I love all flowers equally. So why, I wondered, am I so obsessed with painting roses?
The answer came to me last winter, when I was snowbound and leafing through the David Austen rose catalogue, fantasizing about the rose borders I would plant come spring (didn't happen).
Charlotte: approximately 100 petals. Lady of Shalott: approximately 60 petals. Thomas Becket: approximately 63 petals. (Love the odd number.) Buttercup: approximately 25 petals. Approximate. Variety. Ah-ha.
Variety is the key. There seem to be infinite variations in the colors, but also the structure of roses, which, for one as vague and messy as myself, is most appealing.
And yes, I do know that these are peonies, not roses.
I was at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden last week,
the roses were just getting started,
but the peonies were in full glory.
(And aren't their centers interesting?)
They have some of the same characteristics as roses.
All those petals! And the way they fold and curve.
I always think of ball gowns when I see them. Princess dresses.
No wonder brides love them.
It looks like an individual. Distinctive. A bit shy and flirty.
I've gotten used to the big diva-like ones that are so popular
(hundreds of petals, thousands)
and it was nice to see some that are a little more demure.
My own peonies are still wrapped up in their tight buds.
I look at them every day, hoping to catch them unfurling.