Why restraining yourself at the garden centre will lead to a more beautiful garden
In a world where maximalism is king, restraint can feel like an old-fashioned concept. Why grow just a couple of different varieties of roses, goes the thinking, when we have space for at least a dozen? Why limit ourselves to a particular colour palette when instead we could
enjoy the full kaleidoscope
? Why bother restricting our choices at all, when before us lies the tantalising promise of so much beauty?
Self-restraint when you're new to
gardening
is especially challenging. Faced with a universe of different possibilities, a cornucopia of choice, we can be like kids in the world's best sweetshop, chasing the most powerful of sugar rushes.
Logical thinking often goes out the window. Beguilingly beautiful plants that are entirely unsuitable for our gardens or allotments' growing conditions, or for which we have no available growing space, seduce us at summer shows and plant fairs. Gardeners with dry, shady plots impulse-buy inky-blue delphiniums and bearded irises. Others, with hot sunny gardens, succumb to the lofty, leafy charm of shade-loving tree ferns, or the refined elegance of Japanese acers. Dazzled by their sparkling good looks, we buy single potted alliums in bloom at crazy prices, when we could buy 20 or 30 of their fleshy bulbs for the same amount in autumn. Or yet more trays of bedding plants, just because they're being sold at a knock-down price. It's only later that buyer's remorse kicks in.
[
Six easy tips for making your garden planters last all summer in Ireland
Opens in new window
]
Some people fortunate to have hot sunny gardens wind up succumbing to the attraction of shade-loving tree ferns. Photograph: Brian Lawless/PA
As a gardener capable only of intermittent self-restraint myself, I'm inevitably the proud owner of far too many plants. The current tally includes a bull bay magnolia plus a dozen hydrangeas begging for their own patch of ground. Also, several choice varieties of physocarpus; one gooseberry bush now starting to sulk because of the pot-bound nature of its existence; one winter jasmine (no idea why I bought this); a white-flowering variety of Clematis montana (a rampageous climber, but oh-so pretty in spring); and far too many young seedlings of annuals, biennials and perennials that I didn't have the willpower to resist sowing earlier this spring in the first heady rush of the growing season.
READ MORE
Temptation to buy is everywhere in the garden centre.
These aside, a growing collection of plants, which is as much the result of my impulse buying as it is of thoughtful planning is simultaneously filling up the sprawling sunny beds around our home. It includes yet more roses, a choice variety of euphorbia that I know will get too big, a compact variety of lilac that already looks entirely out of place, and some dusty pink Californian poppies that I couldn't resist.
Like an ex-smoker trying to stay off cigarettes, I'm confronted by the fact that self-restraint takes considerable, sustained effort, and that I'm just not always up to the task.
[
What are the best vegetables and fruits to grow in a polytunnel?
Opens in new window
]
Still, I'm determined to try, driven by the knowledge that it pays rich dividends, including some that only become obvious many years later. Self-restraint avoids, for example, the common dilemma of the overly stuffed, middle-aged garden, where every plant is much loved, but the problem is that there are simply too many, and they're planted too closely together. Similarly, it often neatly sidesteps the equally common pitfall of planting trees and shrubs in unsuitable places where they then slowly get too big for their boots, obscuring light and views until they eventually force us to contemplate the gloomy necessity of cutting them down.
Self-restraint also reduces the chances of sad plants languishing in pots while they wait for a permanent home, or dying a slow death because they've been shoehorned into an unsuitable spot in the garden. It means no unwanted varieties of fruit and vegetables planted on a whim, before the realisation dawned that we didn't want or need three rows of courgettes, or four kinds of beetroot. It also means fewer weary hours of hard labour spent digging up plants to move them to a more suitable spot, and less time wasted watering and mollycoddling others that had to be planted at the height of summer just because we fell instantly, madly, deeply in love with them.
Colour and spice ... and all things nice. Photograph: Fennell
Boring as it might sound, self-restraint in the garden also helps give coherence to a planting scheme, one where the plants' individual qualities have been thoughtfully considered in terms of their combined effect. Equally, it limits the chances of clashing colour combinations, or of ending up with short-lived wonders with a limited season of interest, or plants that quickly bully their neighbours into submission. Instead, restrained gardens have a 'rightness' about them akin to looking effortlessly well-dressed. Except, of course, that they're anything but effortless.
The only danger is when that valuable self-restraint tips over into rigid self-control. I'm glad, for example, of the impulse buy of an assortment of climbing and rambling roses subsequently used to cloak an old tumbledown stone outbuilding in the garden. Nor do I regret my spur-of-the-moment decision to plant a Persian ironwood, or to sow a late, second batch of white cosmos to stretch out their flowering season. I'm even glad of the single, orange Californian poppy that recently spontaneously self-seeded itself into an otherwise very pale colour scheme. I did, I admit, briefly consider pulling it out before sternly stopping myself, proof that these two, seemingly opposite qualities – spontaneity and self-restraint – are much more comfortable bedfellows than we gardeners might initially assume.
This week in the garden
This is a great time of year to propagate a wide variety of perennials, shrubs and trees by taking softwood cuttings of young, fresh, healthy growth, a quick, easy and very affordable way to stock a new garden. See
rhs.gov.uk
for step-by-step instructions.
Make sure to give dahalias a warm, sunny, sheltered spot and rich, moisture-retentive but free draining soil. Photograph:Dahlias potted up under cover earlier this spring should now be planted out into their permanent position in the garden or allotment, making sure to give them a warm, sunny, sheltered spot and a rich, moisture-retentive but free draining soil, ideally enriched with some well-rotted manure and a little slow release pelleted organic fertiliser. Soak the root-balls in a weak solution of liquid seaweed feed before planting to give them a head start.
Dates for your diary
Bord Bia Bloom at the Phoenix Park:
Continuing until June 2nd, see
bordbiabloom.com
It's that time of year once again: Bloom in the Phoenix Park
Buds & Blossom Garden Show:
Spink, Community Grounds, Abbeyleix, County Laois, Sunday, June 8th (12pm-6pm). With guest speakers John Jones, Colin Jones and Tom Coward, plus specialist plant sales by many of Ireland best small, independent nurseries.
laoisgardenfestival.com
Rathmines Open Gardens 2025:
Sunday, June 8th, (2pm-6pm). Several private gardens open their doors to the public in aid of charity, along with Trinity Botanic Garden. See
therathminesinitiative.com
or contact Michael Kelly on 087-6697722 for details.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
a day ago
- Irish Times
Breastfeed ‘too long' and you're a creep; choose formula and you must not love your child
The worlds of daytime TV and infant feeding collided recently, in a controversy involving chatshow-host Vanessa Feltz, fashion designer Karen Millen, and a video of an American TikTok influencer, Madison Simpson, who recently wound up her journey with extended breastfeeding. Feltz invited Millen and others to comment on a video posted by Simpson that shows her nursing her three-year-old daughter. It's hard to know why Millen felt a need to comment on this woman's breastfeeding (calling it 'selfish', 'weird' and questioning whether it was good for the child), or how she felt confident enough to declare that there was 'no benefit'. But it's also hard to understand some of the reaction to her remarks, which might have been more appropriate if Millen was some kind of surgeon general gone rogue. Soon after – and following considerable backlash – Millen delivered a prostrated apology, in which she explained that her views were restricted to the specific question of breastfeeding a three-year-old, not breastfeeding writ large, and in an act of sacrificial allegiance, she describes her challenges breastfeeding her own three children, including recurring mastitis and suffering with 'cracked and sore nipples'. She then declares 'breast is best' and finishes by saying she respects women's choices. A sombre-looking Feltz then reads from the World Health Organisation's infant feeding guidelines. Leaving aside the issue of why anyone would look to clothing expert Millen for enlightened opinions on health decision-making, it is somewhat depressing to witness Millen's apology shift from one position of censure (extended breastfeeding is selfish) to another judgmental position in saying: 'I [breastfed] because I knew it was the best thing for them' and 'breast milk is the best'. There is something about this issue that seems to compel people to speak in normative and captious terms. READ MORE [ It's time for a little more realism and empathy on breastfeeding Opens in new window ] Perhaps public health rhetoric plays a role. The HSE breastfeeding guidance, for example, can be dogmatic: 'Your breast milk contains essential enzymes, hormones and antibodies. These are vital for your baby's normal growth, development and good health.' It's easy to understand how someone reading this might infer that those who don't breastfeed are doing something pretty bad if they willingly deprive babies of something that is vital for normal growth and good health. I suppose I just have to be grateful I can manage to type this with my own abnormally grown fingers. But the controversy struck me as interesting for another reason. As the first generation of social media parents, my cohort really have to grapple with the boundaries around children's digital privacy. Of course, feeding our children (however we do it) is one of the main things we do in their early years, so it's not surprising it ends up online. However, I understand people reacting strongly to the inclusion of small children in content that is posted as part of trying to build a career online. Kids need to be protected from the online world, but they also need to be protected from our engagement with it. For younger ones, it'll be a while until they can tell us how they feel about their likenesses being shared. It's a good exercise to think about how their adolescent selves might feel about the images we post. . A perfect storm of social media companies encouraging us to 'share' idealised versions of parenting and overblown institutional rhetoric that frames the main drivers of children's welfare outcomes in individualistic terms have contributed to this strange environment in which a woman feeding her child becomes the subject of a daytime TV storm.. Nothing, it seems, is more scrutinised than decision-making about children. I've experienced this reflexive meanness writing for this newspaper, with people commenting 'some are just not made to be mums' beneath a social media post about an article about letting my daughter take little walks along our terrace. Similarly, the discourse around both ends of infant feeding has become totally unnecessarily hostile: breastfeed 'too long' and they'll call you a creep; choose formula and they'll say you don't love your child enough. [ Stop framing breastfeeding versus bottle-feeding as a question of mothers at war Opens in new window ] I spent most of this week in London at a British Academy conference on the Ethics of Health Communication , where I spoke about the toxic state of infant feeding rhetoric and the complex state of the research. My presentation featured images of the poisonous commentary directed at both formula use and extended breastfeeding – two sides of the same miserable coin and examples of the rhetorical poison that flows through the motherhood discourse online. We have a long way to go to ensure pregnancy and early parenthood are better supported. One thing experts agree on is that more robust continuity of care across maternity services would help us feel more empowered in our reproductive and early parenting decisions. Equally, it would be good to have public health guidance that is clearer about the possibility of normally grown formula-fed babies, and acknowledges that poverty and inequality are the real threats to children's good health, whatever way you feed them. Breastfeeding can be challenging and (far from being selfish) is a selfless thing to do for a child – those who do it for longer should be given a lot of grace in how and when they decide to wean. Whether it's giving a three-month-old formula or a three-year-old breastmilk, we will all benefit from a little less mutual recrimination and maternal excoriation. Dr Clare Moriarty is a postdoctoral researcher working at Trinity Research in Social Sciences in Trinity College Dublin
Irish Times
a day ago
- Irish Times
Why does it seem that wines are getting stronger?
You are not mistaken ; the level of alcohol in wines has been steadily increasing for the last decade or more. The reason for this is quite simple, at least in part; climate change . As grapes ripen, their sugar levels increase. When the grapes are picked, crushed and fermented, those sugars turn into alcohol. So, the more sugar in the grapes, the more alcohol in the finished wine. As many wine regions have become warmer, so the alcohol levels of the wines have increased. Bordeaux is a perfect example. Back in the 1960s and 1970s, most Bordeaux was between 12 per cent and 13 per cent abv. Nowadays, it is not unusual to find wines with 14 per cent or more, with many hitting a heart-warming 15 per cent. This is partly down to climate change. An increase of one degree centigrade can make a huge difference to ripening grapes. In addition, during the same period, growers learned to farm better, reducing yields and harvesting at optimal periods. All of this meant riper grapes with more sugar. Wine can vary in alcohol from as little as 5 per cent to 25 per cent abv. Lower alcohol wines can be made in three ways. The grower can pick their grapes early, before the sugars have had a chance to increase. This will make for a lighter but probably quite acidic wine. Alternatively, a producer can stop the wine from fermenting halfway through. This will leave the wine tasting a little or very sweet. German wines such as Mosel Riesling and Italian sparkling wines such as Moscato d'Asti are made this way. It is also possible to reduce wine after fermentation by vacuum distillation, reverse osmosis, or spinning cone. All three of these will lower alcohol levels but may also affect the taste of the wine. READ MORE Any wine with more than 15 per cent abv will usually have been fortified, or had brandy added. This is the way sherry, port, marsala and madeira are made. Wines with high alcohol are not necessarily a bad thing, although it does mean you should drink them in smaller quantities. But wine is about balance and both a good Mosel riesling, with an abv of around 8 per cent, and a fine old oloroso sherry at 20 per cent are among the greatest wines of all. In the European Union, all labels must state the alcohol content of the wine. Producers are allowed a 0.5 per cent tolerance one way or the other (0.8 per cent with older wines), so your 13.5 per cent wine may actually be 14% or 13%.
Irish Times
a day ago
- Irish Times
Seán Moncrieff: In the not-too-distant future four of my five children may live overseas
When you're a bit older , there can be a sense that your world is shrinking. Like anyone of any age, you do the same things every day, except, with age, you have more of an acute sense of it. There's a decreasing novelty . Looking through the eyes of a child is a vomit-inducing cliche, yet when Granddaughter Number One comes to stay, that's what happens, whether we like it or not. There can be any number of revelations that she will urgently need to share: she has toes or the dog is barking or Ms Rachel is on the TV. (I find Ms Rachel creepy, but that's probably just me.) We will have to do some chasing or help with a jigsaw. We will have to be examined for ailments. (Granddaughter Number One is a qualified doctor. She has all the equipment any way). We also have to negotiate around the usual toddler sticking points on bedtimes and meals. We never win. It's all hauntingly familiar because, of course, I've done this sort of thing before. But the familiarity is more of a feeling than a specific set of memories. My recollection of her mother, her uncle and some of her aunts at that age is more of a blur: like dealing with a herd rather than a specific child. Often, they parented each other, and they still tease me about not being able to tell them apart. Well, one of them does. The blonde one, I think. This time round, it's easier to focus on Granddaughter Number One's specific foibles. She's not big on tantrums, but instead has learned to weaponise politeness: 'no thank you' is her preferred method of refusal. That's why she's a master negotiator. READ MORE And while it's energising to be sucked into her enthusiasms, it's also exhausting to consider the amount of information a two-year-old can absorb on a minute-by-minute basis. Sometimes, Daughter Number Four and I have to tap out for a few minutes. Herself never does. She has the uncanny ability to morph into the personality of a (very responsible) 14-year-old girl: one who is endlessly excited by baths and wearing pyjamas and knows all the words to every song on all the Disney films. In the not-too-distant future, we won't get to do this as much. When Daughter Number One mentioned they might move to France, I thought it was a bit of a bonkers idea, and for all the obvious reasons. But you could never accuse her of not being super-organised, and she has a detailed plan covering language and schools, tax and accommodation and other eventualities I hadn't thought of. Now they have a place to live and a date when they are leaving. Son Number One is back from Colombia for a while, but will be heading back to that part of the world soon. Daughter Number Three is loving her life in London, while Daughter Number Two and her partner are actively considering where they might live in the future: a future where four out of my five children, and a granddaughter, may live some distance away. [ An encounter near Barcelona's Sagrada Família taught me a lesson about other tourists Opens in new window ] The housing crisis is a huge factor, of course. You could blame the current Government for this, or the government of 20 years ago which failed to plan for this. Which is the same government. You'd wonder why the parents of this emigrant generation kept voting for them. Not that my children, or any of their peers, are without agency. They've made decisions about the shapes of their lives. And with every change they make, I'm forced to expand my thinking, to reshape my familial mental map and how much of the globe it covers. My world isn't shrinking. Quite the opposite. That expansion might even involve language. In a year or two, I may have a granddaughter who speaks French as easily as English. As she may well say to me one day, 'c'est la vie'.
