Can anyone here help me better understand what particular characteristics define a rose as being of a “shrub”-type character?
Yeah, a shrub rose is something that doesnt fit anywhere else, lol. I’m joking but there’s a sick truth to it.
roflol
It almost reminds me of ikebana where the space between something is just as much the definition as the space used. Space for this would obviously be the preconceived notion of classes. Personally, I like the way the UK does classes. It makes slightly more sense even if still very obtuse and bordering on pointless.
ah yes…
'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call’d,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.
Less eloquently, a shrub rose to me is a more modest rose whose bare knees cannot be seen because her skirt grows down to the ground… it could also be a grab-bag for roses the purists won’t have in their favourite class… call that a Tea… nooooo… that should be a modern shrub LOL
Thanks for the insights so far guys.
“Shrub rose” sounds quite a catchy name anyways, quite fitting for, well… “modern times”.