Well, that's why they are in the Rose forums to begin with.

If you want a rose, plant one; if you don't want one, don't plant one. A "true" garden is one that makes you happy.

FYI, not all roses are fragile and fussy - I've got a couple gardens full of Old Garden Roses and Buck roses, both which are tough and unfussy. The Canadian Explorer roses are also tough as old boots. But jeez, don't plant something just because "everybody" says you should.

I have roses but they are not very significant contributors to the overall garden and they are the ones that are not fussy - no diseases, the shrub itself looks nice when not in bloom, etc. My favorite is probably 'Claire Matin'. I don't like pink very much but this is a wonderful shrub with cocoa-brown sepals and new stems and blooms all summer.

Funny story - I have 3 half dead Golden Anniversary in my garden. I bought them for my in-laws but realised just in time they had been married 60 years, not 50, so the bushes ended up in my garden. They are rubbish and I really ought to pull them. I have one sickly twig which is Margaret Merrill, a wonderfully fragrant rose but one which has never flowered for me and is a martyr to black spot. That ought to go too.

The only intentional rose I have is a Goldfinch rambler over the shed roof. No disease, no dead heading.

Been gardening for almost 50 years. Have never grown roses--too fussy, too appealing to deer, etc. etc.

What lisanti said. Why are you so worried about what others may deem or not deem appropriate for your garden? There are many, many kinds of garden out there, with and without roses. Go forth, and make your garden your own!

But at the same time, people say a garden can't be a true garden without a rose..

===>>>

personally.. i am way past worrying about what other people think ...

ken

" people say a garden can't be a true garden without a rose.."

Depends on the garden and depends on the gardener!! Some gardens just do not lend themselves well to growing roses - too shady, too dry, too poor a soil condition - does that mean they aren't real gardens?? Hardly!! A "good" gardener knows what will do best for them in their location and focus on those sorts of plants and that may or may not include roses.

FWIW, A rose fanatic may insist a garden needs roses to be a "real" garden but a conifer fanatic may claim just the opposite! It's all a matter of personal taste. I have had three major gardens of my own in my lifetime. The first was rather eclectic and cottagey and I did include roses. The second was beach front and the only roses that grew on the property were a few wild native roses that required almost no care. My current garden is heavily treed with lots of shade and lots of deer - no roses here!! But all three were/are "true" gardens!!

Used to grow a few roses, but the deer ate the buds so what's the point?

I only grow roses that do well here; that is ones that don't get fungus and aren't delicate. However, my deer show no interest in my roses, so they aren't an issue in my garden.

As others have said, grow what you want to that will thrive in your conditions.

No roses in my garden. Too many deer, elk, and thorns. The branching pattern makes them a debit in the winter garden. Also, I can't prune them without drawing blood somewhere along the line, even when disposing of the branches. They don't compost very fast either. Oh, difficult to weed too.

I don't grow plants for their flowers like most people do. Shape and form come first. Flowers are just an added bonus and if you just look at the flowers, it's like driving down the road just looking at the hood ornament.

Mike