'Style' is how you arrange and use the plants. 'Plant selection' is, well, plant selection. Unless you are dealing with extremely 'formal' or extremely 'informal' plants, it's much more about how you use them.

So take your example of tree peony vs. calycanthus. Which is closer to the effect you want from an entry shrub? Tree peonies are relatively short, very showy bloomers for a short period in mid-spring. Calycanthus are much taller and wider, summer bloomers, fragrant, but not nearly as showy. Which one comes closer to how you see the space in general? Neither of them and you need to look for something else?

BTW, don't think that just because a plant is native, it is going to be an easy plant where you are.

I agree with Mad_gallica. Specific selection of plants that fit the form and/or other functioning attribute will not disrupt the style.

Thank you both - I need to sit on it I guess. And probably neither tree peony nor calycanthus will work. Also I will remember that not all natives will grow easily here. Time for more research and observation and reading! Thanks again.

If it is native to your area and the coditions of your site, I don't know why you would not expect good results.

One thing that gets overlooked sometimes is "native to where". Do we consider a native plant to be one that is native to the U.S., our region, our state, county, or our neighborhoods? Then there is the habitat. A highbush blueberry will be naturally occurring at both ends of my street, but not along the dry sandy glacial outwash in my section of the road. That would really make it not native to my yard, if you really think about it.

If a plant is truely native, it will work.

May I suggest that you sit on your front steps this spring and 'listen' to your house. It has a long and interesting horticultural story to tell you. Over the centuries your land has seen the introduction of plants from all over the world. Some herbal plants were introduced for medicinal purposes. Others for their food value or fragrance or beauty or utilitarian uses. You need to rethink tossing out this history because a garden writer or two has seduced you into thinking 'native plants' are easy to maintain. Of course you can combine the natives with the present bones of your landscape. It is called a cottage garden which, simply put, is a plant collection idea developed by early gardeners anxious to grow all the new plant introductions arriving from abroad. Think about it.

Speaking as an advocate of utilizing native plants in the home landscape, I must urge you to listen to the sage advice of Nandina. Forget about some trendy (but arbitrary) plant classification like "native plant" or whatever the magazines happen to be hyping at the moment. I mean, really is your desire to promote a currently trendy agenda or to enjoy a gracefully appropriate landscape design where everything compliments?

I know that as a novice, you are just itching to do something  anything! However, your first concern should be to do no harm. Take time to learn about the plants that are already there. Try and figure out why they were selected and how to best grow them. Ponder the design and try to understand what is going on and why. It sounds like fate has graced you with a time segment of your life to act as steward for this piece of good earth, so richly steeped in history. It is my belief that in situations like this, a mantle of responsibility resides with the stewardship. Do a lot of research and act wisely.

While you are doing your historical research, there is no reason why you canÂt also do research on native plants for your area. One thing that you are likely to discover is just how much inaccurate information is passed off as fact. Another lesson that you are certain to discover:
The more we learn, the more we realize just how little we really know! {{gwi:7286}}

IronBelly

Yes thank you especially Nandina. That was beautiful. The previous gardener is buried here- I am listening to her as best I can. I will wait.

Regarding "a tree peony or a calycanthus as an entry shrub", is it the main or only shrub in that area? I'm a strong proponent of having four season interest, especially at the entrance.

If you needed an evergreen in the area, the true dwarf English boxwood (Buxus sempervirens 'Suffruticosa') may be an excellent choice. If a vertical is more appropriate, perhaps one of the Hinoki cultivars (Chamaecyparis obtusa cv.), maybe 'Gracilis Nana'

Time out!

It seems to me, the most poignant words of the original poster are: "Âjust moved into an old (1700's) farmhouse. The landscaping has gone to pot, but its bones are beautiful."

It has been a while in the past but we have had lengthy discussions about landscape editing on this forum. It is becoming apparent that concept has either been missed and/or overlooked. Thank goodness the OP has already decided to follow the sage advice of Nandina.

As I alluded to in an earlier posting on this thread, oftentimes neophyte gardeners/designers just canÂt wait to get started: "I know that as a novice, you are just itching to do something  anything!" As many of you regulars should know by now, my responses are usually directed more towards the forum at large than at the individual poster. That applies to this thread as well.

Within the confines of the untrained, subconscious mind, the very action of "do something  anything!" automatically translates to installing additional plants. None of us (other than the OP) have actually been on site so we are all just guessing. However, it could very well be the case that plant material needs to be removed rather than added.

Editing is surely one of the most neglected aspects of good design. Frederick Law Olmsted (recognized as the founder of American landscape architecture and the nation's foremost park maker) was a master who knew the power of editing. Yes, he is certainly remembered for what he did  often forgotten is what he removed. The awe inspiring vistas around the landscape of Washington DC which have been photographed innumerable times are largely due to OlmsteadÂs editing skills. To the horror of many people living at the time, his work in the capital city began by removing a lot of trees. Few shared the foresight of Olmstead. He knew that tremendous vistas were waiting to behold only if they were first "unwrapped". He full well understood the power of editing. That secret is simply that sometimes, "less is more".

IronBelly

You can always do different style gardens in different areas. There's no reason why you can't do research on what plants would have been popular and installed in the 1700's for the front entryway, do a native plant garden elsewhere on the property, and even a tropical pool area out back near the patio. That's the fun of doing your own landscaping. With a few larger bushes in between to screen one area from another and a winding trail, you can have a surprize garden around every bend if you want to.
If you're new at this and just want to do something, get out a paper and pencil and get on the computer and research some plants and just start doodling.Plan out a garden you like--regardless of what style it is, and then figure out a way to make it work in your location.
Another easy first project is to install some spring blooming bulbs in the fall, but figure out this spring where you'd like to have the extra color and write it down/sketch it out now so you can put them in the right place this fall.
My farmhouse was built in 1890, so I have more traditional looking aspects in the front, privet hedge, mums, tulips, daffodils, hostas, forsythias, honeysuckle vines on a trellis, but just around the corner and to the back where you can't see it from the road because of a large hedge of rose of sharon bushes, the entire patio/pond area is tropical with bananas and waterlilies.
Here's a picture of the front porch, visible from the road out front, except you can't see the privet hedge that is close to the road about 100 feet in front of the house:
{{gwi:55005}}
sandy0225
Here's the side door to the east where we go in and out, not too visible from the road, but a little sneak preview that things might look different somewhere else on the property with the two bananas near the porch:
{{gwi:55006}}
sandy0225
and here's off the patio out back:
{{gwi:55008}}
sandy0225
The key is not to have all the different areas visible at the same time, then it just looks like a mismatched hodpodge!

The reason one uses native plants indigenous to one's area is to avoid to common mistake that most gardeners make of jamming a bunch of disparate plants together wily-nilly-like without considerating of the ecosystems they evolved in.What you wind up with is a mindless collection of incongruent plants that makes no asthetic sense.But one can learn the asthetics of plant comunities by studying the natural symmetry of the local flora and emulating them in plant choice and placement.A garden is more than a collection of pretty petals,but a functioning enduring eccosystem that self-organizes over time into a sublime symmetry thats beyond the gardener's ability to plan.Anyone who thinks they can improve upon primevel nature might as well paint over the Mona Lisa while they're at it.My back yard's messy but doing its own thing,and I get to watch! {{gwi:55010}}

So nywoodsman, is what you're saying is that we as designers should abandon some 2000+ years of cultivated garden/landscape history and simply repeat what we see in our immediate native environment?

I'd love to see that one fly through the approval committee of the local HOA :-)

Thanks for your participation NYwoodsman. It is always great to read differing opinions and viewpoints. However, you are mistaken if you believe many of us are going to disagree with your statement: "What you wind up with is a mindless collection of incongruent plants that makes no aesthetic sense." That is exactly what, we too, wish to avoid.

Being an indigenous plant enthusiast myself, I have learned to rely upon these plants. However, I have also come to learn that many people inadvertently do a disservice to the native plants they promote. The question for me is not whether to use them but rather, How can I best use them?

Where most enthusiasts fail from a design perspective (which effectively and ardently promotes the plant group you love) is recognizing the power of "capturing the essence". Think about some of those little moments in nature that stopped you in your tracks. Are not these the things that captured your heart and steal your emotions? Something like stumbling upon an unexpectedly large patch of bluebells during a hike in a remote area creates joy for even those who have never planted a native. There is absolutely nothing wrong with "capturing this highlight" and introducing its essence into your native back yard.

I have expounded on this concept at great length in the past and need not repeat myself ad nauseum. Just consider that native plantings can be so much more with inclusion of a little thoughtful design.

IronBelly

I agree with you ironbelly that deliberate design has its place,I meant to point out that,rather then creating plant zoos,our efforts should be aimed at recreating plant communities that have the ability to self-organize over time.The resultant complexity is far more satifying than anything completely contrived.Gardengal,I think that studying and emulating the local native ecosystems is the only way to avoid the Disneyland asthetic promoted by the gardening industry.No one's ever experienced the sublime in a portrait of goofy.Its time you upgraded that 2000 year old idea

Ahh... now we are getting into the divergence of two very distinct areas that are, all too often, incorrectly considered as one: The Garden Industry & Landscape Design.

The garden industry promotes the concept that design is primarily about plant selection and color because it enhances public consumerism of products they are selling. The garden industry essentially specializes in the process of planting.

In reality, good landscape design specializes in the process of thoughtful analysis.

IronBelly

As long as "thoughful analysis" takes into account the all too human presumption that one can improve upon undisturbed nature.I've seen too much destruction of natural beauty in the name"good landscape design"to have any respect left for the so called experts.

Long ago, I might have agreed with you, Woody. The 80/20 rule applies to most any of life's professions. It sounds to me like you need to just get out more.

There are many wonderful projects now being done with palpable sensitivity. Unfortunately, these are often being completed within the confines of discreet privacy. As a whole, I find that the general level of (and interest in) landscape design is rapidly improving. You will find many folks on this forum will join you in your revulsion to hacks that clearly should not be in the business.

Of course, personal tastes will vary  and the freedom to choose is a good thing. As I said, I see things getting better. I believe the Internet and forums like this one are a causal factor. A tremendous amount of information that was heretofore difficult to obtain is now, literally, available at your finger tips. Tell me, prior to this era, could you have ever dreamed that you would be easily discussing this topic with a clod-kicker from Iowa and a garden diva from the Pacific Northwest? Life continues to improve and so does landscape design.

IronBelly

Ironbelly,I'll have to agree with you on your first point,(I really should get out more),and I appologize if may posts seem like rants(they are),but the changes in my locale that I've witness in the past decade has withered my optimism and keeps me from straying too far from my property line lest I discover even more mindless destruction inflicted on the land in the name of asthetic improvement.I mean,I'm almost 50,and I thought I was beond being shocked by human ignorance but the things I seen lately...I just don't understand it.There must be an innate human propensity towards contextual blindness,that I've underestimated,that causes people not to ever see whats in front of them before its trampled(with backhoes).These days the burden of that knowledge keeps me at home,on my own small plot of land,in an almost conpulsive effort to make up for the destruction I see around me.And,so far,my search of the internet has turn up just more of the same.
Here's a clue:If you mention hosta in your post,you'er probably part of the problem.

Apparently you have not read my rant from years ago about that landscape design concept which began sweeping the country a number of years ago called:
Hostas 'till you puke. {{gwi:7286}}

IronBelly

LOL!

ironbelly,I was rereading your older post and your mention of Olmsted reminded me of an artical I read in the new york times about ten years back about the rediscovery of a property of his up in mass that he had landscaped about a century ago.I thought,"wow it must sure be impressive after a hundred years of growth".Much to my suprise,the land was described as weedy ,overgrown and in desperate need of renovation.I though,how odd,even the barest plot of land,left on its own for a hundred years,will regrow into respectable forest.Whatever Olmsted did,the net effect was to merely thwart the natural regenerative processes.That story was a prefect example of the failed nineteenth century paradigm of the garden as a static human contrivance.The gardens that always moved me to tears were the ones I found far from human efforts.