I am really enjoying this discussion! Rosefolly, again, passion. Yes, if you really long for alpines, I certainly wouldn't tell you not to grow them. Gardening is about passion, after all! It's always up to the individual gardener to decide how much he/she wants to invest in growing a given plant, and what degree of success will be satisfactory. My own tendency, which is partly philosophical and partly temperamental, is to try to adapt myself to my conditions. I'll dig and mulch and weed and water at the start, and I site plants with great care, but I won't go much further, with irrigation systems or winter protection, for example. My garden philosophy isn't everybody's, though, and there's no reason it should be. Part of my joy is meeting the challenge of adaptation; another gardener's might be the challenge of impossible conditions. I heartily agree that the garden will be a mishmash if there are no restraints. This thread is, after all, titled 'The Value of Limits'. Ornamental gardening has an aesthetic component, to utter a tautology. Regardless of what the gardener grows, to make a beautiful garden she/he has to consider plant textures and architecture, bulks and empty spaces, colors, light and shade. I tend to think that respecting the environmental limitations of a site will tend to produce a more stylistically coherent garden. The assemblage of plants will seem more 'natural' because they're plants whose relatives would be found growing together in nature. When I started this thread I didn't link the title well with the content. What I was trying to say was that by respecting the basic ecological character of a garden site and trying to work with it, the resulting garden would be more individualistic, and at the same time more coherent, than if it were subjected purely to the workings of the author's own imagination and desires. Nature as collaborator, not as enemy! "I agree in landscaping there is too much repetition, but my garden is my own and I couldn't care less whether it resembles someone elses, it's my experience/experiment and not for others' amusement."--greenwitch YES!!! I suspect this is the only way to have an original garden--to not care whether it's like or unlike anyone else's. I totally agree. I also don't care whether a plant is rare or common (though I can get sick of a plant I see grossly overused), just whether it works in my garden and is beautiful. And I don't care about what's fashionable in gardening. Ha. The only value to fashion, that I've ever seen, is that it brings plants into the nurseries that weren't there before, that might be useful. Gray-leaved aromatic plants are ever welcome in my garden, and ornamental grasses not, no matter what the dernier cri may be. Well, okay, fashion offers new suggestions of beauty, to add to my mental catalog, and perhaps I'll profit from the suggestions one day. Anyway, greenwitch, I think what you say is exactly right and very important. I do have two blueberries in an old bathtub. I know I can grow anything is a container, but plants in containers are too vulnerable for me to be comfortable with the situation, except for my succulents. By the way, on the subject of 'banal' (my word) plants--no plant is banal if the gardener is in love with it. robiniaquest: I have an Italian friend whose hobby is old fruit trees, and who loves figs. He says that figs are hardier than they're often given credit for in the U.S., but that gardeners in the States make the mistake of generously fertilizing and watering their figs and so the trees make a lot of succulent growth and then freeze in the winter. As you say, anyone who wants to grow plants that are a little tender for their zone, or in need of some extra warmth, needs to know how to take advantage of a wall. Even here my rosemary likes to have a wall to lean against or a masonry pillar to wrap itself around, and I overwinter my potted succulents in a cool greenhouse rigged up against the southfacing wall of our house. My neighbors have a rosemary planted against the west-facing masonry wall of an outbuilding (in this orientation it's also sheltered from the cold winds, which come from the east), and it must be the biggest plant of rosemary I've ever seen. A protective wall and decent drainage would probably help your fig project, too: how is your tree placed? Melissa

Belinda's Dream can get quite tall, to 5 feet or more, so you'd have to be careful with placement. Bishop's Castle is a beautiful and fragrant Austin rose that does very well in the heat. It can spread but I keep mine trimmed short, to about 3 feet, and it still keeps on blooming. Carding Mill is another great hot-weather rose. I agree with hoovb; you have so much room that a wide border of roses and other plants would be beautiful and have a lot of impact. I wouldn't have just roses. As beautiful as they are, they can become boring planted en masse without anything to lend contrast to their shapes and colors. Bolero and Julia Child are both very good roses, with a nice bushy shape and lots of bloom. Boxwood hedges are very attractive but can be labor-intensive with all the trimming to keep them tidy looking. With all that room you might want to visit the Antique Roses Forum and find out about roses that can grow to 10 x 10 feet and more with time, depending on your climate. There are on-line nurseries, such as Roses Unlimited, that have wonderful choices of mostly antique roses that would look perfect with your style of house. Once you begin with roses it can quickly become an absorbing passion, especially with the fascinating older roses. Ingrid

Oh, THAT'S cuphea. I see it all over but not clipped. I like the clipped plants in Cass' photo. I knew it was called heather which always made the real heather confusing to me. I don't know if I'd have the energy to keep them clipped though, but at least if let go, they don't become monsters. Lowe's had white ones on Sunday that I almost bought. I may get some. Lantana can be lovely, but it can also be a wild, lanky thing with no shape. I like some of the colors but always stay away from it. Liriopes I have lots of and even was thinking of the Giant Evergreens before I got the Encores. I had Pentas before the roses. They're nice and draw butterflies, but I thought they'd be too big. If I can get the knack of proper deadheading, I might be able to keep them a nice shape. Gardenias here are big foundation shrubs - perhaps in a pot. I have Spanish Lavender and I like it. It got to be a nice size and a little spreading before the frost zapped it. I almost cut it back Sunday but was busy digging for Azaleas. I also have Bronze Fennel. I like it very much. Interesting color. At the end of summer (Sept/Oct) lovely caterpillars that I hadn't seen before devoured it including the bark. It looked like bare white sticks. I cut it near the ground, and today it's a beautiful plant again just budding flowers. All from a 3" pot for $3. Money well spent. Thanks, linrose, Cass, Sammy, Judith and everybody. You're all very helpful and sweet. I learned a lot from this post. I'll probably be spending some time on the Proven Winners and Floridata sites. Sherry

I'd like to be there to observe if you two ever meet face to face. Yeah, my mom has 5 acres out near Shelton, covered with Madrona, evergreen trees, salal, and ehuck. I transplanted some ehuck in the shade of a Red Cedar, I don't quite remember when, maybe even 10 years ago, and it is 4-5' tall and wide, big enough to have berries now. It is very healthy and green. My yard was logged by PO who also jerkily planted grass everywhere at expense of the native flora, but in places there are salal, Oregon Holly Grape, Trillium, Flowering currant, stinging nettle, miner's lettuce, and so on. It's great to re-establish the local flora a little at a time. Not that ehuck is local, but I have seen wild Red Huckleberry. Ehuck would certainly take patience. Blueberries would be fast.