The example of this garden, with its wide-ranging interest in plants, has empowered me to explore the limits of my space and experiment freely in ways that many garden advice-givers would reject. I'm so glad I've ignored so much advice!
At this point, I feel strongly that gardens should strive to be more than just beautiful, they should be interesting. Beauty has been exhaustively hashed out. I'm exhausted with beauty. The next time I hear about structure, foliage, contrast and repetition I'm going to scream (because I'm tired of yawning). Wake me up when someone wants to talk about making the garden a more interesting place to be.
Okaaay...rant over. Pictures now!
ADDED: In the comments, Pam asks: "But, at the risk of a scream, don't 'structure, foliage, contrast' contribute to that goal? If not, what does make an interesting garden?"
And I replied, Certainly those things contribute, but they are not the only contributors, and those are not sufficient qualities to make the garden interesting. And the conversation is ALWAYS about how the garden is beautiful. How to make the garden function and still be BEAUTIFUL. I'm sorry, so many of these beautiful gardens bore me to tears. Tell me why the garden is interesting, not beautiful.
After all, I can decide for myself if a garden is beautiful.