|Just a picture of a wooded garden scene|
On the one hand, I feel as though I should be buying plants for my garden that will reduce the amount of time, effort, and strength needed to maintain it.
To that end, I ordered two pawpaw trees to plant where the big viburnums grew until two weeks ago when I had a crew cut them out.
The pawpaw tree is a native tree for me, and once established, it should give me years of enjoyment without too much care. Plus. if I'm lucky, I'll get some pawpaws to eat in early fall. The pawpaw trees will be like sentries on two corners of the vegetable garden and add to the other edible fruits - apples, raspberries, blackberries, blueberries, honeyberries, grapes, and strawberries - I've already planted.
On the other hand, I feel as though there are some plants I still want to try to grow, even if they need a bit of extra attention, knowing that even if I give them that extra attention and we have a particularly cold winter, they could up and die on me anyway.
To that end, I just ordered three cold hardy camellias, the hardiest I could find. I will plant them this spring, baby them through the summer and fall and hope they survive the winter and give me a few blooms next spring. They will anchor my Garden of Southern Follies and Delights and add to the crepe myrtle I planted last fall.
Two ends of the gardening spectrum. Easy care to molly-coddling care. It's a conflict within me. Which should I choose?
When we encounter conflict, I think our natural tendency is to try to resolve the conflict quickly so we can live in peace once again. Either do that, or retreat away from the conflict. Me? I think I'll keep this conflict in my garden going for awhile. After all, if I stay somewhere in the middle, I'm sure to save some time in some areas of the garden and therefore have some time to spend on some interesting plants for other areas.
With that, I think I've resolved my conflict. Or have I just reached a nice compromise?