photo B Beaven
When we visited Wales recently we went round several
beautiful gardens [in the rain]. I hadn’t realised that there were so many
examples in Wales although it should be acknowledged that early June is
probably the best time to visit any Welsh garden; everything seems to peak
then. The one which most intrigued me was Veddw.
Intrigued is the right verb because it was designed by a
well-known garden writer and a garden photographer, who still live there as a
couple. Effectively the garden has been designed for themselves: you can come and look if you want to.
Set against a steep hill with views across heavily wooded valleys
to the skyline over on the other side, it is west-facing and comprises garden rooms bounded by carefully trimmed
hedging which is cut almost like topiary. Except there are no spirals, roosters
or other ornamental details such as one finds in dedicated topiary gardens;
here it is all curves; all of the same size, repeating all the way up the
slope. Within the rooms there are different planting schemes; in one there is a
shimmering pond utterly clear, no weeds or other detritus which has the
formality of the hedging reflected in its informal surface. A very nice piece
of detailing. There is a wildlife garden and a large area dedicated to meadow
planting; an orchard, a tiny lawn and a small vegetable garden.
The house itself is small, a little ramshackle with solar
panels tacked on adding to the impression of a couple living very much on their
own terms, not exactly outside society . . . I mean they both have jobs that
must keep them aware of and grounded on the world’s treadmill . . . but very
much living and doing it in their own way.
I should have loved it but I didn’t. Superficially, it is a
brilliant, iconoclastic expression of two knowledgeable and dedicated minds and
I am definitely for iconoclasm and self-expression, breaking the mould and all
that but I found myself troubled by the egotistical nature of it. In a way,
they shouldn’t open it up to the public. It can’t be about money . . . I think
it was £7.00ea to get in . . . so keeping it private shouldn’t be a financial
issue, its more about why anyone would want to showcase something so . . . so .
. . personal to the world.
It is unchanging. The planting palette is restricted. They
have planted monocultures of brightly coloured grasses to suggest, they say,
the colours of the crops in the past but you can never modify or alter this
feature. When everything is finely poised, even if you might want to plant a
swathe of dahlias, you can’t: it would upset the equilibrium and then you would
have to change ten other things to restore that original balance. The designers
will not alter the garden: this is it, fixed for ever.
So, you have no flexibility. I wouldn’t like that. I want
to see the seasons: daffs in spring; lilies in summertime; Meconopsis finally
opening their beautiful blue petals in September. I am sure the designers
consider the garden to be a work of art, made to be admired in artistic terms. But
it doesn’t nourish the soul, not my soul anyway.
Thinking about it later, I wondered if it could be fairly
described as an intellectual garden. Is it about tension and ultimate release?
By creating these rooms, then imposing a strict framework, forcing them to
relate to the hills around, referencing the ancient history in the planting and
the curved forms, what they have done is create something unchanging, immutable
and undeniable. But isn’t that the nature of photography; or sculpture? It is
not in the nature of a garden to be fixed like this. Surely the whole point is
the freedom, the ever-changing reversible character of the space, the weather,
the land, the personalities of the plants. Whether this plant flourishes or
not, whether the rain will stop before everything is washed away, whether the
wind will cease and there will still be shrubs left to admire . . . I think
that is both the challenge and the delight of a garden.
You need to go and see for yourself. It’s in Monmouthshire.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment