New Edition of the Snowdrop Book on the way

[Paddy Tobin]

This was passed on to me today and I thought it might be of interest to galanthus fans.

Paddy

A Press Release from Griffen Press

January 2009

SNOWDROPS 2


Since the publication of Snowdrops, A Monograph of Cultivated Galanthus by Matt Bishop, Aaron Davis and John Grimshaw in 2001 there has been not only a tremendous growth in interest in snowdrops, but a huge explosion in the number of newly named cultivars, and an update to this reference is much needed.

Matt Bishop, John Grimshaw, Chris Sanham and Jörg Lebsa are therefore pleased to announce that work has now started on the daunting task of documenting the newly named cultivars, with the intention of publishing them in a supplement to Snowdrops that will record the continuing development of the genus Galanthus in horticulture. It is planned that this book will be entitled Snowdrops 2.

Between us, we are currently aware of  c.1000 newly named cultivars and no doubt there are more still to be tracked down. Not surprisingly, with this number of cultivars to be researched, the publication date for Snowdrops 2 will be some years away and a further announcement about this will be made in due course, when we are better able to estimate the size of the task.

In the meantime, however, there are two important areas where we are looking for your help:

1. If you have named a snowdrop that is not recorded in the current edition of Snowdrops, and you have not previously told any of the co-authors about it, could you please do so as soon as possible.

2. If you are thinking about naming a new snowdrop could you please contact us BEFORE you name and distribute it so that we can check to ensure that the name is available for use (i.e. not already attached to another clone, and compliant with the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants, avoiding disappointment later if a name has to be changed), and to record it on our database for future publication.

In the first instance, please let Chris Sanham have this information at snowdrops2(AT)nationalcollectionholder.co.uk or Rus House, High Street, Henfield, West Sussex, BN5 9DD, United Kingdom

We look forward to an exciting and fascinating few years ahead.


   Matt Bishop, John Grimshaw, Chris Sanham, Jörg Lebsa

[annew]

I can't help thinking this is like painting the Forth Bridge. By the time that one comes out it will already be out of date and they'll have to start on Snowdrops 3!

[Maggi Young]

I heard an item on QI last night about a new type of paint, mixed with some compound which will  help the Forth Bridge to resist rust and which will mean that on a few years time, the task of painting said bridge will no longer be un-ending ....... I suspect there is no such hope for the snowdroppers.

[Alan_b]

I heard an item on QI last night about a new type of paint, mixed with some compound which will  help the Forth Bridge to resist rust and which will mean that on a few years time, the task of painting said bridge will no longer be un-ending ....... I suspect there is no such hope for the snowdroppers.

Sooner or later Galanthophiles will form some sort of accreditation body.  An accredited snowdrop will have to pass judgement as being noteworthy and you will probably have to pay to get your snowdrop accredited.  Non-accredited "named" snowdrops will fall by the wayside.  Either that or names will simply fade away in the manner that the vast quantity of yellow nivalis are all named "Sandersii Group" and we seem to be moving rapidly towards a  "Trym-type" Group.

[Alan_b]

SNOWDROPS 2

......

Matt Bishop, John Grimshaw, Chris Sanham and Jörg Lebsa are therefore pleased to announce that work has now started on the daunting task of documenting the newly named cultivars, with the intention of publishing them in a supplement to Snowdrops that will record the continuing development of the genus Galanthus in horticulture. It is planned that this book will be entitled Snowdrops 2.

............

Note that amongst the authors is our forum's own "Snowdropman", Chris Sanham.

[Martin Baxendale]

I suppose the snowdrop books may be a Catch 22 situation. When a book is being prepared, lots of people rush to name snowdrops they'd been vaguely thinking about naming for years, so the names can go in the book before the opportunity passes. Everyone who has a "new" snowdrop published in the book, with a mention of them having named it, buys at least one copy of the book, which adds to the success of the venture, so another one becomes a viable proposition...

[Maggi Young]

Sooner or later Galanthophiles will form some sort of accreditation body.  An accredited snowdrop will have to pass judgement as being noteworthy and you will probably have to pay to get your snowdrop accredited.  Non-accredited "named" snowdrops will fall by the wayside.  Either that or names will simply fade away in the manner that the vast quantity of yellow nivalis are all named "Sandersii Group" and we seem to be moving rapidly towards a  "Trym-type" Group.

The RHS system for registering Narcissus is workable and free ...... I wonder what moves, if any , may be afoot to repeat that for 'drops and other genera?

[Martin Baxendale]

The RHS system for registering Narcissus is workable and free ...... I wonder what moves, if any , may be afoot to repeat that for 'drops and other genera?

Does the RHS daffodils registrar actually assess the flowers as being suitable for registration though, or is it simply a rubber-stamp job?

Personally, I'd have a problem with a system where a small group or individual was set up to act as judge and jury on whether a plant should be given a name or not.

For a start, it can't possibly be enforced. Do the name police come along and take away your label at shows? Anyone can give a plant a name and no-one can physically stop them passing it to others with that name, so a register (which is effectively what the snowdrop books are) would useful for people to go to and check names and descriptions, as a help with identification, but it would not stop snowdrops being named.

Also, if a small group did set themselves up as the arbitrers of what makes a 'good' snowdrop, that could be dictated by their personal tastes, which might be at variance with the tastes of others. I think that approach would be a minefield, and I'd rather let common sense and word of mouth about what's good and not good prevail. Poor cultivars will end up not being bought and grown in the end. Just because the daffodil register has thousands of names in it doesn't mean they're all being grown or sold; it's just a record of what has been named, good and bad.

[Alan_b]

The RHS system for registering Narcissus is workable and free ...... I wonder what moves, if any , may be afoot to repeat that for 'drops and other genera?

Personally, I'd have a problem with a system where a small group or individual was set up to act as judge and jury on whether a plant should be given a name or not.

Martin, that's last millennium's way of doing things.  Now you could set up a system where pictures of the snowdrop and a description are posted on the internet and people could vote on whether it had merit.  Resulting in The SRGC Forum Galanthus Award of Merit, perhaps?

[Maggi Young]

I suppose the RHS narcissus scheme is more of a rubber stamp, but at least all details are taken and held and are able to be searched  etc.  

I confess to being rather sceptical about the way that the naming process seems to be described for this new snowdrop venture.

 What a plant looks like has very little bearing on how much merit it has as a garden plant ..... apart from personal preferences, there are considerations of disease resistance and robustness ..... in plants as prone to instability and disease as snowdrops, I would think the whole matter could become a minefield of absurd proportion.

[KentGardener]

But the poor spikies!  

I know I am in a minority loving the weird and wonderfully unusual ones - what chance would they have of being worthy of an 'award of merit'  I consider them worthy of a name - but guess they would probably get a pretty low vote compared to the 'beauties'....

John

[Martin Baxendale]

I'm all for awards, which can help to highlight really good (and garden-worthy) plants. I just have doubts about how effective it would be to try to physically prevent 'bad' (either looks or garden worthiness) plants being named, and how advisable it would be. All academic anyway. I'm sure common sense will prevail in the end. Just think of it as a snowdrop bubble. Of course, my new novel might just add to the interest and hype things up even more if it's a success (which it probably won't be knowing my luck recently).

[KentGardener]

Of course, my new novel might just add to the interest and hype things up even more if it's a success (which it probably won't be knowing my luck recently).

As will news items like these...

http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/4150698.Flower_bulb_sells_for___150/

http://www.hortweek.com/news/883905/Unique-EA-Bowles-inspired-snowdrop-bulb-sells-150/

I haven't found the time to read a book for years (other than plant reference books and computer manuals that is - looking forward to Snowdrops 2 coming out in a few years time  ) - but think I need to make time to read your novel Martin.  Do I buy it from you or from Amazon?

Cheers

John

[ian mcenery]

Interesting subject. The main problem is not just whether a flower looks great it seems to me the important issue is whether it proves to be garden worthy and can make an elegant statement from more than 2 inches which can't really be assessed in a picture.  I am sure that in 50 years time many of the plants now considered to be the holy grail will have entered obscurity if not miffed out of cultivation altogether because they were poor of constitution. Bear in mind that the high price asked for some drops will have 2 components the first its rarity and the second how difficult it is to increase. If a plant continues to be expensive then the clue is in the price  .

A well known grower of saxifrages told me that he did not consider a plant really good until he had had it for 20 years and it still retained a compact habit and flowered well.


PS this is from a collector of nearly 100 varieties - sad how the obsession works 

[KentGardener]

...can make an elegant statement from more than 2 inches which can't really be assessed in a picture.

I think I know what you mean Ian.  I walked into a Norfolk garden over the last weekend and knew straight away that the Galanthus growing the other side of a tree was 'David Baker' - it is so distinctive I can be spot it from a long way off. 

Unfortunately I don't think it is so cut and dry with many lovely snowdrops  - it is the finer detail for me that makes them interesting. 

Cheers

John