By Peter Schneider

HAVE YOU EVER thought of making calligraphy letters out of rose blooms? Me neither, but an idea that Carolyn Parker had in 1999 has turned into this beautiful book.

For each of twenty-six roses, A through Z, she presents a lovely hand-made floral letter, and the story of that particular rose, and its associations in her life. Taken as a whole, these form an excellent introduction to roses. Apart from the cleverness of the idea and the beauty of the result, two things impressed me right away. Only nine of the twenty-six roses discussed are hybrid teas. And only six were raised by Americans. So readers really are getting a peek at the rose world, not just one class of roses raised in one country. A is not for All-American Rose Selections.

Parker writes that roses beginning with K, N, V, and Z were the hardest to come up with, and yet she ended up with KATHLEEN, NEVADA, VIOLETTE, and ZEPHIRINE DROUHIN, four of the strongest choices in the book. She tells us that she only purchased ZEPHIRINE DROUHIN because it began with a Z and she needed it for this book.

This is typical of the friendly, honest approach found throughout the book. Parker is not delivering rose commandments from the top of some mountain. We read about her early mistakes with roses and her enthusiasm when things really start going right with her favorite flower. We meet her friends and family. And the exclamation points all ring true.

Parker gardens in California, and in her garden portraits we see some of the possibilities offered by a rose land without killer winters. But she recognizes that everyone in America cannot grow R. BANKSIAE, for example, and promptly points this out. This is not a book about how to grow roses, or kill bugs, but the beginner who reads it will not be led in the wrong direction.

I was intrigued to read about the fragrance rating scale used by judges at some shows. My experience in this part of the country (Ohio) is that fragrance classes are often judged by blind persons, children, the general public, or whichever judging team finishes first. In no case are they using any point system. My own personal informal research reveals that roses with "Fragrant" or "Perfume" (or their variations) in their names win the fragrance award a disproportionate number of times. A nationwide, formalized scale would go a long way to giving the "Most Fragrant Rose" award more of the seriousness and notability it deserves.

The rose arrangements displayed throughout the book are awesome, presenting the roses we love at their very best. Because I have no talent for floral design, I have particular respect for anyone who does. But I also dislike the filter that has been placed between some rose arrangements and those who are not schooled in the inside world of flower arranging. I often look at an arrangement at a rose show, and I think it's interesting, but I cannot fully appreciate it until I read the schedule which tells me what it is supposed to be. Oh, of course, it's a rhinoceros at the watering hole in Tanzania. Sometimes it is almost as if flower arrangements are presented as problems to be resolved, rather than something everyone can enjoy. But there are no filters or problems in R is for Rose--just some of the most beautiful arrangements you've ever seen, and detailed, step-by-step, photo-perfect instructions about how to make them.

There are only a few errors in this book. ROBIN HOOD, important in the breeding of ICEBERG and thus David Austins's English roses, is a hybrid musk, bred by the father of the hybrid musk, Joseph Pemberton. The grandiflora ROUNDELAY is misspelled. Yes, Sir Joseph Banks bankrolled the Royal Botanic Garden at Kew. But identifying the trail blazing explorer and botanist only as a Mr. Moneybags is kind of like saying that Abraham Lincoln is that guy on the penny.

This is a book for the general gardener, and Parker wisely shies away from rose debates. Although the opportunity presents itself, there is no rehashing of the SPRAY CECILE BRUNNER / BLOOMFIELD ABUNDANCE controversy. The Texas rose rustlers are not taken to task for the misidentifications. Because the ROULETII she pictures will not be the same rose that all rose experts think of as ROULETII she gives a careful and reasonable explanation of the process that led her to this identification. Here she makes an important point: "A picture isn't proof though."

The winter wind is shaking my windows and the landscape in which I'll spend the next several months consists of naked trees and uncut hay poking out above the snow. But when I open this book, it is summer again. R is for Recommended. P.S.

(That's P for PRISTINE and S for the surprising SWEET SURRENDER.)

PRESS ARCHIVE