I've been watching as like others, I'll watch anything garden related! But I have been disappointed at the lack of thought for the future of the garden. Turf seats you can't mow and piled against an already knackered fence to rot it, raised beds with soil heaped against fences, those tree ferns all wonky like the wind had blown them over already, the wall at the bottom of that garden with the tree root they didn't remove or re-lay the bricks and fix the wall - just piled logs in front of it to hope no-one noticed, the dragon fly inspired 'patio' which looked nice but if it's gravel you surely can't sweep it up/pressure wash it etc. Maybe I should just enjoy it rather than over analyse it ;-)
Yesterday's garden bothered me because I thought the beds and paths would merge in a matter of weeks with that layout. And I wouldn't like to lean against those steel planters in cold weather!
You're right, Emma - maybe analysis isn't appropriate for afternoon TV....
I am clearly in the minority here because, having watched 3 or 4 of the programmes I think it is not a bad 'daytime TV' programme. There seem to be some half decent, realistic budgets and no pretence of trying to do everything in a ridiculously limited time frame.
I've found the Rich brothers designs to be clean and modern, Charlie's to be more traditional and I've liked both - always interesting to see 2 completely different designs for the same space.
I'm tending to like the Rich designs more - which is a bit of a surprise bearing in mind what my garden looks like...
I have to agree about the practicality of those turf seats though. My first thoughts - how to mow, snagging clothes on the vertical sticks, that soil is going to sink a lot, and that fence won't last 5 mins unless there is a space behind the back of the seat and the fence. Also very surprised they didnt find the cash to buy a couple of pots of stain to tidy up said fence.
Much prefer this programme to Love Your Garden and it's light years ahead of The Instant Gardener which I really don't get at all.
Heaven is ... sitting in the garden with a G&T and a cat while watching the sun go down
I thought spending half the budget of 6000 pounds on the three steel planters was a bit ott. I would have preferred wooden ones and proper paving you could sweep. The one glaring thing about the design was that there was no height anywhere - it was all very flat which I think made it less interesting.
'Optimism is the faith that leads to achievement' - Helen Keller
Again I agree with Verdun (doesn't always happen! ) - even about putting on weight. I am now 2 1/2 stone heavier than my wedding dress size How the heck did that happen when I work so hard in the garden? I find Charlie down to earth and likeable. And she makes me feel good because she actually looks heavier than me! But maybe that's the camera.
Dordogne and Norfolk. Clay in Dordogne, sandy in Norfolk.
Posts
I've been watching as like others, I'll watch anything garden related! But I have been disappointed at the lack of thought for the future of the garden. Turf seats you can't mow and piled against an already knackered fence to rot it, raised beds with soil heaped against fences, those tree ferns all wonky like the wind had blown them over already, the wall at the bottom of that garden with the tree root they didn't remove or re-lay the bricks and fix the wall - just piled logs in front of it to hope no-one noticed, the dragon fly inspired 'patio' which looked nice but if it's gravel you surely can't sweep it up/pressure wash it etc. Maybe I should just enjoy it rather than over analyse it ;-)
Yesterday's garden bothered me because I thought the beds and paths would merge in a matter of weeks with that layout. And I wouldn't like to lean against those steel planters in cold weather!
You're right, Emma - maybe analysis isn't appropriate for afternoon TV....
I am clearly in the minority here because, having watched 3 or 4 of the programmes I think it is not a bad 'daytime TV' programme. There seem to be some half decent, realistic budgets and no pretence of trying to do everything in a ridiculously limited time frame.
I've found the Rich brothers designs to be clean and modern, Charlie's to be more traditional and I've liked both - always interesting to see 2 completely different designs for the same space.
I'm tending to like the Rich designs more - which is a bit of a surprise bearing in mind what my garden looks like...
I have to agree about the practicality of those turf seats though. My first thoughts - how to mow, snagging clothes on the vertical sticks, that soil is going to sink a lot, and that fence won't last 5 mins unless there is a space behind the back of the seat and the fence. Also very surprised they didnt find the cash to buy a couple of pots of stain to tidy up said fence.
Much prefer this programme to Love Your Garden and it's light years ahead of The Instant Gardener which I really don't get at all.
I thought spending half the budget of 6000 pounds on the three steel planters was a bit ott. I would have preferred wooden ones and proper paving you could sweep. The one glaring thing about the design was that there was no height anywhere - it was all very flat which I think made it less interesting.
Again I agree with Verdun (doesn't always happen!
) - even about putting on weight. I am now 2 1/2 stone heavier than my wedding dress size 
How the heck did that happen when I work so hard in the garden? I find Charlie down to earth and likeable. And she makes me feel good because she actually looks heavier than me! But maybe that's the camera.
The truth is, Busy-Lizzie, you've not put weight on at all - it's all muscle