Friday, October 8, 2010

FUGLY

What in the world is going on?
It seems of late that many of our more progressive designers are requesting the most subtle and sophisticated roses in the marketplace. "Combo, Quicksand and if you can't find those sub with Camel or Sahara" are the cries we hear.
Hello? We have been promoting Combo and Quicksand for many moons, but it seems this fall their subtle and very understated  tones of beige and puce shot through (think shot as in 'shot-silk') with hints of autumnal tones of  peach, raw umber, rose madder and yellow ochre are highly sought after. 
Looking in the coolers for new varieties that might make suitable substitutes I came across this rose with which I was hitherto unfamiliar. In the subdued lighting of the coolers, snugly wrapped in the tight, squared-off corrugated packaging this rose looked incredibly promising. However, in the naked light of day, stripped of the vestiges of any wrapping the rose looked less beguiling, and revealed some rather cheap bubblegum tones.of pink.
As I am forever an optimist, I delayed judgement until it had hydrated and the flower had time to find a comportment that was more open and relaxed.
Unfortunately, the situation only got worse for this bloom called "Tamara", as not only did more pink become evident, displaying aspects similar to those of Toscanini and Vivaldi, but cruelly the way in which the petals opened was lacking in finesse or beauty.
Now, it could be that the roses I reviewed were from the first flush of the plants, and being an immature product had not yet fully formed their correct structure - but I doubt it.
It demonstrates just how thin the line between the sublime and the ridiculous (the f'shizzle and the fugly) is.
A few more things that make this rose a candidate for the supermarkets is that once the guard petals are removed the color becomes a distinctly bland pink. And quite a few guard petals had to be removed as this variety does not sustain the stress of handling and shipping well.
Two thumbs down for Tamara.





2 comments:

  1. I'm with you on this one - just a bad rose all around.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're dead on with this rose variety, it's ugly. Thanks for posting on this.

    ReplyDelete