« Patio Container Garden, Week 1 | Main | Science Fiction and Fantasy Media Intro Lecture on MP3 »

April 09, 2005

From the Ground Up: The Story of a First Garden by Amy Stewart

When I'm diving into a new field I know nothing about - Buddhism, photography, wine, wrestling, or gardening, to take a few recent examples - I'm always looking for a certain kind of writer: an opinionated, first-person guide to this confusing new world. My model for this kind of writing is Bill James, the great baseball analyst. I'm always on the lookout for "the Bill James of wine" or "the Bill James of wrestling."

The point isn't that I want an expert to tell me what to think. Rather, I want to hear about this new universe from a distinct, coherent point of view. From there, I can develop my own perspective. I don't want an authority so much as a critical sensibility. These new subjects always teem with boggling amounts of details - the eightfold path of Buddhism, the varieties of wrestling holds, the latin names for all those flowers. I'll never learn all this stuff by trying to memorize it, and that wouldn't be much fun, anyway. Rather, what I want is to absorb the perspective of a savvy participant, so that the field as a whole makes sense to me. Once I do that, the details can fall in place over time, if I decide to stick with it.

I appear to be in the minority in this preference - most people seem to prefer the bland-to-cutesy textbook style of the Dummies guides. Guide series do have their places - I'm a big fan of the " . . . for Beginners" series of cartoon guides. When they're done right, as in the classic Marx for Beginners by Rius, those are a great way to get your bearings on a subject. The newer "Introducing . . ." cartoon series is also great. And Oxford University Press has a nifty ongoing series of "Very Short Introduction to . . . " books. The Jung books from both of the latter series have been great entry points into a massive body of work.

All this brings me to From the Ground Up, my entry point into the daunting world of gardening. I've picked up a half a dozen gardening reference books over the last few years, but all of them succeeded only in dazing me with a boggling array of disconnected tips, warnings, and factoids. What I needed was a theory of gardening that made sense to me. So I switched over from Borders's "Gardening Reference" section to the "Gardening Writing" section. I was wary, because I find nature writing often unbearably twee and smug in that Year in Provence mode. I was wary of this book too, given its sweet but very Provencial impressionistic cover painting of a front yard garden. I browsed the book over several Borders visits, each time wavering, then finally took the plunge.

It was a good call. I devoured the book over just a couple of days, and now I feel a new sense of comprehension of all this gardening stuff. Stewart writes about her first year of building a garden from scratch, as an enthusiastic but inexperienced amateur. Her tastes, reassuringly, are for wildness over rigid structure, and a few weeds and bugs over pesticidal warface. She strongly prefers organic methods, but isn't a compost Nazi when chemicals seem to be the only way to go. I don't really like her taste in vegetables - I can't stand tomatoes or zucchini - but I think I'd really enjoy hanging out in her garden.

This isn't one of those books where the putative subject becomes a metaphor for the writer's life. Sure, we learn about her husband, her beloved great-grandmother, and her two amazing cats. But the focus is always on the garden for its own sake, and that's plenty. We learn a lot about the virtues of compost, the overratedness of roses, and, in a great chapter, the lives of earthworms. (The latter subject must have really inspired her - she followed this book up with a whole book on worms.)

Stewart did have an inspired location for her garden: a rental house in Santa Cruz, across the street from an amusement park and just a block away from the beach. Gardening so close to the ocean - and to druken tourists - has its own specific challenges. And this microclimate has its own specific charms. One thing I'm learning is that gardening is always local. You can browse all these giant coffee-table books full of fantasy gardens, but what really matters is what will grow in your soil, under your sky. (That's why my next step is to start reading books specifically about gardening in the South - Tough Plants for Southern Gardens looks particularly promising.)

I'm still not sure I'll end up planting much more than my current batch of containers. Or maybe I'll just grow a huge row of something simple and useful, like mint - I really like mint. But even if I punt on this whole gardening project, I understand the gardener's worldview a little better now, thanks to Stewart.

Posted by tedf at April 9, 2005 03:33 PM

Comments

So who's the Bill James of wine? Who's the Bill James of photography?

Posted by: Gavin at April 11, 2005 08:19 PM

A guy named Robert Parker, who rates wines on a 100-point scale, is said to be the Bill James of wine. Adam Gopnick made exactly that claim in a recent piece in The New Yorker. I haven't been through enough of his recommended bottles yet to see what I think of his taste. He doesn't seem to be in James's or Stewart's league as a writer or analyst, though.

The Bill James of movies was Pauline Kael. The Bill James of poker is probably David Slansky, although he has some strong competition. (There's a lot of good poker writing out there.) The Bill James of baseketball is John Hollinger of alleyoop.com. With the publication of the new Rolling Stone Record Guide, the Bill James of music is now officially our mutual friend Rob Sheffield.

The Bill James of wrestling is a guy named Scott Keith. I'll get around to him in a future post.
I haven't found the Bill James of photography yet. Any suggestions?

Posted by: Ted at April 11, 2005 10:35 PM

Are you looking for the Bill James of photo-taking or photo-viewing?

Posted by: Gavin at April 12, 2005 09:45 AM

Either or both. I guess Bill James himself is the Bill James of watching baseball, not playing baseball (he can't teach you how to hit a curve), so it follows that the Bill James of photography would write about photo-viewing, not photo-taking. But I'd think the perspective would really improve my photo-taking, too.

Posted by: Ted at April 14, 2005 02:32 AM

The book that changed the way I think about photography was John Szarkowski's Looking at Photographs. (Amazon link here.) It's 100 photos from Moma's collection, with detailed commentary on a facing page for each of them, and it's both a crash course on the history of photography and a new set of tools for looking at pictures. So Szarkowski is my nominee for the Bill James of photography, although I suppose I should read some of his other books (he's written dozens, apparently) to confirm the opinion.

Posted by: Gavin at April 14, 2005 10:10 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?