256 
REVIEW. 
would not form a whole, which the word group always implies. On the contrary, though all the. trees in a 
gardenesque group ought to he so far separated from each other as not to touch, yet the degrees of separation may 
he as different as the de- 
*3 
signer chooses, provided 
the idea of a group is not 
lost sight of. In fig. 7, 
the trees are arranged in 
the gardenesque manner; 
and in fig. 8, in the pic¬ 
turesque style. The same 
character is also communi¬ 
cated to the walks; that 
in the gardenesque style 
having the margins definite 
and smooth, while the pic¬ 
turesque walk has the edge 
indefinite and rough. 
Utility requires that the 
gravel, in both styles of 
walks, should he smooth, firm, and dry; for it must always be borne in mind, that, as landscape-gardening is an 
useful as well as an agreeable art, no beauty must ever he allowed to interfere with the former quality.” 
These two styles are scarcely sufficiently understood, hut upon a correct appreciation of them depends, in a 
great measiu-e, the disposal of many of our most valuable plants. Again, Mr. Loudon, with great judgment, 
remarks, “In laying out and planting grounds , or in criticising such as are already formed by eminent artists, it is 
necessary always to bear in mind that difference between the gardenesque and the picturesque ; that is, between 
a plantation made merely for picturesque effect, and another made for gardenesque effect. Gardenesque effect in 
plantations is far too little attended to for the beauty of the trees and shrubs, whether individually or collectively; 
and picturesque effect is not generally understood by gardeners ; so that the scenery of suburban residences is 
often neutralised in character by the ignorance of professional landscape-gardeners of the gardenesque, and of 
professional horticulturists and nurserymen of the picturesque. To make the most of any place, however small, 
all the styles of art ought to be familiar to the artist ; because there are few places in which, though one style 
prevails, some traits of other styles may not be advantageously introduced. In planting, thinning, and pruning, 
in order to produce gardenesque effect, the beauty of every individual tree and shrub, as a single object, is to be 
taken into consideration, as well as the beauty of the mass ; while in planting, thinning, and pruning for 
picturesque effect, the beau¬ 
ty of individual trees and 
shrubs is of little conse¬ 
quence ; because no tree or 
shrub, in a picturesque 
plantation or scene, should 
stand isolated, and each 
should be considered as 
merely forming part of a 
group or mass. In a pic¬ 
turesque imitation of na¬ 
ture, the trees and shrubs 
when planted, should be 
scattered over the ground 
in the most irregular man¬ 
ner ; both in their dis¬ 
position with reference to 
their immediate effect as plants, and with reference to their future effect as trees and shrubs. In some places trees 
should prevail, in others shrubs ; in some parts the plantation should be thick, in others it should be thin; two or three 
trees, or a tree and a shrub, ought often to be planted in one hole, and this more especially on lawns. Where, on the 
contrary, trees and shrubs are to be scattered in the gardenesque maimer, every one should stand singly; as in the 
geometrical manner they should stand in regular lines, or in some regular figure. In the gardenesque, there may be 
single trees and single shrubs; but there can be no such thing as a single tree in the picturesque. Every tree, in the 
picturesque style of laying out grounds, must always be grouped with something else, if it should be morel)' a shrub, 
a twiner, or a tuft of grass, or other plants at its root. In the gardenesque, the beauty of the tree consists in its own 
individual perfections, which are fully developed in consequence of the isolated manner in which it has been grown; 
in the picturesque, the beauty of a tree or shrub, as of every other object in the landscape, consists in its fitness to 
group with other objects. Now, the fitness of one object to group with another evidently does not consist in the per¬ 
fection of the form of that object, but rather in that imperfection which requires another object to render it complete.” 
