Awhile back, I mentioned how I was disappointed in the 'Replete' daffodil I'd gotten a couple of years ago. I didn't like it last year, and I don't like it this year. It is supposed to be pink in the center and it's pale peachy orange. It would never occur to me to call it pink. Check out the picture, description, and most importantly the disclaimer here.
It's a double that might be called ruffly, but I call it messy. It's like it's having a bad hair day every day of its life. The picture posted here is mine and it's an extremely flattering one. It certainly doesn't look like the pictures you'll find on sellers' websites. (That subject is a rant best saved for another day.)
It has other afflictions, too:
- It's floppy and most times can't stand up under its own weight
- It doesn't bloom very prolifically
- The blooms don't last very long
- It's just generally ugly
How this thing managed to be named 1995 "Daffodil of the Year" is beyond me, when there are so many more attractive ones out there. It's like it's the Sphinx cat of the daffodil world. I'm sure there are those out there that love Sphinxes and Repletes, but I'm not one of them. Oregon hybridizer Murray Evans, who introduced it in 1975, is no doubt proud of his baby, but I'm glad it's not his only claim to fame.
I have threatened to dig it up and move it to my Orphan Garden, but I think I'll just let it stay where it is. Some of its downfalls make it not worth the effort of moving it. Besides, it's planted in with other ones that I do like. By the time they bloom, Replete isn't around to spoil their good looks. Whenever I decide to divide that bunch of bulbs, I'll try and isolate the Repletes then.
But in keeping with my optimistic outlook on life, I have found one thing I do like about it. Its back side is actually very pretty. We should all be so lucky to have a pretty rear, eh?