r:-]> r' "*-?!*'•> 



NOVEMUEK 14, 1012. 



The Florists^ Review 



^ 



27 



THE ART OF FLOWER 

 i^ ARRANGEMENT i^ 



By FRED C. V. BROWN 



PBOGBESS IN ABT. 



Aa Shown by Three Designs. 



The preceding article of this series, 

 published in The Review of October 31, 

 dealt particularly with the economy of 

 art and the necessity of using reason 

 in everything attempted. We tried to 

 show that the wreath alone, no matter 

 how you may do your arranging of the 

 blooms, is not sufficient in its interest, 

 unless you embody some principle, some 

 theory, or display some striking indi- 

 viduality. We tried to tell you that 

 it is far better to use a single material 

 to act as a main attraction and let it 

 rest at that, than to use half a dozen 

 varieties and place 

 them with only a 

 view to "using up 

 stuff." 



Merely Pretty. 



The wreath shown 

 on this page is a fair 

 example of what is 

 generally termed a 

 ' ' mixed,-flower de- 

 sign." In this 

 wreath we have used 

 plain, ordinary ma- 

 terial; namely, an 18- 

 inch frame, fifty car- 

 nations, six roses, 

 four stalks of candi- 

 dum lilies with four 

 flowers on each, one 

 spray of asparagus 

 and fifty g a 1 a x 

 leaves. Let us 

 analyze our design 

 and see the result of 

 our efforts. 



We find a wreath 

 of flowers; our de- 

 sign is pretty; that 

 is all. There is no 

 lasting impression, no 

 special interest, no 

 display of individu- 

 ality or originality; 

 there is nothing to 

 hold the attention 

 now that it has been 

 attracted by the 

 main body of the 

 form; it is simply 

 pretty. But our ma- 

 terial is pretty, and it 

 18 only the beauty of 

 this that calls forth a remark. No story, 

 no character, no theory is displayed. 



Common, but Inartistic. 



This form of mixed-flower design is 

 worthy of the hands of the most crude 

 beginner and would be a poor makeshift 

 trom the hands of one calling himself 

 a professional florist. It is a form of 

 arrangement met with everywhere, 

 every day, but it is a glaring example 

 of our thoughtlessness and stands as a 

 monument to our inability. The only 



Mr. Brown will be pleaaed to answer, «■ this 

 •eriei of articles progresses, any criticisms or 

 questions that may occur to his readers. The 

 first article of the series was printed in the issue 

 of October 10. The next installment will appear 

 in an early issue. 



redeeming feature is, it is "pretty," 

 and that only in material. Wreaths of 

 this type never differ one from another, 

 and while many think it an economical 

 form, it is by actual test the most ex- 

 travagant form possible to use. It is 

 without reason, character, ingenuity or 

 skill, and therefore is inartistic. 



The second of the three illustrations 

 shows the same wreath and the same 

 flowers as in the mixed-flower design. 



only we have grouped our separate ma- 

 terials and, as a result, we find that we 

 have had to waste material in order to 

 use it all. We could greatly improve 

 this design by reducing the size of our 

 lily spray and making the main attrac- 

 tion, the wreath of carnations, more 

 pronounced. Then we would have our 

 roses and lilies for our opposition and 

 high light, and to use in the display of 

 our skill as florists and our power to 

 charm. 



The third illustration again shows the 



same design and the same flowers, only 

 we have used what is generally con- 

 sidered a much more extravagant form 

 of design, the solid arrangement with 

 the cluster, and we surely find some- 

 thing that is understandable, some- 

 thing that carries a story and interest, 

 something that you do not have to "be 

 educated to appreciate." 



A Beally Artistic Wreath. 



This third design embodies artistic 

 principles; it may not charm you, but 

 that is only the fault of the maker. 

 This form can be talked about; it has 

 more or l^ss character, but the design 

 shown in the first of the three pictures 

 can only call forth 

 the remark, "A 

 wreath of flowers." 

 No doubt many 

 who have read this 

 and the previous ar- 

 ticles have decided 

 by this time that the 

 writer has a biased 

 faith in forms of the 

 solid flowers. Such 

 an inference, how- 

 ever, is far from fact, 

 for we have only 

 used this style be- 

 cause of its splendid 

 adaptability to illus- 

 tration. 



Free Scope. 



The manner of ar- 

 ranging the flowers 

 used in these three il- 

 lustrations is limited 

 only by your own 

 power of creation. 

 But, no matter how 

 you twist or turn the 

 flowers, or how you 

 place your high light, 

 or what you use for 

 the main body of the 

 form, unless you use 

 reason and let your 

 efforts speak for 

 themselves and in 

 their silent speaking 

 be understood, you 

 are not artistic; you 

 are extravagant, and 

 you are placing your- 

 self and your pro- 

 fession on a level 

 with the street faker or the corner 

 grocer, who has a few bargain blooms 

 to sell when the spring glut is on. 



Ck) Back and Bead. 



We wish, at this point, that: we could 

 get our readers to turn back to the 

 first articles of this series and read 

 them through again. We believe that 

 the theory of the arrangement of flow- 

 ers that we have been trying to bring 

 out in these articles will by now have 

 begun to impress itself upon the appre- 



