. wrote: [...] There wasn't the same Buzz. Might it be the lack of competitive emphasis with the Belgium shows? What curious psychological difference does the merging impact, as opposed to the London shows, where show gardens are definitely more individual? Why does that individuality impact so greatly? Is it the voyeuristic aspect? The competitive rush? The surprise? Or simply the impact of the distinctiveness, akin to separateness of experiences... flavours if you will? A bit unfair to suggest a _voyeuristic_ motive! Well, I was just trying to stir the pot with ideas. Actually, it's not what I had in mind per say, but I note an element of 'entertainment' in the UK shows, which, although the Belgium ones also gave an element of entertainment (in ways I've never seen), it was not the same thing. (entertainment) I think keen gardeners just like seeing gardens: surely there's nothing perverse about that? Nope, but then not all who go to these shows are keen gardeners, so what is the draw? But there is a strong tradition of confident individuality in British gardening, and I'm quite sure few would bother to cross the road to see a show where the keynote was conformity. Unless, as keen gardenered, the want to see examples of conformity at its best? I think that's even more important than the competitive aspect. After all, while it is competitive of course, it isn't really competitive in the ordinary way: it's quite possible for every exhibitor to be awarded a gold medal, so in a way the gardens are aiming for some sort of absolute standard more than trying to beat one another. Very true, though competing (striving; if you prefer)for a medal -- Mike. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|