"We are Luddites" - Peter George's article in RGQ 70 #1

[Fermi]

Having just received the latest RGQ I was very interested to read the President's piece in the NARGS Bulletin Board.
Peter raises some interesting points and I'm reminded of something we were told when our (non-gardening) group was facing similar issues: the death of any group starts with seven words: "We've never done it that way before".
Although Peter asked for members to e-mail him their feedback I wondered if it would be appropriate to discuss it on the Forum.
In that case I just wanted to get the ball rolling.
cheers
fermi

[Tim Ingram]

I agree strongly with Peter George's analysis of the problems facing specialist plant societies like the NARGS, and have tried to initiate a debate about this on the AGS website with pretty limited success. I think debate is important because it brings more people together to think of new initiatives and focusses attention on what it is that is so important to us about the societies we belong to, which for me is stimulating new people to share in them. I disagree with Peter about the NARGS website which I find very stimulating and well put together and has enabled me to learn a lot about the plants and gardening that occurs in the States. The problem can be with new people coming in to such a site (forum), but whereas this is a valid criticism of the AGS site I don't think it is here - those who contribute have very varied experience and expertise and I for one have found that very inspiring.

The AGS and NARGS are very different; the former has a very strong ethos of exhibiting plants and a much lower profile on the value of our gardens. I have tried to argue that the latter are a strong resource and that more energy put into opening them around the country would begin to raise the profile of our more specialised form of gardening amongst gardeners in general. Even more effective would be combining efforts to fund and produce far better television programmes on plants in wild habitats like the mountains and deserts, showing the great drama of such places, which we all appreciate, with the often unexpected beauty and variety of the plant life. This is long term but I think has to come as a means of showing far more people in general of the wonders of the botanical world.

I am less convinced of the long term value of investing effort in the electronic communication that occurs between younger people - this is really somethng they create partly as a place for themselves away from the overriding strictures of an older generation. So any such adjunct to the NARGS really needs to come about by and for a younger group of members who are convinced of the value of the Society as it is now. More important is convincing people in general what a sensible activity gardening is (and especially linked to learning about plants in the wider world), and that actually getting your hands dirty has a lot more about it than spending too much time on the computer.

As Peter says once you start it is difficult to know where to stop! There is a nice article Lincoln Foster wrote in the AGS Bulletin Vol. 27, p.187 (1959), where he compares rock gardening in Britain and America, and it could easily be written now as then. At one point he comes up with the rather wonderfully worded sentence 'Serious horticulture is a form of sophisticated behaviour rather out of keeping with American enthusiasms.' But there must be scope to increase the sophistication of American gardeners!

[McDonough]

An interesting topic.  I have not received my NARGS Quarterly with Peter's article in it, so I will reserve offering much feedback until the Quarterly arrives.  I have however, read a version of the article in one of the Berkshire Chapter NARGS newsletters.  I'm not sure what the thoughts and arguments are relative to using social network media to connect with younger people to potentially spark of interest in plants. Although as one who has young adult daughters who obviously do favor such communication venues, and with first hand observations on Facebook, I do believe it is worthwile to invest some time in these areas.

Some of you reading this are also Facebook (FB for short) "friends" of mine, others might use FB but we haven't yet connected. I have a love-hate relationship with FB (I will spare you the details why), but after almost dumping FB entirely, I finally acquiesced to its existence, popularity, and favored usage by both young and older participants.  There is much to interest rock gardeners and plant lovers of all types, albeit usually with less depth of meaningful discussion, but still a worthwhile avenue of communication.

Facebook has lots of "Open Groups" that can be joined; here are some that I joined or "subscribe" to.  I'm noticing a number of young people participating in these Groups!

Delosperma and other cold hardy mesembs
166 Members, 463 Photos  (relative young group, some familiar faces here, such as Panayoti Kelaidis, the FB maven that he is )
http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/304702516852/

Kniphofia
37 Members, 79 Photos  (PK is a familiar face over in this group too)
http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/267448319972883/

California Native Plant Society
2,282 Members, 233 Photos
http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/38417209275/

Flores Silvestres de Chile • Wildflowers of Chile
2,873 Members, 1,515 Photos
http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/47405455016/

Facebook also has "Secret Groups" that can be joined if one gets invited to join, or create your own group and invite friends, or make it an Open Group if desired.  I'm thinking of starting one on Epimedium (an Open Group).  Also, when using FB, it is very easy when opportunities arise to augment a particular discussion or photo-comment-thread, to post a NARGS Forum link that'll bring a larger audience into NARGS fray.  

NARGS does have a FB "page", it is here:
http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/North-American-Rock-Garden-Society/232300658503
...but it is not very active.  It would be better that it be a FB "Group" where people could belong to the group, with an active ongoing presence to a mega audience.

[Tim Ingram]

Quick correction to how I worded my above reply - where I said 'The problem can be with new people coming in to such a site (forum)', I meant 'for' new people... The big problem for the AGS, I think, is the strong expertise of the exhibiting community within the Society, which while it has always been such an essential feature of the Society is also intimidating and rather exclusive. The same is not true of the NARGS where expertise seems very freely shared. I think we have more to learn from gardeners in the States than vice versa.

[Peter George]

I am really quite pleased that the discussion is now on the Forum. I have received about 25 email responses so far, and they have been both varied and interesting, as well as unusually helpful to me. I'll try to address all of the issues over the next few days, but today I'll start with the website.

The problems with the website are less it's current 'state' and capacity, as its lack of ability to accept change/upgrades. In simple terms, what we have is a site that simply cannot be upgraded without a 'redo,' and without the ability to upgrade the Joomla Content Management System, which is the 'bones' of our site, we are simply stuck. In addition, as the technology changes, we won't be able to add functionality without the probable destabilization of the site, leading eventually to a full fledged collapse.

So if we are to do the responsible thing with our internet presence, we must build a new site on a more robust (and upgradable!) CMS. I've asked for 10k in our 2012 budget for a new website, which if approved, will give us enough to do it right.

[Lis Allison]

....Even more effective would be combining efforts to fund and produce far better television programs on plants in wild habitats like the mountains and deserts, showing the great drama of such places, which we all appreciate, with the often unexpected beauty and variety of the plant life. This is long term but I think has to come as a means of showing far more people in general of the wonders of the botanical world.

....

What a great idea. Programs like that would be wonderful - existing gardeners would enjoy them, and they might interest not-yet-gardeners. Just making it sound as though 'they' (the great 'they') value gardens, gardening, plants, habitats etc. will raise gardening's profile and increase its appeal. I wonder if some could be done locally by small TV stations? But let's not have those 'garden-makeover-in-half-an-hour' programs! Heck, I might even buy a TV!

[Tim Ingram]

One of the younger members of the AGS strongly favours using Facebook for more communication with younger gardeners. After reading Mark's comments above I can see that it could be especially valuable for more specific discussion on particular groups of plants, and that would actually be a good way of drawing people into the much wider aspects of gardening we share on the NARGS Forum. I would also favour more information on propagation, perhaps with short videos, as I have seen elsewhere on the web, since this lies so much at the heart of gardening and yet is rarely examined in some detail.

[IMYoung]

One of the difficulties with FaceBook is shown by an attempt to follow some of Peter's links.... one can only view them if one is a registered user of FaceBook.



The problems of a site that needs upgrading to be "future proof" to some extent is one that many will sympathise with.... and one that the SRGC is also addressing.

[McDonough]

One of the difficulties with FaceBook is shown by an attempt to follow some of Peter's links.... one can only view them if one is a registered user of FaceBook.

Maggi, I think you are referring to my FaceBook links   

Yes, it is true, you can only follow some FB links if you are a registered FB user.  Just checked the stats on FB membership, and they report over 800 million!  The point of the links, for those who have FB, is to illustrate the fact there is a growing community of plant-related topics out there, some of it certainly in the ballpark of expert rock gardening, and with some specialized topics, it could be embraced as a way to draw in young people who swear by FB... already seeing that happening.

Also, I keep finding truly amazing photo galleries on Picasa and Flickr, found one today from a woman in Korea that posted exquisite photos of many native Korean plants; exploring, linking, and engaging with these sites too, may draw in people from around the globe who have a love of nature, the mountains, and the wild plants they encounter.

[IMYoung]

One of the difficulties with FaceBook is shown by an attempt to follow some of Peter's links.... one can only view them if one is a registered user of FaceBook.

Maggi, I think you are referring to my FaceBook links   

Yes, it is true, you can only follow some FB links if you are a registered FB user.  Just checked the stats on FB membership, and they report over 800 million!  The point of the links, for those who have FB, is to illustrate the fact there is a growing community of plant-related topics out there, some of it certainly in the ballpark of expert rock gardening, and with some specialized topics, it could be embraced as a way to draw in young people who swear by FB... already seeing that happening.

Also, I keep finding truly amazing photo galleries on Picasa and Flickr, found one today from a woman in Korea that posted exquisite photos of many native Korean plants; exploring, linking, and engaging with these sites too, may draw in people from around the globe who have a love of nature, the mountains, and the wild plants they encounter.

Oops, yes, they were yours, not Peter's. 

Most Picasa and Flickr galleries are open to all, I think.

[David Sellars]

Peter's article in the Quarterly has many good ideas.  I particularly like digitizing the entire collection of the NARGS Quarterly.  The SRGC has done this and I have found the resource invaluable looking up old articles on plant exploration.

I do not think that the young people referred to "love plants and rock gardening as much as we do".  They are too busy communicating with each other and knocking into people on the street while they do it.  Gardeners are "doers" first and communicators second.  As we know, it takes a great deal of focus to be a successful rock gardener and there are so many competing alternatives these days for the attention of the younger generation.  That said, there now appears to be a swing back to real live events which may be positive for the appeal of the reality of gardens and participation at chapter meetings:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/01/post-digital-world-web

Personally I find the current NARGS web site excellent, especially compared with the former version. Members can interact on the wiki or the forum, post pictures and video and thereby create an online community and it is becoming more and more active. I am actually pleasantly surprised there are so many non-Luddites in NARGS.  If members want to start using Facebook they will and as Mark noted above the NARGS Facebook should be a "group".

In general I think we worry too much about expanding membership.  Either you want to join or you don't. One of the "complaints" from prospective members about our local club is that we use Latin names for plants.  It would be rather like someone complaining that a rowing club is always using boats.

[Tim Ingram]

I am with you most of the way David, but it's always great when you see your rowers winning gold at the Olympics!

[McDonough]

I finally got my Rock Garden Quarterly and read the subject article; "We Are Luddites" (even though I'm not a Luddite ).  I can echo sentiments expressed above by other forumists, particularly in terms of Peter's forward-looking projects that make NARGS interests and resources more accessible to members.  But I do not sympathize with the depiction of NARGS being perched at the precipice of doom, gloom, and utter demise.

Nor do I share the dreary picture painted of the NARGS website.  With post-publication mitigating comments relative to the difficulties of the web site "backbone", regarding obstacles to flexibility in providing updates and adding new features, I'm sure that's true, as 3 years in technology terms equates to a human "generation", indicating technology obsolescence. Attributing "shortsightedness" to the NARGS.org website doesn't bode well for me; also perhaps not for those involved who expended huge effort to making it all happen in the first place. It might very well be time to update the site for technological reasons alone, much less so because of any inherent flaws or substandard design; it's a good web site. The awesome 2011-2012 on-line seed exchange ordering demonstrates its intrinsic value.

In the article's estimation of what works and doesn't, I cannot agree with "the [seed] Exchange became stale" (wasn't the surplus seed distribution implemented in these so-called stale years). Myself and a small army of unpaid volunteers gave up a good number of full weekend days preparing NARGS Seed Exchange orders for two years that NARGS New England Chapter handled the seed order fulfillment process; again in the so-called stale years.  Other chapters did the same.  It is stated the "Rock Garden Quarterly became a liability" on one hand, then cited in the same article as the only current NARGS function as a positive, described as an "outstanding quarterly publication".  I recognize the juncture in time being referred to here, but it is unfair to the monumental amount of effort in previous years. I have worked with all of the NARGS editors over the past +30 years that I've been a ARGS/NARGS member, and have had excellent experience with all of them.  I value each and every NARGS Quarterly bulletin that I have, and look forward to the day where this tremendous resource is digitized and made available to NARGS members, an inspired idea and objective in my opinion.

In the items of things mentioned as working (just one, the current NARGS Quarterly), there is no mention whatsoever of the very place you are reading this, the NARGS Forum, an on-line community for rock gardeners and plant lovers of all sorts, the "Facebook" for rock gardeners  A little over a year ago, the NARGS Forum was opened up to any internet applicant, requiring a huge amount of work, the work continuing to this day where Forum membership applications need to be vetted daily and either accepted or rejected.  We have a "plugin" installed on NARGS Forum (thanks Hugh!) that automatically rejects approximately 100 bogus spammer registration requests each and every day, but many bogus registration requests still get through daily... each is researched (we have tools, but it is still time consuming), and we quietly do our duty each day to make all of this happen.  The NARGS Forum could be instrumental in increasing membership, it needs to be recognized and promoted.

To be continued...

[IMYoung]

The NARGS Forum could be instrumental in increasing membership, it needs to be recognized and promoted.

 That is very true. The Forum can be a terrific tool to enthuse readers and draw in members.

[Tim Ingram]

I would certainly echo Mark's comments about the value of the website and forum. I can only compare it with the other alpine forums and for me it is where I obtain the most solid and useful information, and it has a distinctive presence which is made by the contributors and hopefully will always attract new gardeners. The bigger problem is simply making far more people (gardeners or incipient gardeners) aware  of where gardening can really take you. In Britain hugely more people are members of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (and have a very extensive knowledge of Natural History) than belong to specialised plant societies, or even the Royal Horticultural Society. In our perception of the Natural World plants do not hold the same cachet as animals, and this must be a reason why proper studies of plants in the wild are never televised. Unless and until there is some shift in this perception it seems unlikely that greater numbers of people will consider gardening as many of us do.

David may be right that in America there is less need to be concerned. For one thing as a country you have a wonderful flora which will always tempt people like me who would like to learn more about it. In Britain the AGS does have greater problems, to an extent because our Society is a lot less democratic in its make up and we do have very few younger people becoming involved, which to me is an extraordinary failing when you consider all the things that plants teach us. Even in the Czech Republic, which is renowned for its rock gardening (and seed collectors!) there is a decline in the alpine societies. It does seem that a huge amount depends on the individuals that inspire others, and as Mark says, contribute very strongly to the Societies.

Since the same problems seem to run across many different specialised societies, it could be a time to come together and promote much better tv programmes on plants, as I have said before. There are huge possibilities here varying from more ambitious ideas of looking at alpine plants across the world, to probably more realisable ones of the detective stories of searching for certain plants in dramatic situations, to actually building gardens with these plants, something that many of us find completely compelling. All of these could illustrate the out and out excitement of 'proper' gardening with plants.

I sympathise with Peter and those charged with running the Society because attracting new members can be such a hard task and many of us just take this as something that happens without much involvement from us. It will be very interesting to see where the discussion leads.